CONVICTED TV quiz show cheat Charles Ingram has hit back at a Crown Court judge who reduced his defence costs by half at the same time as criticising him and his wife, Diana, for spending money that should have gone to the court.

Mr Ingram said they are now seeking a judicial review of the imposition of defence costs, which are not normally imposed on those convicted without income. They will appeal against their conviction at the European Court in Strasbourg.

Mr Ingram said he and his wife were furious at comments made by Judge Geoffrey Rivlin at Southwark Crown Court last Wednesday after he agreed to reduce their defence costs bill in the Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? court case from £65,000 to £30,000.

Judge Rivlin said: "The truth is that these defendants cynically manipulated their finances. I refer in particular to Mr Ingram's finances, in which he put a substantial portion first into the hands of Mrs Ingram and then beyond the reach of the court."

It emerged in court last week that Mr Ingram had put some £40,000 from his £68,000 Army pension into Mrs Ingram's account. The couple had spent £11,000 on a new car, settled mortgage and credit card bills of £25,000, paid their children's independent school fees and repaid £24,000 to members of their families who had supported them during the court case.

Most controversially, they blew nearly £5,000 on spread betting on the stock market, something, which Mr Ingram admits was a foolish thing to do. He said: "We were desperate. We had no income and were looking at £450,000 of debts.

"The judge knew we had all these debts and yet he punitively and vindictively imposed these defence costs on us as well. Even people who have their own homes and a good income don't get that sort of treatment.

"Judge Rivlin shouldn't have even heard this case. It has emerged that there is a connection between his family and Diana's family through a synagogue in Cardiff.

"I don't know why he was biased against us, but he certainly was. He knew we had £65,000 debts and we had incurred another £280,000 in pursuing our civil case against Celador, the makers of the quiz show. Then he put us further in debt with £50,000 in fines and finally added £65,000 defence costs.

"We have no income, but I felt it was important to repay what I owed to my family and Diana's family because we might have to approach them again. The credit card companies are preferred creditors and the school had agreed to give us a special discount so the least we could do was pay them.

"I was quite entitled to put that money into Diana's account. We are a family and she had incurred family expenses that needed to be paid. I wasn't trying to get away with anything."

Mr Ingram said he is willing to take a Polygraph lie-detector test as part of his appeal to the European Court and is prepared to show that Celador's tapes of his appearance on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? were doctored to make the alleged conspiracy between the couple and Welsh lecturer Tecwen Whittock more compelling.

He said: "One day I will prove our innocence. But in the meantime we will fight the defence costs order. The legal system does not know how to tackle our kind of situation. It should not be left to the original trial judge to make a decision on them. He should never have made the order in the first place."

Mr Ingram is about to take part in the New York Marathon in aid of the deaf-blind children's charity Sense. He aims to raise £10,000 through his participation in the 26-mile run through the Big Apple on November 7.

He is also hoping to make an appearance on a celebrity version of The Weakest Link. Mr Ingram said: "No matter how pitiless Anne Robinson is, at least she's fair, which is more than can be said for Judge Rivlin."