An argument against short notice

THE question for the appeal bench was: how far in advance of the next hearing should they order that written arguments be submitted?

Lord Wheatley thought four weeks, but he was reminded that two weeks tended to be the favoured period.

"The trouble with that is, if we say two weeks, we normally get them the night before," he complained.

Two wrongs don't make it right

PICTURE … thousand words?

Not always, as seen by the aerial shot presented to Lord Uist that was supposed to help him apportion blame for a motor scooter rider toppling off while passing a bus.

"The point marked 'collision locus area' is wrong," the judge remarked, "as there was no collision and the incident did not occur at that point."

Confusion reigns

THE witness appeared to be confused, suggested the judge, between a bar and a nightclub.

"Something I have found myself, from time to time," claimed defence QC Neil Murray.

Ageing thinker

IT WASN'T the most confident of starts for the witness who, after confirming his name, gave his age as "… 52, I think."

Take guilt as red

DEFENCE lawyer Iain Paterson's submission to the jury was that the prosecution's case was rather weak, stating: "It seems to me the advocate-depute is suggesting that if you have ginger hair and you live in the Borders, you are guilty."

It's not understandable

• IT IS pleasing to find that not only non-lawyers have difficulty in following what is said by lawyers. They can have problems among themselves, as shown by Lord Brodie.

An earlier judgment had been cited to him and he said: "I would respectfully agree with the correctness of the decision and, indeed, everything said by Lord Marnoch, if I have understood him correctly."