Lawandorder sums up
OF THE JURY, I must warn you first
of all that you must put aside any personal
antipathy you may feel towards the defendant Mr
Horst Wessel. Just because you may think, as I do,
that he is a shifty two-faced rogue intent on
discrediting a fine outstanding hero of the British
war effort, that is no reason for being too hard on
There are, as I see it, four questions on which
you must decide.
Firstly, you must decide whether or not the
plaintiff Capt. Myne-Sweeper should receive
damages, and you may feel that the heroic Capt.
Myne-Sweeper is more than entitled to them.
Secondly, you must reflect on whether the sum of
£1 million would be sufficient to compensate
this latter-day Nelson for what you may think is a
shocking and totally unfounded slur upon his
Thirdly, I must ask you to consider whether such
a sum is not totally inadequate when compared to
the monstrous smear on his reputation made by a
mercenary and totally unprincipled hack of the type
you see before you in the shape of the defendant,
the repulsive slit-eyed Mr Horst Wessel.
Fourthly, you must debate among yourselves
whether the sum of £2 million would not in the
light of the foregoing considerations be an
altogether more appropriate amount to restore to
the bemedalled hero of the seven seas some
semblance of his reputation, now so grossly
besmirched by this monster in human form, I refer
of course to this twofaced wielder of the poison
pen, the evil self-styled defendant whose name I
can no longer bring myself to utter.
There is one other small matter of law on which
I feel it is my duty to advise you. When you return
to the box following your deliberations I shall put
to you the question: "Do you find for the plaintiff
or the defendant?" You should then reply, quite
simply, "For the plaintiff" -- and by that I shall
understand you to refer to the valiant old sea-dog
Capt. Myne-Sweeper, who saved this country from her
enemies during the dark days of the war.
You may now retire.