Murder trial at the Old Bailey


Murder trial at Old Bailey

The Vogon Defence.

1995

Ladies and gentlemen of jury. You have heard the prosecution say that I am a heartless, cold blooded, hatchet murderer. A psychopath in fact. They have laid before you what they claim to be the facts and, in a clinical sense, it is impossible for me to deny that these are in fact, facts. But, despite the fact that the defence has remained silent up to this point, I am sure that after you have heard what I have to say, you will agree that not only am I neither a psychopath nor a murderer, but also that what I did was in the best interests of our whole community and that therefore, instead of being sent to prison for causing the deaths four people and assaulting two others, I should be warmly congratulated.
           It is true that I entered the premises of Flat 3, 10 Rillington Place with a Japanese Samurai sword and stabbed one person, sliced the head off another and cut a third almost in half. It is also true that after leaving the scene of this incident, I went to my own next door flat, took off my blood soaked clothes, showered, put on some fresh clothing and then left the building. It is also true that as I was crossing the street and passing an open topped sports car, I took the sword from my holdall and sliced the head off the driver and that I then went to the tube station whereupon, after boarding a train bound for Piccadilly Circus, I punched one person in the face and then, after moving to the next carriage, broke the arm of another.
           All this, ladies of the jury, is true and I do not deny it. However, you have heard me plead not guilty to murder and I will now explain to you why my actions on that day could, by no stretch of the imagination, be conceived as murder - coldblooded or otherwise. I am, as you will come to see, nothing but an innocent victim of today's society.
           Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we live today in world which, in just a few short years, has changed beyond all recognition. Change, these days, comes rapidly and although this change often brings good things, it also brings many evils and it is these evils, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, which are destroying our world. One of the worst of today's evils, like it or not, is noise. As the world gets busier, people do need to move around more and so, it is inevitable that the noise of cars, trucks and aeroplanes will increase but, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this is not the kind of evil noise to which I am referring. The noise I am referring to is that loud, harsh and unpleasant sound which now permeates every nook and cranny of our lives and which business concerns and the electronic media euphemistically call music.
           Because the media, which is so influential, calls this unpleasant sound, which emanates from speakers in almost every building in our country, music, most ordinary people are inclined to do the same. It is, after all, hard for an ordinary individual to dispute the claims of those in powerful positions. In the view of society, the opinions of an ordinary individual are not as important as those of someone who is in a position of power or influence and consequently, if a person in the spotlight refers to a sound as music, it is hard for an individual, who is not in the spotlight, to disagree. It is even more difficult for them to do so today because most of the people in the spotlight are saying that what is fundamentally a vulgar and unpleasant sound, is actually music. But, if we analyse the facts, can this electronic sound really be called music?
           Imagine that you are standing where I am now and that next to your ear you are holding the world's most expensive microphone. Imagine also that six feet in front, a person with a guitar, violin, saxophone or drum strikes or plays a chord. Your ear hears this sound and turns it into signals and these signals are then sent to your brain which reads them as music and responds accordingly. But, at the same time the microphone is also hearing this sound and turning it into signals which it sends down a wire to a recorder. However, the microphone, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, albeit the most expensive one in the world, is not an ear and so the signals the microphone sends down the wire are not nearly the same as the ones your ear is sending to your brain. The recorder, with some added loss of quality, then turns the signals it receives into numbers which are written onto the cd and, at a later date, a player reads those numbers and turns them into signals which are sent to a speaker. But speakers are not musical instruments and so, when they try to turn the signals they receive into the sound originally made by the guitar, violin, saxophone or drum, there is no recouping of the lost quality. Instead there is an even greater loss of quality and so, when a person's ear hears this electronically reproduced sound and turns it into signals which it sends to the brain, sensible brains realize that the signals are in no way similar to the signals they receive when listening to a live musical instrument and therefore simply reject any idea that the sound the ear is receiving is music. This is the reason, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, why it is impossible to for anyone to honestly say that an electronically reproduced sound is actually music. A crude and vulgar approximation of what music is supposed to be perhaps, but not, and I repeat not, music.
           Some have said that music is any coordinated series of sounds but I think that all scientists will agree when I say that any musical sound must be received by the ear in the form of a sound wave. All pleasant or beautiful sounds, be they from a finely crafted musical instrument, a resonant voice, the waves lapping gently on a sandy shore, the rustling of leaves in a breeze or a laughing child, reach the ear in the form of a sound wave and it is this wave which causes the brain to respond by filling us with feelings of pleasure. But unfortunately, electronically reproduced or produced so called music does not create a sound wave. What it does is create a series of pulses which try to emulate a wave but, as a series of sound pulses is not a sound wave, whatever the business or media people say, no electronic noise can ever qualify as music.

------

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, it is a sad fact of life that in this country of ours there are many talented musicians and composers, but they are being seriously inhibited by the fact that business interests are completely disinterested in any composition which is not electronically reproducable. Some have got around this by writing extremely sentimental songs the words of which have a very emotional effect and so younger listeners are so affected by the slush, they forget to pay any attention to the supposedly musical sounds which support the words. Our better composers have compensated for the lack of a genuine wave in electronic noise this by creating songs or pieces of music which roll along like a wave and, although these sounds don't qualify as true music, the rolling effect does help to make their mass produced, electronic noises less obnoxious. But, one of the saddest things in today's world is that we, the people of this country, are being deprived of the wonderful music these people would create by using natural instruments because business interests ignore any composition which isn't electronic because it can't be mass produced is therefore not capable of making them vast amounts of money.

------

But, why do so many people listen to these terrible sounds on their radios, televisions and stereo systems and call them music? Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I put it to you that the ordinary people of this world have been subjected to one of the greatest hoaxes in the history of human kind. Everyone calls this noise music, but you will find that those who are most vociferous in this claim are usually those who have something to gain by doing so. Let us be honest, radio stations need listeners and so they have to convince their audiences that the noises they broadcast are worth listening to and so, instead of being honest with their listeners and saying that what they are broadcasting is nothing but a very crude approximation of what the singing and music should sound like, they say that what they are broadcasting is music and then protect themselves by suggesting that anyone who disagrees with that statement has obviously got an inferior stereo system.
           There is, as the printed media constantly reminds us, more money in today's so called music business than in almost any other business and so large numbers of people have something to gain by saying that an electronically reproduced sound qualifies as music. Some people, mostly performers, media personalities and business types, have extremely large amounts of money to gain by doing this and are, unfortunately, then forced into a position where they have to vigorously defend any suggestion that their commodities are nothing more than crude, vulgar noises which have been dressed up in pretty, eye catching packages. Consequently, to market their product and ensure their continued profitability, they have to do everything they can to make sure no one dares to say that the king has no clothes and that he is, in fact, completely naked.
           But, to go further, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this greatest ever deception of the people has become so great that, go where one will, there is no escape and, in consequence, those who like peace and quiet are forced to listen to sounds those who have been taken in by the hoax like to call music. Often, one has to listen to the duped and their stereo systems when one is not even in the same building and sometimes, not even in the same street. But listen all must. Some, who have not been deceived by all the media hype have had the courage to call this noise, noise pollution of the worst kind, but, unfortunately, every time they have voiced their views they have found themselves confronted by powerful business or media interests which were anxious to ensure that nothing interfered with their money making. As a result, modern so called music now affects people wherever they live and, as each day goes by, more and more of the duped acquire more powerful stereo systems and so, not only is there is less and less opportunity for lovers of peace and quiet to escape, what used to be an extremely unpleasant inconvenience has, because of the increased power of these systems, now become an actual physical pain.
           Because of this, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, many people are suffering dreadfully. Load, vulgar and unpleasant so called music is considered by some to be fashionable and so they play their noise at the highest possible volume. Though, this often isn't because they like what they are hearing. Rather it is because they want others to see them as modern, up to date people and how can they do this more effectively than by blasting out the latest hits and ensuring that everyone hears their choice of music and, in consequence, concludes that they are hip, modern and forward thinking individuals? But, when you go and ask these people to turn off their noise because it is extraordinarily unpleasant and upsetting, they usually look on you as someone from a different planet because who but a space alien would dispute the words of the powerful and extremely rich electronic business organizations? There is, after all, a pecking order in this world and those who are down should refrain from arguing with those who are up.
           However, modern systems have become so powerful that even if an individual turns their stereo down to the point where they can just barely hear the so-called music, the base is usually so deep and penetrating that, even several buildings away, the residents are subjected to a never ending boom, boom, boom. Boom, boom boom. Boom, boom, boom. It is the same as a Chinese torture but there is nothing the unwilling listeners can do because the player of the noise has turned their stereo down to a point where any lower would make it impossible for them to hear the whole selection of so-called chords being played. The net result is that when a person of today wants to listen to their stereo, everyone in the vicinity must also listen, regardless of whether they want to or not.
           But, to return to the point. The prosecution has accused me of being a psychotic axe murderer and back their claim by saying that when I entered the premises of Flat 3, 10 Rillington Place, I stabbed one person, hacked the head off another and cut the third almost in half. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. I am going to ask you to remember that I was not using an axe or machete, but a Samurai sword and that although I admit that I fully intended to bring about the demise of these people, in no way was I psychotic or brutal. The first person I stabbed, the second I took a swing at and, such was the sharpness of my sword, her head just literally fell off. Then I turned and as the third person was approaching me with what appeared to be an intent to kill, I quickly raised up the sword and brought it down on his head. I will confess, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, that I was astonished by the way the sword simply sliced its way right down to his navel. I hadn't used any force but, I must tell you, it was rather like cutting though soft butter. The sword just seemed to fall through his body. Later, in the street, I took a swing at the man in the sports car and, like the second person whose demise I brought about, I will tell you that his head just simply fell off.
           So, whether you decide to convict me of murder or not, I will ask you to remember that I was using an extraordinarily sharp sword and so there was nothing brutal or psychotic about my actions. Murder it may or may not have been, that is for you to decide, but psychotic or brutal it was not.
           Now the question is, was it murder? If a person in a torture chamber kills their torturer, is that murder? If a person is continually hounded by others to the point where life completely loses its meaning, is killing the persecutors murder? Is being forced to listen to other people's extremely loud noise a form of torture? Now that stereo systems are so powerful, there is no escape for lovers of peace and quiet. The noise penetrates walls, ear plugs and any other defense one might try to put up and worse, it never stops. Boom, boom, boom. Boom, boom, boom. Boom, boom, boom. This sound is so penetrating it reaches into the very depths of a person's soul and, because it reaches such a deep part of the psyche, it totally destroys that person's ability to function as a human being. In other words, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we now live in a world where the ordinary men and women in the street are being deliberately destroyed by the selfish, self-centered stereo players and their noise. Stereo players can, for example, use head phones when they want to listen to their loud sounds, but they don't like doing this because, I suppose, they find it much more satisfying to destroy the souls of their neighbours.
           In my case, I can honestly say that I have spent my life running from people and their stereo systems. Wherever I have gone there has always been someone who wanted to switch on their stereo and play their noise. Never having been rich enough to afford an estate in the country where I could have kept the stereo players at bay, for almost all my life I have been unable to find peace and quiet and, as the unbearable noise has always forced me to keep moving on, I have never been able to settle somewhere and achieve something with my life. However, eventually, after having moved more times than I can remember, I bought a flat in 10 Rillington Place because only older people lived there and older people, like me, usually tend to enjoy some peace and quiet. But, unfortunately, because only older people lived in this building, the price of the flats was somewhat less than in the surrounding area and so, when some younger people discovered that they could get a cheaper flat by moving in with us, they promptly bought and brought all their modern ideas with them.
           However, once they had moved in they were quite shocked to find that the established residents frequently complained about the noise they were making. They couldn't understand why we complained. After all, was it not the right of any individual to play the music of their choice, at the volume of their choice, at the time of their choice? They couldn't believe that other people would try and deprive them of their right to enjoy themselves in any way they wished and so they refused to switch their stereos either down or off. They also argued that listening to loud music was a wonderful experience and that, if we were patient, we would begin by getting used to it and then we would grow to like it. So, whenever anyone of them came home, the first thing they did was switch on their stereo. They did eventually concede to turn it down, though not off, after ten at night but they had one of the most modern and most powerful stereo systems and so the endless, soul destroying boom, boom, boom. Boom, boom, boom. Boom, boom, boom penetrated every flat in the building and residents were forced to listen until such time as the youngsters decided they'd had enough and went to bed. Calling the police was no good as they just said it was a council matter and the council refused to do anything because the volume was turned down after ten at night and also, the whole building constituted a single piece of private property and so it was a matter for the residents to settle between themselves.
           I will tell you, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, that shortly after the noise started one of the older people died but this was put down to natural causes, not stress and later, another had a nervous breakdown and was taken to a psychiatric hospital. However the youths simply insisted that this was a modern world and loud noises were everywhere, so it wasn't necessarily their fault.
           In my case, although it was normally my habit to pack my bags and move on when something like this happened, this time I was caught with a mortgage and so was tied to my flat. I couldn't leave and so although I frequently asked my neighbours to turn off their noise or use headphones, they just refused. Eventually, because of my complaints, they began to look on me as an old fogie who was unable to appreciate the benefits of our modern society and because of this, they started treating absolutely everything I said with derision.
           In the end it became too much for me. The torture was never ending. It was destroying my soul and so I decided that something had to be done. But what was I to do? I had written to the media and my political representative but nothing had happened. Nobody seemed to want to know about me and my miseries and so, as society flatly refused to protect me, there was little I could do except save myself further suffering by committing suicide. I disliked to idea of doing away with myself but the concept of selling up and trying to start again somewhere else was too much for me. If I'd just been able to leave with what I had in my suitcase I might have been able to cope, but such was the financial situation, selling up meant I would have to accept an enormous loss and, with a heavy debt to repay, simply starting again would have been impossible.
           However, then it then occurred to me that I might be able to do something which would draw attention to the plight of millions of silent fellow-sufferers and, as self-inflicted death seemed so pointless, after much inner-debate, I chose this latter course. I went to an antique shop and purchased a good quality Samurai sword. Then, one early afternoon when my neighbours were blasting out their noise and I asked them to turn off their music and they responded in their usual way by telling me to get lost, I drew the sword and stabbed the one who had spoken. After entering the flat, a man and a women were cavorting to the sounds which blasted from their stereo system and, in my rage, I took a wild swing at the woman and ... But I have already told you about that. What I haven't told you about is that once I had brought about the demise of my torturers, the first thing I did after switching off their stereo was to sit down and spend five glorious minutes just listening to the wonderful sound of complete silence. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I ask you, in today's busy world, what can be more beautiful than the sound of absolute silence?
           But, to continue. After having enjoyed the blessed sound of silence for a while, I looked around at the dreadful carnage which surrounded me. I hadn't wanted to actually kill anyone, but a stand had had to be made. The law had continually refused to silence the stereo players and so it had become necessary for a private citizen to do what the law refused to do. I did realize, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, that I had, at a stroke, effectively silenced many thousands of selfish, unthinking stereo players. Because of my actions, many would realize that their selfishness was a danger to them. I wasn't the only one whose inner soul was being destroyed by loud stereo playing and who was to say that others wouldn't be inclined to react in a similar manner. Once what I had done became public knowledge, the stereo players would know that playing their stereos could upset the wrong people and, in consequence, they might end up going the way of my neighbours. Love the sound of their stereos though they might, I was quite sure that they didn't love it that much.
           A statement, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is a statement, however made. But having taken my first dreadful steps I had no option but to continue my path and ensure that fear did what our elected politicians were disinterested in doing. So leaving the flat I went into my own where I showered, changed my clothes and considered my next move. To me, this had not been murder, this was doing something, albeit drastic, to make a better world and, to be truthful, the three people next door had told me often enough to get with the times or get lost and so, much as I hated the principle of killing, I found it difficult to feel remorse for what I had done.
           I then left my flat with the sword in a holdall and as I was crossing the street, a open topped sports car driven by another selfish, unthinking stereo freak pulled up the traffic lights with its extremely powerful stereo system blasting out the sound. Psychologists have said that these people are simply trying to make a statement and need to be understood. But alas, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this stereo freak's statement happened to meet up with the statement that I was in the process of making. At this moment in time two statements ran headlong into each other and although I didn't know what the car driver's statement was intended to be, my statement was that the people of this country should be entitled to walk along the streets without having their hearing destroyed by clever young things who are trying to express some petty and puerile emotions and so, in my anger, I drew the sword from my holdall, took a swing at the back of the drivers neck and, as I've mentioned before, because I had one of the world's sharpest swords, his head simply fell off.
           After this I made my way to the tube station and boarded a train for Piccadilly Circus. At first the journey was quiet but, unfortunately, a youth got on with his not so personal stereo and, even though he sat some distance away from me, I was forced to listen to the endless chck, chck, chck, chck. Chck, chck, chck. Chck, chck, chck of his personal stereo. Sony and other companies may say their personal stereos are personal, but most of those who travel by public transport know that this is simply not true. The endless and incredibly annoying chck, chck, chck is a sound many a regular user of public transport is familiar with and, as I was half way through making what I considered to be an extremely important statement, I decided that I should do it properly. So rising from my seat, I made my way over to the youth, tore the headphones from his head and then, when he looked up in surprise, I drew back my fist and punched him in the face.
           The prosecution, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, has said that I brutally attacked this person. But let us consider what we mean by a brutal attack. A brutal attack, as you all know, is when you punch a person half a dozen times and then knock them to the floor so you can give them a good kicking. A single punch may be severe, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, but it is not brutal. In this case there was no need for me to punch the youth a second time because he simply cowered away from me in fear and I felt that my work had been done. I think you'll agree that once the users of personal stereos realize that they run a risk of getting an unexpected punch in the face, they'll be extremely careful about the volume they use when on public transport and, in consequence, the normal everyday traveller will be able to use the buses and trains without having the harmony of their day destroyed by what are, in effect, nothing more than selfish, unthinking, self-centered louts.
           But to continue the story. After leaving the youth I moved to the next carriage and was confronted by what appeared to be a well dressed business man shouting loudly into his mobile phone. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I asked myself, what has the world come to? Even the middle and upper classes are showing absolutely no consideration for the other people who inhabit our country. As far as mobile phones go, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, it seems to me that it's always the upper classes who yell loudly into their phones and I ask you, is this because they want everybody to know that they have posh voices? Is it possible that they start to feel inferior if others don't look up to and admire their superior status in our community? To be honest, I don't know the answer to this question but, I will tell you that I was so infuriated, I grabbed the hand which held the mobile phone, twisted it behind the man's back and gave it a wrench. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I seriously didn't mean to break this person's arm but do have to admit that, in my anger, I may have used a little more force than I intended to. Nevertheless, I think you'll all agree that we live in a world which has become devoid of peace and quiet and, on that day, I believed that it was time for someone to make a stand. For example, most people can live with the sound of cars, buses, trains and planes because these are sounds made by people in the process of making a living. It is also important to remember that the manufactures of these products go to extreme lengths to try and reduce the amount of noise their vehicles make. It is only those in the so-called music business and the stereo system manufacturers who insist on going in the opposite direction and actually try to increase the amount of noise their products make. A number of years ago a Swedish manufacturer of stereo systems proved conclusively that to get the best quality sound reproduction one should only use a six watt amplifier but when, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, did you last walk down your high street and go into a Dixons or other hi-fi shop and see a sound system with a six watt amplifier?

As you know, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, at this point in the proceedings someone used their mobile phone to call the police and I was arrested when I left the train at Piccadilly Circus. The prosecution has made much of the fact that I still carried my holdall with the Samurai sword but, as I have said, it was time for someone to make a stand on the issue of noise and so I still had my Samurai sword because I still intended to use it. To make my statement complete, I had chosen to travel to Piccadilly Circus on that day because I was looking for the Cool Dudes, those arrogant young men who like to swagger down the street and use their high powered ghetto blasters to destroy the spirits and souls of all who happen to be within a quarter mile radius. The reason they strut so arrogantly down the street with their noise is because they believe no one will dare to do anything about what they are doing, despite the fact that it is an extraordinarily unpleasant and antisocial thing for them to do. Well, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I intended to let them know that not everybody was too scared to do something about what they were doing and they were saved only by the fact that I was arrested.

------

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I now have told you all that I did on that fateful day and have also explained why I did it. The prosecution has asked, nay begged you to return a verdict of willful and premeditated murder but I will ask you to stop and consider the facts and then ask yourself whether this was, in fact, murder. After you have considered all the facts I believe, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, that you will agree with me when I say it was simply a matter of self-defense.
           However, I must begin my defense by pointing out that the term self has many connotations. Contrary to what doctors and psychologist may say, I am more than just some flesh and blood with a brain which responds to inputs and then sends signals to various parts of my body. Besides being flesh and blood, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I am also a spiritual being and therefore I ask you, if it is legally permissible for me to kill in the defense of my physical body, is it also legally permissible to kill in the defense of my soul or spirit? If you kill my spirit, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, do you kill me? Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I will ask you, if any one of you has your spirit willfully and completely destroyed by another individual, can you at any later date be considered to be a live human being? What, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is a zombie? If someone successfully turns anyone of you into a complete and incurable zombie, did they murder you?

------

From an individual point of view, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, what was I to do? I had been driven to the point where the whole of the inner me was being completely destroyed. The government had refused to do anything to put an end to my torture and so I was forced to find some way of putting a stop to it myself. I would, as I have said earlier, much preferred to have been able to pack my bags and move on to somewhere else but this was impossible and so destruction was the only option open to me. But was it to be the destruction of myself or the destruction of my torturers? I am sure you will agree, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, after having heard all that I have said, that in terms of my personal inner self, my actions were simply those of self-defense.
           But to take a larger, overall view, this nation of ours contains over sixty million people and these sixty million people constitute a collective of which I, as a single individual, am but a tiny part. But, by acting in the defense of the individual me, I think you will agree that I also acted in defense of the collective me - or the us.
           For many years selfish business interests and egotistical media types have done everything they could to encourage the less wise among us to believe that the noise they can purchase from shops in their high street is something worth listening to. They have also encouraged them to believe that it is hip, cool or fashionable to play this noise at the loudest possible volume and, it has, naturally, been of no concern to these business interests if these young people destroyed the souls of all who surrounded them? How often have you seen on television a young reporter or high status media person saying that the greatest thing in life is having a powerful stereo system which can blast out the noise? I think we've all seen that, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, many times. I think we can also agree that our younger generation sees no reason to disbelieve the words they hear coming from people who are obviously important and successful enough to appear on television. These high status people, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, have an enormous influence of our youth because, to the mind of a youth, if these people are successful enough to appear on television, they are obviously more important than their parents or grandparents who are never on television. As a result, parents can say and do what they like, it makes no difference because, in terms of society, they are not as important as those appear on television. In the home the parents may rule but, any teenager knows that they will soon be expected to leave home and make their own way in life and, when it comes to deciding on how best to do this, it is the seemingly important people on television who have the greatest influence. After all, to the mind of a teenager, it's a big wide world out there and all the parents do is go to work, come home, cook, clean and then spend the rest of the evening watching television. Because of this, when it comes to success, parents clearly don't know as much as the obviously successful types on television and so, if they, as individuals, are to make their way in life and be successful, whose thoughts and opinions will serve them best?

------

But, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, to deal with the benefits any reduction in this noise will bring to our society. Firstly, noise has a habit of preventing people from thinking. Our schools and universities may be turning out hundreds of educated people every week but, what is an education? You can teach a monkey to fly a space ship and so there's no reason to suppose a youth can't be taught the principles of international marketing. But although almost any young person can learn on the monkey see and hear, monkey say and do principle, noise prevents them from thinking about what they have learned and, shall we say, considering how what they learned about international marketing, which is persuasion, affects an individual's moral values and how the consequent change in moral attitude will affect our future social stability and therefore, the market place. For example, a decrease in moral values leads to an increase in social instability and that, in turn, invariably results in an increase in the demand for security products. But, to return to the point, as there is a lack of depth to what our children have learned, in the future, when faced with situations which have not been covered by their pretty polly, pretty polly instruction book, they will be lost. They won't know what to do and worse, having being prevented from developing any inner depth by the stereo noise they have been duped into listening to, they can't apply deep thought to any of the problems which face them. They may be able to apply some kind of band aid or quick fix, but a deep and lasting solution to the problems which face them will be an impossibility because too much time has been spent concentrating on noises and emotions which emanate from outside them and, in consequence, they have had no time to ponder on the noises and emotions which emanate from inside.
           Also, as I have said, we, as a nation are a collective of over sixty million people and although a part of this collective loves to make loud noises, by far the greater part of it enjoys peace and quiet. But all of us have been prevented from finding this peace and quiet by the stereo players and, as extremely high powered stereo systems are now sold in every high street, the problem gets continually worse. Because of the stereo players, decent, ordinary everyday people have found it increasingly impossible to find the peace and quiet they need to recharge their batteries and continue with the not always pleasant task of honouring their responsibilities. But alas, the concept of responsibility, to a stereo player, is something only boring fuddy duddies bother themselves with.
           Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, like most people I like to relax. Relaxing in peace and quiet is an enjoyment in itself and when I have finished enjoying myself in this way I get up and apply myself to the tasks which have to be done. Millions of people in our country find peace and quiet an enjoyment and, like me, once they have enjoyed themselves in this way, they get up and apply themselves to the problems of life and, by so doing, make our country a better place for everybody to live in.
           Everyone in this country, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, has the right to peace and quiet and I am going to ask you to consider this when you debate the issue and then bring back your verdict of not guilty because, not only did I act in the defense of my own soul or spirit, I also acted in the defense of the souls or spirits of the millions of silent sufferers who have been unable to protect themselves from the unnecessary and extremely loud stereo noise which now infests almost every square inch of our country.
           Everyone in this country of ours, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, also has the right to defend both their physical and spiritual selves. Technically the law is there to protect each individual from the selfish and inconsiderate actions of other individuals and the law should have defended me against the stereo players. But the law failed in its duty and so I was driven to the point of self-destruction. The question is, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, should I have simply allowed myself to die because the law was inadequate? Or, was I entitled to take action to defend my own life? If the law won't stop the torturers, is the victim obliged to lie still and let the torturers continue with their pleasures?

------

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you are twelve decent, ordinary, everyday citizens who have been brought here to decide on the argument which exists between the prosecution and I. So, I must ask you to ask yourselves whether this is a court of law or a court of justice? Are you here to decide on the letter of the law, or are you here to decide on justice? The letter of the law, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is our guide towards justice but justice must always be our ultimate aim and therefore you have the right to overlook the letter of the law in favour of what you believe to be justice. Self-defence, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, self-defense.

------

Back to home page