We have ways of making sure you respect English law
The whole point of the law is to be so baffling and mysterious that no one knows much about it
Monday 22 March 1999
So, starting today, I am going to bring you a series of tests on the state of English law. This is not to teach you about the law, but to point out how very little you do know and to increase your respect for the majesty and unknowability of the law. The first set of test questions is all about animals and the law, and is based on three recent court cases. Here we go.
1) Mr Threlfall of Willesden had a long-running dispute with his neighbour, Mr Jacobs. The cause of the dispute is immaterial; what matters is the mode of revenge chosen by Mr Jacobs. Knowing that Mr Threlfall disliked dogs, and was even quite scared of the bigger kinds, Mr Jacobs proceeded on a campaign of capturing a series of stray dogs, then putting collars on them and releasing them again. These collars all had one thing in common; they bore a metal tag on which was written a made-up name for the dog and Mr Threlfall's very real name and address. The result was that whenever one of these stray dogs was caught and brought in, it was returned to Mr Threlfall.
The constant stream of unknown dogs being brought to his door was more than he could stand, and he might well have gone mad had he not suspected that Mr Jacobs was involved in this stray dog campaign.
He soon found a local pet shop which had sold an unexpectedly high quantity of dog collars recently.
"Do you know who bought them?" he asked.
"Yes, a Mr Threlfall," said the pet shop man. "I know that was his name, because he also had a large quantity of tags engraved with his name and address."
"What did this Mr Threlfall look like?" asked Mr Threlfall.
The pet shop man gave an accurate description of Mr Jacobs, and soon Mr Threlfall had instructed his solicitor to lay charges against Mr Jacobs. But with which of the following could Mr Jacobs be charged?
a) Falsely imprisoning a stray dog
b) Cruelty to neighbours
c) Conspiring to give false information to a registered animal shop
d) Falsely uttering another man's address as his own
e) Giving a dog a bad name
2. Mr Ieuan Williams, a small-time Welsh burglar, was caught in his house with the proceeds of a burglary he had committed the night before, including a rare parrot. The parrot was produced in court at Cardiff as evidence, and the owner identified the parrot as his, based on the fact that it could utter several identifiable phrases, including "Rhodri Morgan was cheated!"
The defence argued in favour of Mr Williams, the accused burglar, that all evidence in the court had to be given in either Welsh or English, on request, and they therefore demanded that the parrot also parade his vocabulary in Welsh. As the parrot was unable to do this, they claimed a mistrial.
Can an animal be required to give his evidence in Welsh? And can he be sued by Tony Blair for uttering malicious and libellous comments on the election of a Welsh boss figure?
3. Mr Whistler, a Cumberland farmer, was out with his gun one day looking for rabbits when he spotted a fox and shot it. Unfortunately, it was a tame fox belonging to a Mr Kidwelly, who was out for a walk with it; the fox had been trained not to attack sheep or poultry, and to walk off the lead. Mr Kidwelly was determined to sue Mr Whistler for shooting his pet. His solicitor, however, was of the opinion that he would never persuade the court that anyone should assume that a fox was a pet.
"I have an alternative line of thought," he told his client. "I have inspected the site of the unfortunate shooting and I have noticed that although Mr Whistler was standing on his own land at the time, and the fox was also on his land, he in fact shot across territory belonging to someone else. If we can prove that the bullet passed through air space not belonging to him, I think we can get him on all sorts of gun infringements."
Was there any truth in this? Or was it just the usual sort of hot air talked by lawyers when they're up against it?
I'd like to give you the correct answers to these three. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as a "correct" answer in English law. That's what English law is all about!
If you're beginning to get the idea, we'll have another test paper soon.
Listen to his collaboration with Naughty Boymusic
Film review Michael Glatze biopic isn't about a self-hating gay man gone straight
Arts & Ents blogs
- 1 Replica Back to the Future Hoverboard released
- 2 Katie Hopkins attacked me on Twitter — so I reported her to the police for inciting racial hatred
- 3 Brixton squat flats now costing up to £3k per month show how out of control rent is in London
- 4 A new (old) cure for MRSA? Revolting recipe from the Dark Ages may be key to defeat infection
- 5 Gamers confess the worst things they've done in The Sims
Sacha Baron Cohen is definitely not involved in Freddie Mercury biopic, says Brian May
Zayn Malik releases first solo song 'I Won't Mind' in 'Zaughty' collaboration with Naughty Boy
Poldark review: Demelza’s insouciance is almost as impressive as Ross’ pecs
Tidal: Jay Z's Spotify rival streaming service criticised for making wealthy artists even richer
James May hints he will not continue on Top Gear without Jeremy Clarkson
Ukip supporters are 55 or older, white and socially conservative, finds British Social Attitudes Report
Street preacher quoting from the Bible fined for calling homosexuality an 'abomination'
Jeremy Clarkson sacked live: Alan Yentob 'wouldn't rule out' ex Top Gear host's BBC return
Woman filmed launching racist tirade against men on the Tube for speaking in 'own lingo'
The West has it totally wrong on Lee Kuan Yew
David Cameron calls Labour 'hopeless, sneering socialists' while announcing 7-day NHS plans