Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

I'll take £5,000 in petty cash, please

Miles Kington
Monday 23 February 2004 01:00 GMT
Comments

A most extraordinary law case is going on in London at the moment, in which a man accused of bank robbery says that, even if he did it, it wasn't for the money. His defence is that... but perhaps it might make more sense if I bring you an extract from the trial itself. We come in at the very moment when the accused man, Mr Lenny Fairfinger, takes the stand.

Counsel: Your name is Fairfinger?

Defendant: It is.

Counsel: That is a most unusual name.

Defendant: Yes. It is in fact a misprint for Firfinger.

Counsel: That is also a most unusual name.

Defendant: Not in the south-east corner of Saxony, in Germany, where my ancestors came from.

Counsel: They may have been better off staying there, Mr Firfinger.

Defendant: And what do you mean by that, may I ask?

Counsel: You may not ask. In this court, I am allowed to ask questions, but you are only allowed to give answers.

Defendant: Was that a question?

Counsel: No.

Defendant: Then let me know when one comes along, so we can do business.

Judge: Mr Tarlton, Mr Tarlton!

Counsel: Yes, my Lord?

Judge: I take it there is some point behind this exchange of inanities between you and the defendant?

Counsel: Yes, my Lord. I am trying to browbeat him with a display of insouciant bullying, and he, in return, is attempting to keep his courage up with some Cockney badinage.

Judge: And who is winning?

Counsel: Early days yet, my Lord. Fifteen-all in the first game, I would say.

Judge: Righty ho. Let me know when someone gets the upper hand.

Counsel: Thank you, my Lord. Now, Mr Firfinger...

Defendant: Fairfinger.

Judge: Thirty-fifteen against you, Mr Tarlton!

Counsel: Yes, my Lord. Now, Mr Fairfinger, the charge against you is that you did take part in a bank robbery last July, in Wembley. It is alleged that you...

Defendant: I admit it.

Counsel: Pardon?

Defendant: I admit it. But it wasn't for the money. So I am not guilty.

Counsel: If it were not for the money, what was it for?

Defendant: It was to get in the Guinness Book of Records.

Counsel: You... ask... the... court to believe... that... you...

Defendant: Yes.

Counsel: But criminals cannot get in the Guinness Book of Records by committing a crime!

Defendant: Course they can. There's lots in there. Biggest train robbery. Biggest jewel robbery. Most murders. Crippen, Christie, Ruth Ellis, etc etc.

Counsel: And how did you hope to join that august body?

Defendant: I wanted to become the bank robber to have taken the largest amount of small change in history. That is why, when I raided the bank in Wembley, I specifically asked for the money to be handed over in 1p and 2p coins. That was deliberate! See, I could have cleaned them out! I could have taken millions in notes! Instead, I was content with £5,000 worth of copper. Not a note did I take!

Counsel: And what makes you think that that would have got you into the Guinness Book of Records ?

Defendant: I know it would have! And I have proof of it! I have here a letter from the editor of the Guinness Book of Records, saying that if I do the robbery, I can get in the book as a record-holder! If anyone is guilty of this crime, it is not me - it is the editor of the Guinness Book of Records!

Sensation in court.

More of this tomorrow, when I think we shall see the editor of the Guinness Book of Records take the stand.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in