Thread by @fascinatorfun

@dgurdasani1 I’m going to tell you a story because you go to a lot of trouble explaining the sources of the evidence as you understand it, identify where there is uncertainty and spell out where you think the evidence is pointing.

@dgurdasani1 Firstly. What you do is both generous in explanation and links to evidence.

And it is brave when others who may be more senior bring their seniority to bear rather than engage in specific details on the particular evidence as an intellectual equal.

@dgurdasani1 When I was a young (and very tiny 7st 7lb) advocate a case came my way that was legally very difficult. Ripping off senile old people - many of their life savings - by offering building and decorating “services” that devalued their properties and grossly overcharged them for it.

@dgurdasani1 I knew that their had been a run of losing cases in criminal courts, often thrown out by judges at half time.

Let’s face it. Your main witnesses were unable to remember much for long. Indeed my first witness was unable to speak her own name out loud complete.

@dgurdasani1 *there*

It was that obvious how far down the tunnel of dementia she was.

However a legal point from my student days has niggled at me about theft v deception and I wondered if the cases were failing, in part, because they were being charged with deception.

@dgurdasani1 But the argument was that the “victims” had apparently willingly got in the perpetrators’ cars/vans and went to banks and building, take their life savings out and handed them over. No provable deception.

@dgurdasani1 It felt more like stealing from a child to me, but with elderly obviously confused adults the victims.

So - at the time that was a legal conundrum was what faced me.

@dgurdasani1 I thought this band of men were doing something wrong, wicked, taking the last savings of elderly people with dementia that might make the difference between them living their last days in relative physical comfort and great insecurity and discomfort.

@dgurdasani1 But how to craft it in criminal law?

I sought the advice of a young but very highly regarded barrister (now a very senior judge) and he helped me craft the charges and indictment and advised me on what evidence to rely.

By this time there were seven defendants.

@dgurdasani1 All separately represented .

And, boy, did some of them try to use their seniority and confidence to scare me into redacting key evidence. When I refused (outwardly confident as I couldn’t see why my refusal was unreasonable) one was so angry he threw his brief on the floor.

@dgurdasani1 At the same time he shouted at me that I didn’t know what I was doing.

The pink ribbon tying together his defence bundle burst open and papers scattered all over the floor.

I was very very shaken but still could not see what was wrong with my decision.

@dgurdasani1 I phoned the barrister who had advised me in case I was being unreasonable. He told me to stand my ground and on no account help pick up the papers. Just quietly stand and watch him whilst he had to put them in order.

@dgurdasani1 I did just that and the case went ahead as an old style committal to see whether there was enough evidence to go before a jury.

One witness after another, all with various stages of dementia, were called.

@dgurdasani1 They could not remember much but the court needed to see it. And we had other sources of evidence to prove key facts in issue.

The seven barristers sniggered.

The judge threw the case out.

I didn’t think that was OK. I could not see what was wrong with my case in law.

@dgurdasani1 No matter how many people tried to suggest otherwise.

I spent that night and the next day with my excellent barrister drawing up a request for a voluntary bill of indictment application to the High court.

It succeeded.

@dgurdasani1 The High court judges thought it was an important legal point worth arguing. (turns out there were two other cases going through the appeal courts but that was not evident to me at the time)

@dgurdasani1 The seven defendants were arrested, this time no bail
We all ended up back in the original court in front of the same judge
This time we had a voluntary bill of indictment from the High Court telling the lower court they HAD to commit the defendants to the Crown Court for trial

@dgurdasani1 It was a roller coaster of a case with the other cases that were going through the appeal process on alighted legal issues facing wins then reversals.

In the end the House of Lords (as it then was) found in favour of the point on which our case turned.

@dgurdasani1 The moral of the story is that good lawyers, good scientists and good people will engage on the evidence, identify where there is uncertainty (as you have done) and never never never try and use seniority to win an argument.

@dgurdasani1 Stick with the evidence. And if your argument is reasonable it is reasonable to expect that to be responded to with courtesy.

@dgurdasani1 And - yes - all seven defendants were convicted.

All their appeals failed

I was scared every day I went to court - all these experienced people against me- but I just couldn’t see what was wrong with my case. Indeed I thought that it was wrong not to bring it and pursue it.

@dgurdasani1 So don’t let anyone no matter how senior intimidate you if you have been diligent with the evidence.

Stand your ground and, in the very best traditions of science, expect responses that are likewise in the evidence. And where uncertainty remains. Well-Define it
That’s science.