Crown Court - Transcript - Day 8

Case: Rex vs Mister Beaver Hateman, Criminal Libel

Presiding Judge: Sir George Jeffreys

Counsel for the Prosecution: Godfrey Badger K.C.

Counsel for the Defence: Mister Hootman G.H.O.S.T

Judge Jeffreys: Mister Hootman, I presume that you will be calling the defendant as your first witness?

Mr Hootman: That is correct m’lud

Mr Hateman swears in profusely.

Mr Hootman: You are Beaver Hateman of Badfort Castle and you are a freedom fighter?

Mr Hateman: That is correct.

Mr Hootman: Let us get to the nub of the evidence. Did you steal a so called ‘magic’ dressing gown?

Mr Hateman: No I did not. I merely borrowed a rather tatty item I found lying about in the museum in order to keep myself warm when I inadvertently found myself locked in.

Mr Hootman: Of course, and something which anyone who found themselves in that position might do in order to survive the dangers of hypothermia. There was no heating in the museum?

Mr Hateman: Do you think that skinflint would have kept the heating on?

Mister Hootman: Quite so, and as for the supposed properties of this dressing gown?

Mr Hateman: A load of nonsense – invisibility my arse!

Judge Jeffreys: I will not have that sort of language in my court.

Mr Hateman: Sorry Boss!

Mister Hootman: Now, I wish to question you on the matter of the paintings – it is claimed that you stole them whilst wearing this garment and that you could not be seen. Is this true?

Mr Hateman: Ha! That’s a good one – I was nowhere near the place – we was celebrating El Comandante’s retirement. We got him a very nice clock and sent it to our fraternal comrades in Cuba. Anyway, we had a day out at the Gallery a few days after they were supposed to have been stolen – they was all there. All rubbish mind you, apart from a few by J Von Tussle.

Mr Hootman: Let us pass on then, to the day that you were assaulted by Uncle….

Mr Badger: Objection M’lud – alleged assault…

Mr Hootman: I beg your pardon, if my learned friend would prefer,… the day of the alleged vicious assault, how did you come to be in the vicinity of Uncle’s Treasury?

Mr Hateman: Well, it was like this you see, we was wandering around Homeward on an investigative tour to discover the inhumane conditions that Unc’s tenants are forced to live in. The contrast was astonishing - dwarfs living in squalor and the high life for their landlord. How the other half lives! Talk about the lap of luxury! I ain’t never seen such ostentatious opulence. Anyway, we got lost in the place – it’s really big you know? I don’t know how he keeps track of all those empty rooms that could house so many poor homeless people…then we found ourselves going down this long slope and suddenly…

Mr Hootman: You were ferociously attacked?

Mr Hateman: Yep, that’s about the long and short of it – terrible it was, we only just got away with our lives.

Mister Hootman; No more questions your honour.

Judge Jeffreys: Mister Badger, you may cross-examine the witness.

Mr Badger: Mister Hateman, is it not true that you have had previous disputes with Uncle?

Mr Hateman: I have had a few run-ins with him – he don’t like being crossed.

Mister Badger: Your political stance is Marxist?

Mr Hateman: I don’t believe my politics come into this.

Mr Badger: Could your attitude not be described as anarchistic?

Mr Hateman: My political philosophy encompasses theories and attitudes that reject compulsory government, the establishment, and support its elimination.

Mr Badger: What is your attitude to Uncle? …does he not represent the establishment to you ?

Mr Hateman: Him? He’s just an old fool – I think that he is profoundly eccentric, a reactionary, a survivor of feudalism and living in the past.
Grasping old devil – sitting on all those paintings. He’s a little fascist – you can’t own great art you know.

Judge Jeffreys: Mister Hateman I don’t think that answer is at all useful and does you no credit. Please keep your temper, you will not impress either myself or the jury by raising your voice.

Mr Badger: When things go bad for you do you have an overwhelming compulsion to lash out? You are a hot-tempered individual?

Mr Hateman: Not at all.

Mr Badger: No? is it not true that you would do anything to embarrass and defame Uncle? Anything, to bring him down to your gutter level ? – including stealing his paintings, taking his money and defaming his character in your propaganda rag?
Is that not true Mister Hateman!

Mr Hateman: Shut your face! You can’t talk to me like that! Guv, he can’t speak to a man of the people…

Mr Badger: No more questions, your honour

Judge Jeffreys: Thank you, will you now, please, take the accused back to the dock. We shall resume proceedings tomorrow morning.

Crown Court - Transcript - Day 7

Case: Rex vs Mister Beaver Hateman, Criminal Libel

Presiding Judge: Sir George Jeffreys

Counsel for the Prosecution: Godfrey Badger K.C.

Counsel for the Defence: Mister Hootman G.H.O.S.T

Judge Jeffreys: After the scenes in this court yesterday, I expect today to pass with no further tumult – is that understood? Mister Badger, I notice that you have a number of witnesses that you wish to bring forward to vouch for the good character of Uncle.

Mr Badger: I have, your honour.

Judge Jeffreys: I do not think that is necessary – I am sure that everyone in this court is aware of his immense achievements and reputation.

Mr Hootman: Pah!

Judge Jeffreys: Did you wish to say something Mister Hootman?

Mr Hootman: No your honour, merely clearing my throat.

Judge Jeffreys: Have you any more witnesses for the prosecution, then, Mister Badger?

Mr Badger: One final witness – I know that this is an unusual request, but I should like to call the defence counsel – Mister Hootman!

Judge Jeffreys: It is an unusual request, however, this is an unusual case – so I shall allow it.

Mister Hootman is sworn in.

Mister Badger: Mister Hootman, you have made much, in this case, of what you feel are the dubious properties of the Wizard’s Dressing Gown?

Mister Hootman: Yes, it is a lot of fantastical nonsense!

Mister Badger: This, ladies and gentlemen of the jury – from a ghost!

Gasp from the galleries.

Mister Badger: Can there be a greater figure of fantasy? An incorporeal but ubiquitous, non-quantifiable substance or energy – can one get more supernatural, more fantastical than that?

Mister Hootman: I am not a ghost – I have a well-documented medical condition that makes me a bit wispy and see through. I think it very unkind of you to mock me in this way. My affliction does not stop me from taking part in the struggle for the goal of a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community. It just means I cannot do much heavy lifting.

Mister Badger: Ah yes, the struggle for control by the community…the community of Badfort, I presume?

Mister Hootman: We do attempt to offer an alternative to the problems inherent with representative democracy, promoting the establishment of a classless, stateless society based on common ownership of the means of production.

Mister Badger: So, Uncle, being the most well-known entrepreneur, needs to be removed?

Mister Hootman: For the good of the people, yes.

Mister Badger: Are you not the master planner of the Badfort Crowd?

Mister Hootman: No, I am just a good citizen.

Mister Badger: A good citizen does not believe in magic?

Mister Hootman: Certainly not, we must build Utopia in the real world. There is no such thing as magic or the supernatural.

Mister Badger: Do you think that someone, such as yourself, composed of a misty material and able to walk through solid objects can really claim that fantasy holds no place in the material world?

Mister Hootman: Look, I have told you I am not a ghost – if I was, how come all the ghosts in the Haunted Tower hate me so…

Mister Badger: No more questions. That M’lud is the case for the prosecution.

Judge Jeffreys: Thank you Mister Badger, tomorrow you may begin calling the witnesses for the defence, Mister Hootman.

Crown Court - Transcript - Day 6

Case: Rex vs Mister Beaver Hateman, Criminal Libel

Presiding Judge: Sir George Jeffreys

Counsel for the Prosecution: Godfrey Badger K.C.

Counsel for the Defence: Mister Hootman G.H.O.S.T

Judge Jeffreys: Mister Badger, I gather that we are to be honoured with a very unusual witness, today – the very person in who’s name we are prosecuting justice?

Mr Badger: Yes, your honour, I would like to call the King of the Badgers.

The King is sworn in.

King: First of all, I would just like to say, you are all doing a splendid job – carry on the good work.

Mr Badger: That is very kind of you, your Majesty. I am sure we will not detain you long – for I am sure you have pressing matters of state to attend to.

King: Well, I have just got the opening of a school to do today – got to be on my best behaviour, some documentary johnnies are following me around - then I can put my feet up and watch “The Bill’…then I think there might be a banquet?

Mr Badger: Quite so, your Majesty. I just need to ask you about your part in the foiling of the alleged raid on Uncle’s Treasury?

King: Quite so, quite so – yes well Uncle asked me to ring up and pretend I needed to borrow some money for a orphan’s home. So I did, and that’s it really – caught old Beaver bang to rights, as they say on “The Bill”…

Mr Hootman: Objection, M’lud, we are here to ascertain the facts not hearsay.

King: Be quiet, or I’ll have you locked up too.

Judge Jeffreys: I don’t think you can actually do that, erm, your Majesty.

King: What’s the point in being King, then?

Mr Badger: Errr, quite, well…so Uncle knew that Mister Hateman was on the premises and would overhear the conversation?

King: Of course he did, you can smell Hateman a mile off even if he is invisible!

Mr Badger: As the sovereign of Badgertown is it your belief that the allegations made in The Badfort News could have the effect of bringing institutions into disrepute thereby destabilising the whole of society?

King: Of course, it was most inflammatory, I ask you? - give them freedom and all they want to do is overthrow their betters!

Mr Badger: Quite so, no further questions, your honour.

King: Right, well I’ll be off then.

Judge Jeffreys: Could you stay, just, a little while longer and answer some questions from Mister Hootman?

King: Oh, alright then – if it is absolutely necessary.

Mister Hootman: Is it not true that most of the time you are hard up and have to cadge money of Uncle?

King: How dare you!

Mister Hootman: Therefore, one must ask how credible a witness is - who is always in debt to the elephant who has caused this case to be heard, and on whom he is wholly dependent in order to maintain his redundant place in society!

King: You cheeky young whippersnapper!

Uproar in court.

Judge Jeffreys: Order!, Order! – as the ushers seem unable to restore order, I think it best if we adjourn for the day.

Crown Court - Transcript - Day 5

Case: Rex vs Mister Beaver Hateman, Criminal Libel

Presiding Judge: Sir George Jeffreys

Counsel for the Prosecution: Godfrey Badger K.C.

Counsel for the Defence: Mister Hootman G.H.O.S.T

Mr Badger: For my next witness I would like to call Mr. Waldovenison Smeare, your honour.

Usher: Call Mister Smeare.

Mister Smeare is duly sworn in.

Mr Badger: You are an artist of some repute, a writer on art, a broadcaster and an authority on the paintings contained in the Homeward Gallery, is that correct?

Mr Smeare: Yes, I have taken a particular interest in the paintings that Uncle has so graciously donated to the Gallery. I am a graduate of, and special lecturer in the subject of Fine Art, at the Royal School of Art in Badgertown, I received the medal…

Mr Badger: Yes, suffice to say eminently qualified in the sphere of artistic endeavour. As you are aware, these paintings went missing on the night of…

Mr Hootman: Objection, M’lud – the defence refutes that claim.

Mr Badger: I shall rephrase the question, the paintings are alleged to have gone missing on the night of February 26th of this year, but when the Badgertown police were called in to investigate the matter they found that the paintings were all there – is that correct?

Mr Smeare: No, that is not true – they had been replaced by cheap and common imitations! – it is immediately obvious to someone with the eye of experience. Many of the paintings that had been taken were ones that I had painted myself. It is ludicrous to suggest that I would not be able to tell my own work from that of unskilled amateur!

Mr Badger: Would it have requires an artist of great skill to make these forgeries?

Mr Smeare: Not great skill, no, just someone with a gift for artistic mimicry.

Shout from the Gallery: Bloomin’ Cheek! (later identified to be Mr. J.Von Tussle)

Judge Jeffreys: Another outburst like that and I shall clear the public gallery!

Mr Badger: No further questions, your honour.

Mr Hootman: Uncle has spent a lifetime building up his art collection has he not, Mister Smeare?

Mr Smeare: That is true, it is quite a collection…

Mr Hootman: Yes, and you would have us believe that he has done this from a sense of civic duty rather than the reality - which is that he regards them as just another investment - sitting on them as if they were shares or premium bonds…

Mr Badger: Objection, M’lud, this is pure hearsay!

Judge Jeffreys: Members of the jury, ignore that last remark.

Mr Hootman: Mister Smeare, is it not true that you rely on the patronage of Uncle for the majority of your income?

Mr Smeare: The fact that he is a collector of my work has no bearing on my expertise as a…

Mr Hootman: Quite so, quite so. I would like the witness to look at Exhibit C, your honour – one of the paintings that has been claimed to have been returned to the Homeward Gallery. It is a painting by Uncle himself of an idyllic country scene. Mister Smeare, you claim that this is a forgery?

Mr Smeare: Indeed, the brushwork and definition of Uncle’s own work is immensely superior to that of this tawdry forgery. It has an absence of the patrician assurance that one would expect in one of Uncle’s paintings. It lacks the elegance, the effeteness, the delicate touch…

Mr Hootman: Remote, aristocratic? – one might say the work of the cosseted? … even dissipated?

Mr Smeare: Those are not the terms that I would use, but this work is clearly the work of some heavy handed toiler of the earth – not someone of privilege and rank.

Mr Hootman: So, would it surprise you to find out that Uncle has actually admitted that the painting is his work?

Mr Smeare: I beg your pardon?

Mr Hootman: I am afraid it is so.

Mr Smeare: It is impossible!....I can only assume that they felt that it would have no value on the black market…um…not that it is not a fine painting…but…I…that is…

Mr Hootman: No more questions, M’lud.

Judge Jeffreys: Very well, we shall adjourn for the weekend and I shall see you all again, in this court, on Monday morning.

Crown Court - Transcript - Day 4

Case: Rex vs Mister Beaver Hateman, Criminal Libel

Presiding Judge: Sir George Jeffreys

Counsel for the Prosecution: Godfrey Badger K.C.

Counsel for the Defence: Mister Hootman G.H.O.S.T

Judge Jeffreys: Would you like to call another witness for the prosecution, Mr Badger?

Mr Badger: Yes, your honour, I would like to call Mister A.B.Fox.

Usher: Call Mister A.B.Fox.

Mister A..B. Fox is duly sworn in.

Mr Badger: You are Mister A.B.Fox, of Homeward Castle, formerly an employee of the Wolferton Detective Agency.

A.B.Fox: That is correct, Sir.

Mr Badger: And you are employed by Uncle as his personal detective, is that correct?

A.B.Fox: Yes, Sir.

Mr Badger: I am correct in thinking that you have an exemplary record in the detection of criminal activity and the apprehension of those that indulge in such activities.

A.B.Fox: I have such a reputation, I believe, Sir.

Mr Badger: Ah yes, down these mean streets a fox must go who is not himself mean, who is neither tarnished nor afraid. He is the hero, he is everything. He must be a complete fox and a common fox and yet an unusual fox. He must be, to use a rather weathered phrase, a fox of honour -- by instinct, by inevitability, without thought of it, and certainly without saying it. He must be the best fox in his world and a good enough fox for any world….

Mr Hootman: Objection, M’lud… this is pure conjecture on the part of my learned counsel…

Mr Badger: I was merely attempting to show the good character of the witness M’lud.

Judge Jeffreys: Yes, well I think we have heard enough, please proceed with your questions Mr Badger.

Mr Badger: You were asked by Uncle to investigate the theft of the Wizard’s Dressing Gown?

A.B.Fox: That is correct.

Mr Badger: Whilst searching the museum premises you discovered a number of skewers in the bucket which acts as a means of exit?

A.B.Fox: Yes, I knew skewers to be the weapon of choice of Hitmouse, a member of the Badfort gang, and it was later discovered that they were covered in his fingerprints.

Mr Badger: Ah, quite so, is it possible that they had been left there whilst on some visit to the museum by Mister Hitmouse?

A.B.Fox: Well, they were not there before the theft – they could only have been left there on the evening of the theft.

Mr Badger: What about the defence's argument that Mister Hateman and Mister Hitmouse ‘accidently’ came to be locked in the Museum.

A.B.Fox: Quite frankly, that is ridiculous, we thoroughly searched the Museum that evening – they could only have been hiding and then made use of the stolen article to effect their escape.

Mr Badger: You were present when the art theft was discovered at Homeward Gallery?

A.B.Fox: I was, Sir, and we discovered a scrawled handwritten text that said:
The Tyrant of Homeward - hit him where it hurts!

Mr Badger: Indeed, you recognised it as the hand of Mister Hateman?

A.B.Fox: Yes – I have seen many examples of his handwriting on blackmail notes and the like.

Mr Badger: Thank you Mister Fox, I have no further questions.

Mr Hootman: Is it not true, Mister Fox, that you rely on Uncle for a great deal of your work?

A.B.Fox: He is one of my major clients, yes.

Mr Hootman: So in all the time you have worked for him I expect you have come to understand his paranoia about certain individuals?

A.B.Fox: I do not know what you mean?

Mr Hootman: I mean that he has a pathological hatred of my client, and that as an employee you would be expected to do all you can to put him behind bars ?

A.B.Fox: I merely follow the clues and collect the evidence, it is for others to decide the course of action to be taken.

Mr Hootman: Come, come a clever fox like yourself, you know how to manoeuvre the evidence?

A.B.Fox: I don’t know what you mean.

Mr Hootman: Have you heard the expression “fitting someone up”?

A.B.Fox: If you are implying…

Mr Hootman: You have had many encounters with Mister Hitmouse, have you not?

A.B.Fox: Unfortunately, yes.

Mr Hootman: And in those encounters have you not, on occasion, forcibly taken such items, that Mister Hitmouse uses at the many barbecue parties he holds for the inhabitants of Badfort, for instance…skewers?

A.B.Fox: I have, but these skewers were not being used for culinary purposes they were being used as deadly…

Mr Hootman: So it would be a very easy matter to take them from your copius mackintosh and place them in the bucket?

A.B.Fox: Well, of course, if one were unscrupulous…

Shout from the Gallery: Yeah you stick it to him…bent detective fox!

Judge Jeffreys: If there are any more outbursts like that I shall clear the gallery!
Have you any more questions for the witness.

Mr Hootman: I would just like to ask the witness to look at exhibit A. It is a handwritten article that my client was preparing for his newspaper. A review of a restaurant.

As you can see I have picked out certain words that appeared on the note found in the Gallery.

The Tyrant, of Homeward, is one of the best restaurants what we have ever dined at – a real hit. But my dining companion seemed in pain so I asked him where it hurts. He said only in his wallet !

Is it not true that this note could have been used to forge the note that you claim was written by Mister Hateman?

A.B.Fox: Well yes, but there is no knowing when this article was...

Mr Hootman: No further questions M’lud.

Judge Jeffreys: The we shall adjourn for the day.

Crown Court - Transcript - Day 3

Case: Rex vs Mister Beaver Hateman, Criminal Libel

Presiding Judge: Sir George Jeffreys

Counsel for the Prosecution: Godfrey Badger K.C.

Counsel for the Defence: Mister Hootman G.H.O.S.T

Judge Jeffreys: Before we proceed with the case for the prosecution, Mr Badger, it seems from yesterdays evidence that the magical properties, or lack of, possessed by the Wizard’s Dressing Gown, is of crucial importance in this case. If this gown could be submitted as an evidential exhibit, it would be possible to ascertain the veracity of the claims made for it. Would that not be possible?

Mr Badger: Unfortunately, your honour, the coat sustained some damage during the events at the Treasury. It became coated in treacle and in order for it to be returned for display in Museum it was sent to the dry cleaners. When Uncle’s manservant, The Old Monkey, went to collect it they claimed that the article had already been reclaimed.

Judge Jeffreys: That is most unfortunate, and a very lax manner in which to treat a major item of evidence – I hope searches are being made.

Mr Badger: They are your honour – but so far without success.

Judge Jeffreys: Very well, call your next witness for the prosecution

Mr Badger: I would like to call Wizard Blenkinsop your honour.

Usher: Call Wizard Blenkinsop!

Wizard Blenkinsop is duly sworn in.

Mr Badger: You are Wizard Blenkinsop, of Wizard Glen?

Wizard Blenkinsop: I am.

Mr Badger: Now, is it correct that the dressing gown used by Mister Hateman…

Mr Hootman: Objection M’lud!

Mr Badger: …the dressing gown alleged to have been used by Mister Hateman in these crimes was donated by yourself to the museum.

Wizard Blenkinsop: Yes, perhaps foolishly I thought that it would be the safest place for it, inside a secure display case…

Mr Badger: You told no one of it’s secret powers.

Wizard Blenkinsop: I did not – but unfortunately a rather foolish cat in my employ made a record of the event in his diary.

Mr Badger: But you can confirm it’s magical properties?

Wizard Blenkinsop: Indeed, I can…many are the times when I have had to extricate myself from imprisonment in some Goblin’s lair, or enchantment by a witch.

Mr Badger: But in the wrong hands this could be used for criminal activity?

Wizard Blenkinsop: Without doubt!

Mr Badger: Thank you, I have no more questions for the witness.

At this point the wizard made to leave the witness box…

Judge Jeffreys: We have not finished yet – would you please come back Wizard Blenkinsop.

Mr Hootman: This court has been told of the excellent character of Uncle….

Wizard Blenkinsop: Yes, a fine fellow…

Mr Hootman: Is it not true that he purchased Homeward, from yourself?

Wizard Blenkinsop: Yes, that is true - the upkeep was all getting too much for me….

Mr Hootman: Would you say he paid a fair price?

Wizard Blenkinsop: Certainly fair at the time, of course it is worth a great deal more now, but that is because…

Mr Hootman: Would it not be true to say that the asset was severely undervalued, and he tricked you into paying much less than it was worth?

Wizard Blenkinsop: Not at all, he has merely made the most of it, and discovered new avenues of revenue – I bare him no grudges….

Mister Hootman: No, well, members of the jury, no one likes to admit they have been made a fool of - especially not one who has a high position in society based on their claims to have the powers of the ‘magical arts’…

Wizard Blenkinsop: That is outrageous, I object most strongly to your inference….

Judge Jeffreys: Yes, you must desist in this line of questioning Mister Hootman.

Mister Hootman: Very well, let us move onto your claims regarding this dressing gown. You assure us of it’s abilities to render the wearer invisible?

Wizard Blenkinsop: I do indeed.

Mister Hootman: Invisible? There are many things that one could do if invisible…ever been tempted to ride on public transport for free?

Wizard Blenkinsop: Certainly not!

Mister Hootman: What! – never even been tempted to sneak your way into some major event when tickets are unobtainable?

Wizard Blenkinsop: We wizards have a certain code of conduct, you know…

Mister Hootman: Members of the jury, I put it to you that only the most saintly of men would be able to resist the opportunities such invisibility would give one….unless of course this garment is just a figment of the imagination of some sad person with delusions of grandeur. You do not really possess any magical powers do you Mr Blenkinsop? You are a charlatan, a trickster !

Wizard Blenkinsop: How dare you !

Mister Hootman: Prove that you can perform real magic then!

At this point there was a flash of smoke and the Wizard disappeared.

Mister Hootman: Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, you may have found that act astounding…but I submit this video in evidence as proof that anyone could do this…it is merely an example of advanced trickery.



Judge Jeffreys: Have you finished, Mister Hootman ?…then we shall adjourn for the day.

Crown Court - Transcript - Day 2

Case: Rex vs Mister Beaver Hateman, Criminal Libel

Presiding Judge: Sir George Jeffreys

Counsel for the Prosecution: Godfrey Badger K.C.

Counsel for the Defence: Mister Hootman G.H.O.S.T

Mr Hootman: Much has been made in this Court of you generosity, has it not?

Uncle: Yes…but not by myself I might add.

Mr Hootman: Is it not true, however, that this generosity comes at a price?

Uncle: I have no idea what you mean…

Mr Hootman: Well, let me put it this way – is it not expected that you receive something in return for your gifts? For instance has the King of the Badgers, himself, not bestowed medals on you in return for small favours you have done him…

Uncle: Well, yes, but…

Mr Hootman:…and at one point even the Town Hall Mace?

Uncle: He did indeed give me that item, but its value…

Mr Hootman: …and is it not expected that those you assist are expected to show their gratitude by depicting those events in paintings, and to lay on celebrations in your honour…all to massage your ego and to reinforce the image of yourself that you have created as a great benefactor?

Uncle: You are twisting these facts to cast me in an unflattering light! This is ridiculous…an elephant of my position being spoken to like a common…

Mr Hootman:…criminal? Do you mean the sort of person who might, for instance… take a bicycle without the owners permission?

Uncle: I am well aware of the incident to which you allude. It is a well-known fact that I merely borrowed the bicycle – I certainly was not prosecuted over the matter and I think that you will find that the owner has been quite happy with the recompense I have made to him for this slight error of judgement…

Mr Hootman: So you say, so you say, but suffice to say that there is no smoke without fire.

Judge Jeffreys: Have that remark struck from the record. Members of the Jury I ask you to disregard that last remark. Counsel, you should no better than that – please keep speculation out of this Courtroom!

Mr Hootman: I apologise most profusely your honour – a mere slip of the tongue. Let us pass on to your relationship with the accused. Would it not be correct to say that you consider him to be a thorn in your side?

Uncle: He has caused a number of problems in the past that have upset the normal running of Homeward.

Mr Hootman: I put it to you, Sir, that you are a self-confessed capitalist and that as the owner of a vast property, with many business interests – you are dependent on docile tenants to guarantee your rental income and subservient workers to assure the smooth running of your enterprises.

Uncle: I think that my rents are more than fair and that my workers receive a very adequate remuneration…

Mr Hootman: A very patrician attitude…almost feudal one might say.

Judge Jeffreys: Where is this line of questioning leading, Mister Hootman, I must say I do not see its relevance?

Mr Hootman: Your honour, I merely seek to show how someone who might attempt to aid these tenants and workers to improve their lot might be seen as a danger, by Uncle, to his life of privilege.

Judge Jeffreys: You may continue, but I warn you to be careful how you proceed.

Mr Hootman: Thank you M’lud. I put it to you, Uncle, that you are jealous of Mister Hateman.

Uncle: I have no idea what you mean?

Mr Hootman: You must be well aware, that Mister Hateman, is seen by many as somewhat of a Robin Hood character….

Uncle: He’s a thief you mean.

Mr Hootman: No, no, of course not…but he is seen my many as standing up for the poor against the rich, is he not?

Uncle: No, I think that most people see him as a con artist and a felon.

Mr Hootman: I put it to you that, the fact that he is so loved, enrages you because unlike yourself he has no need to buy adoration!

Uncle: That is the most ridiculous accusation…

Mr Hootman: No matter, let us pass onto the events you so eloquently, if incorrectly, described yesterday. Firstly let us consider the ‘magical’ Wizard’s Dressing Gown.

Uncle: By all means. A most powerful and dangerous weapon in the hands of the wrong person.

Mr Hootman: A Dressing Gown?

Uncle: Indeed, one with the properties of that particular dressing gown.

Mr Hootman: Yes, supposedly conferring the power of invisibility.

Uncle: Indeed.

Mr Hootman: As you know my client’s version of events is that he was wandering around the Museum and fell asleep. When he awoke, feeling somewhat chilly, he saw the dressing gown and placed it around himself to keep warm. He was certain that it had no value because it was so worn out and moth-eaten. Does that not sound more likely than you extraordinary claims that he stole it because of its enormous value…as a ‘magical’ garment?

Uncle: I believe the prosecution will be calling a number of expert witnesses in order to prove this.

Mr Hootman: We shall see…I shall now move onto the crimes that you claim were committed by my client using this ‘magical’ gown. You claim that he stole all the paintings from your Art Gallery?

Uncle: Indeed I do.

Mr Hootman: But is it not correct that when the Badgertown Police were called into investigate the thefts that they found all the paintings present and correct?

Uncle: No that is not true, what they found were crude imitations of the originals…

Mr Hootman: So you say, but so far we have the borrowing of a dressing gown, and you yourself have admitted to the borrowing of items in your own past, and an art theft that never happened. Is that not the truth?

Uncle: The curator saw the paintings being taken. They floated out of the Museum…

Mr Hootman: Members of the jury…we are expected to believe that they ‘floated’ out of the museum, carried by persons unknown wearing a ‘magical’ dressing gown… I put it to you, Uncle, that you are a fantasist. Your whole life is a fiction…you imagine that you live in a castle with ‘magical’ places and ‘magical’ objects, and that you are the master of this ‘magical’ kingdom, where all the tenants bask in your bounteous presence…

Uncle: That is nonsense!

Mr Hootman: ‘Magical’ Dressing Gowns? Is this not the stuff of children’s fiction? Honestly, you will be expecting us to believe in Schools for Wizards next! Your adherence to a world of fantasy is merely an opiate for the people! It is a means by which you exert control. As the great philosopher Plato said - Ignorance or error about reality is among the worst disasters that can befall us, and from these so many other pains and disasters follow; and fantasy is a contributor to that worst disaster.
You create an illusory fantasy world where the people are happy with your rule – you require that the people believe in this fantasy so that they will make no demands in the real world. To call on them to give up their illusions is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions.

Uncle: That is a monstrous distortion of the truth!

Mr Hootman: Is it not a distortion of the truth to claim that innocent tourists, who accidentally found themselves in your Treasury, were using a ‘magical’ dressing gown to steal from you ?...I ask you, members of the jury, next he will be asking you to shout that you believe in fairies! No more questions M’lud!

Judge Jeffreys: In that case, we will adjourn for the day.