THE MAGISTRATES then decided that Mr. Lawrence should make his
application in public. Later that morning Mr. Lawrence applied to have the part of the opening speech relating to the 'certain evi- dence' heard in private. Mr. Melford Stevenson said inter alio: 'I think I have already made my attitude to this matter quite plain. I do not consent to the court being closed, and at the same time I do not oppose that which Mr. Geoffrey Lawrence is now asking for, and I think I have done my duty by indizat- ing to you the nature of this discretion, the language in which it is expressed, and the way in which we on behalf of the Crown submit it ought to be exercised . . . that admissibility of some evidence may be capable of discussion is a matter which you may properly take into account. . . . The fact that this case has attracted substan- tial public notice, in my submission, has nothing whatever to do, with the question to which you have to direct your mind.'
Although Mr. Melford Stevenson did specifi- cally say that he was not opposing the defence's application, it is very difficult to see what else he was in effect doing. if what he said was not oppo- sition, I do not know what opposition is! It cer- tainly was not support, and it is not surprising that it should have been followed by the dismissal of the application by the justices. The Attorney- General's answer to Mr. Wigg that counsel had 'made it perfectly clear that he did not oppose the application that certain evidence should be heard in camera' seems to have pleased a member of the Attorney-Generals' trade union, but it was surely too disingenuous to satisfy anybody else.
* * *
Previous page
