billwill
Saturday 4th September 2010 11:13pm
North London
6,162 posts
Quote: Ben @ September 4 2010, 11:29 PM BST
And who am I to judge?
Judge... Ah that brings something else to mind, illustrated with this mini-script.
"Ben On Trial"
FADE IN
INT - A COURT ROOM
Ben is on trial for Murder
~~~~~~~
JUDGE
Proceed
PROSECUTOR
(to Witness)
Now Professor, you are an expert statistician, are you not?
PROFESSOR
Yes, that is correct
PROSECUTOR
Given the evidence of the blood spots and the fingerprints that you have heard, what is your estimate of the likelihood that Ben here is NOT the murderer?
PROFESSOR
I calculate it as at least 10 million to one.
PROSECUTOR
My Lord that concludes the case for the prosecution, it clearly indicates that THIS MAN (points at Ben) is guilty.
JUDGE
Defence?
DEFENCE ATTORNEY
(to witness)
Ah, Professor I wonder if you could calculate some different odds for me. What do you think the odds would be that a famous Jewish comedy writer, while some 13,000 miles away from Germany or from Nuremberg, would happen to buy in a jewelery shop a wrist watch that happened to have belonged to a very senior infamous Nazi.
PROFESSOR
(stares at ceiling for a while)
I would say at least 15 million to one.
DEFENCE ATTORNEY
Thank you.
(to Judge)
Your honour, the described watch purchase co-incidence actually happened and we can if you wish bring this comedy writer to the stand to prove it.
JUDGE
We will accept this for fact, given the wide distribution of the news about this Nazi watch and the depositions that you have produced.
DEFENCE ATTORNEY
(to Jury)
Ladies and Gentlemen, given that it was 5 million times less likely that Ben here is the murderer, than that this watch purchase occurred and given that the watch purchase actually DID occur, I put it to you that strange co-incidences CAN happen and that there is REASONABLE DOUBT that this man Ben is guilty.
And this concludes the case for the defence.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
JURY
Not Guilty!
FADE OUT