It's still all there to argue for
I agree with your core argument Frank, I almost posted to say, "Well done, you've cracked it" when you said that they had admitted the unfair legislation thing. But there is of course that old chestnut beloved of newspapers and public opinion - anyone's opinion - when an unpopular decision is arrived at: "Won/lost on a technicality". Your core argument may be correct; what you now need to do (in my utterly unqualified opinion !
) is marshal all your guns against whatever technicalities the opposition may use to win on a minor point, e.g. the objections the sheriff was making. Think of it rather as, it's not enough to have the winning carrot/tattie/shallot on the plate: you need to have a whole plateful of identical standard winners. Any imperfections and you may lose a vital point, in which instance the procedural legislation may say all other points are moot, to win on this point means...
(Where's the disgusted eye-rolling emoticon when you need it ?)


Leave a comment: