Judge throws out case because he can’t address defendant by full name


A case was been thrown out of court last week because the judge could not accuse the defendant as he refused to say his full name.

Matthew Jones, 29, was charged with insurance fraud on 6 August when his house ‘mysteriously burned down due to a miscalculation of the smoke point of overproof rum’. He later admitted that the rum may have contributed to the error. Over the following two weeks a substantial body of evidence was gathered, including CCTV footage presented by his nosy neighbour, revealing several removal vans to move leather furniture and racks of clothing to his current residence in Brentwood. Forensic analysis also revealed that the receipts he produced for the insurance company as proof of ownership of 25kg of saffron were forged. Despite his insistence that his neighbour’s had it in for him ever since their cat died eating deadly nightshade from his garden, the jury revealed their verdict of ‘guilty’, with an additional ‘liar liar saffron not on fire’.

The twist came when Jones, already tasting the prison gruel in his mouth early on, changed his last name to Nigger. The judge, unable to bring himself to drop the N-bomb, attempted to deliver the verdict first by obliquely referring to him in the same manner that people do when they don’t want to call their partner’s parents Mum/Dad or by their first names. Nigger promptly asked the judge to confirm who he was speaking to, which was met with a frustrated silence followed by violent mute pointing and hand-waving and an outburst of ‘you all know who I’m talking about, that guy over in the stand’, slamming his wig on his desk before storming out. When no other judge would take the case for the same reason, the entire case was dismissed.

To prevent more of the accused from escaping justice in this manner, a new bill is being rushed through Parliament to outlaw changing one’s name to the racially charged term, but is expected to fail to get a majority as there is nobody in the House of Lords willing to describe the bill in sufficient detail.

Tagged , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: