Mind your Ps and Qs

Recently on The Today programme the 'thought for the day' was about whether the wording of the Baptism service was turning people off by, well, scaring the life out of them.

The Rev Angela Tilby put in a strong defence for keeping matters as they are, not for sentimental reasons but because the words mean what they say and resonate with the solemnity of the occasion. I wondered then about us in courts and all of our 'may it pleases' and 'my learned friend this and that'. I'm glad we've dropped the Latin, which, mutatis mutandis, I never really understood, but I will certainly battle for the formal English that we use now and should continue so to do. There is something about a courtroom that does require a high level of formality. It doesn't help anyone if matters become so informal that the mood relaxes and an element of 'anything goes' comes into it.

Although the people who might get the most put off by this are the defendants, it is in fact in their interests that standards are maintained. They know they are being taken seriously, for a start. When it is your innocence and liberty at stake you need to know this is not just another case we hope to bosh off by lunchtime. It is important to see everyone maintaining an attitude of engagement, precision and scrupulous fairness. The defendant should be accorded the same respect as everyone else, and that includes when they are sentenced.

It also means that when the witnesses come to give their evidence they are more likely to be true to their oaths. Taking an oath is a solemn business; standing up in front of a room full of strangers and seeing the defendant in the dock is a serious endeavour. In cross-examination, uncomfortable questions may be put that mean although you are sure the defendant is the one who did the crime, you nonetheless know that you must answer truthfully and give an answer you may not want to give but you know you have to.

Witnesses also should know they will be protected from unfairness but required to be fair as a consequence.

Lemon and lime

If we had a system that allowed us to be informal and talk over each over then the respect that our day-to-day procedures command will begin to erode. Also, speaking in slang terms means speaking lazily and unclearly; what someone means by their 'kindas' and 'you knows' and what another means may not be the same thing, and also becomes dreary and tedious to listen to over time.

We have looked at wigs and gowns before and it still all comes down to maintaining respect. So many clients have threatened to 'kick off' in court when down in the cells, but they come up like pussy cats when that time comes.

It also means that, when we have to discuss the less charming ways people greet each other or what has been going on in the privacy of their own homes in all its gory detail, it is actually much easier to do so in a formal setting because the words that are recounted are simply the words that were used or need to be used, and the embarrassment is removed. It is always a bit peculiar to listen to the well-modulated vowels of the judge summing up the precise terms of abuse that one person used to another, or to quote exactly the words that were involved say in a rather clumsy invitation to have sexual relations '“ but we all get on with it and there are no blushes to spare.

Attention seekers

In fact, courts are about the last place left in the country apart from churches where courtesy is the normal currency of business. Listening to the House of Commons is to listen to a shrieking match where our legislators sound like drunken pub brawlers jeering 'heeeeahh heeeeahh' in a tribal, wholly meaningless and unhelpful way; politicians and others interviewed in the media are subject to haranguing and sensationalist point scoring, and chat shows are normally prurient exercises in cheap laughs and so-called 'edgy' humour.

What most of these theatres have in common is that in reality the debate is more about the interviewer or the presenter, and not the issue. In court the advocate should always be aware of the danger that comes with thinking that the case is about you rather than the issue. There are some advocates who preen and prance or cough and splutter or let everyone else be privy to their emotional index, but they fail to see what everyone else sees '“ their arrogance.

In the same way it is always bad form to criticise your opponent the prosecutor unless he or she really deserves it '“ it is the case they bring that you attack, not the person.

So we do not have anything to apologise for. Let us don our horsehair and fluff up our gowns, let us greet each other with respect and bow, let us not leave the judge alone in court, let us give way when our opponent stands up, let us seek leave to turn our backs and thank the court for its time and patience. William of Wykham said 'Manners maketh man' '“ manners also serve justice, whatever violence, contempt and disrespect has brought us all here in the first place.