I was going to post this true story in the light of current events but now I can do so with a clear conscience on this thread. It was in the eighties when one of our managers had been called for jury service. (We used to get them out of it by writing to the court to say that they were essential to the business but when you do that it's guaranteed that they will be called again.)
I needed to speak to him about some developments in the business in which he was going to be involved and, as the case that he was trying was likely to be a long one we agreed to meet while he was still serving on the jury. I went along to the court during the afternoon to wait for him to finish for the day and as I was early I went into the public gallery.
The trial was of three men for armed robbery. The defendants, all black men, were accused of holding up a bank and the evidence was such that it seemed that their not guilty plea had no chance at all. The police had been tipped off and had waited for them to go into the bank and then had followed them in. Because they knew that the robbers would be carrying guns the police were also armed. One of the defendants had been shot during the arrest and had needed to spend some time in hospital so the trial was delayed. He was now considered to be fit enough to stand trial.
The defence claimed that the officer who had fired the gun had behaved incorrectly in not sticking to the rules - the prosecution denied this. The police officer had given his evidence to say that acting on information received, they had been keeping the bank under surveillance and had followed the bad guys in. He said that he had shouted: "We are armed police - put down your guns". When the robbers had not responded he had given another warning "We are armed police - if you do not drop your guns we shall fire". The defence's case was that no such warning had been issued and that the policeman had come into the bank with guns blazing in gung-ho fashion. Counsel had put it to the officer that he had not in fact warned the accused man before he had shot him.
When I was in the court a witness was called. He was an elderly man who had been in the bank to transact some business when first the robbers and then the police burst in (think Clive Dunn in Grandad mode). When the prosecuting counsel got to the firing of the gun and the wounding of the accused man the following conversation took place:
Prosecuting counsel: "And what happened next?"
Grandad: "The policeman shot the bank robber."
Prosecuting counsel: "Now I want you to think very carefully before you answer this. Before the policeman fired his gun, did he say anything to the accused?"
Grandad: "Oh, yes sir, he did."
Prosecuting counsel: "And do you remember the words that he used?"
Grandad: "Yes sir, he said 'You're dead, Sooty!' "
The entire public gallery, the jury, learned counsel and the accused, including the wounded one, erupted into laughter.
