TL/3PA
H
K
M
N
S
T
U
V
--890-
JL/3P/2
Manod
So
candidates in the reports in the Marks Register (D.3). Then there is the failure to note in the appropriate space in the Training Record (D.4) the fact that he had already passed the Standard 11 Examination, a higher standard than that which was required for the course. The plaintiff
Whether these things were has given eloquent proof of sensitivity. .careless omissions or csgurl solecisms disclosing a vent of feeling and understanding in his regard, they clearly were hurtful to him, but as : signs of malice as the law understands it, they are far too light to weigh in the scale. Then there was the alleged particlity shown to two European officers, Evans end Daly, who were said to have been involved in criminal assaults and yet were not penalized or dealt with by inquiry ces was the plaintiff on the matter of the suspected cheating. As to this Senior Inspector An denied that the Evans' incident ad involved a serious fight with weapons as the plaintiff claimed and said that the whole thing was a minor fracas which was dealt with domestically. The same witness said that he used to check the Occurrence Bock but never say any entry in it relating either to that incident or the Daly episode. Inspector Daly himself denied that there was anything of the kind in the episode in which he was involved, nothing he said of a kind that one would expect to be made the subject of a serious disciplinary charge.
Apart On his account it was a matter of rude words only. from all this, it must be said that tro instances of alleged partiality are scarcely indicative of the kind of studied wicked nalice alleged by the plaintiff.
B
C
· D
I do not I have considered the evidence very carefully in this case. think I have overlooked any outstanding particular upon which the plaintiff has relied as shoving malice. It has been a very singular action, indeed unequalled in my experience. Over nearly three weeks the court and jury have witnessed the unusual spectacle of a plaintiff calling a great mumber of witnesses, the majority of hon, as he made it clear in the course of the trial, the plaintiff did not expect even from the outset to support his story. And in fact all of those to whom he put questions on the details of the corrupt advances - but especially the witness Tidey
The situation gave the direct lie to his story. is extraordinary, for the plaintiff is in the position of one parading his own witnesses before the jury and then saying to the jury these are my witnesses.. I am speaking the truth but don't believe a word they say!" It would be tempting to say that on this alone the case ought to be withdrawn from the jury. I have, however, attended to the nossibility that if it could be said that a reasonably substantial case had been shown on the plaintiff's ovn evidence, it would be a jury matter notwithstanding the unusual tactics of the plaintiff to sort out the true from the false.. I have however, setting aside the adverse testimony of the other witnesses, combed the plaintiff's own evidence to see if it would on its om yield likely matter for a jury's consideration.
:
I should add that from the outset there has been a gap between the copious testimony which the plaintiff was prepared to give against some of his colleagues, especially his instructor, and what he had to say of the defendant. If what he said was true concerning the others and if that were to be accepted, there would indeed be a strong case of
He admits' some kind, indeed of various kinds, to present against them. that the defendant never approached him and that he never reported to the defendant when he was being barrassed. Only two tontative attempts were made to close that gap betweer the evidence concerning the other witnesses and the defendant end to show the direct complicity of the defendant in a scheme to secure his relegation because of his refusal to pay money. The plaintiff said that on cue occasion the defendant
E
G
H
I
K
L
M
N
R
S
T
U