the conclusion that we attach more importance to preventing its

disclosure than we actually do.

10 This new wave of correspondence presumably reflects

Cahill's frustration at our refusal to be drawn. The allegations he

makes are all familiar, and most have been heard and rejected during

the course of Osman's five habeas corpus applications. We should

not allow ourselves to be intimidated by the sheer weight of

Cahill's current correspondence into making any substantive comment, especially as Cahill has no locus standi in the Osman case.

D H Colvin

Share This Page