I was much upstaged at court, acting the part of straight-man while the prosecution and defence lawyers stole the limelight and got all the gags.

The prosecution woman was incapable of completing a sentence without adding more stumbles than words, though if it was meant to be a stammer, it was unconvincing. It looked more like she just hadn't done her homework, or was filling in for a sick colleague. She didn't even mention that I had owned up to a much larger instance of similar vandalism earlier in the year while in police custody, and had nothing to say regarding whether my action was serious, inconvenient, malevolent, or worthy of punishment.

Luckily, my defence lawyer, the Greenpeace-supporting duty solicitor appointed me at the copshop, was on hand to do her job for her in addition to his. While he did well to make a brief resume of my ethical reasons, and to point out that I was unrepentant and had deliberately targeted vehicles which were not the property of private individuals, I think he got a bit carried away when he said things like:

"He was inspired by Greenpeace, though I very much doubt whether that organisation would support his action, in fact I know offhand that they wouldn't..."

"He seems to have a conscience, at least in terms of the environment"

"He is bipolar, as well as being manic depressive... his mental state was clearly not in question, as he said it wasn't in the police interview... although he may not have been well at the time, he was clearly capable of knowing what he was doing... his mental state cannot be included in his defence"

"He knew that what he was doing was against the law, and it was clearly wrong"

"I am at odds as to what sentence to recommend"

It all baffled me a bit, and I think it baffled the magistrates too, whose _expression towards me seemed to soften the more he spoke.

Somehow, it has emerged that I wion't receive a custodial sentence, community service is looking to be the most severe punishment likely to be imposed, but the magistrates seemed keen on me being sent on an ETS (Enhanced Thinking Skills) course - I think both my solicitor and the Crown Prosecution Service brief should attend with me. The course is aimed at teaching people to think before they act, so since I'll probably be attending along with other sub-minor-league criminals, it might add up to lessons in how to get away with things. Removing my tongue from cheek, it does sound beneficial to a bipolar who is also manic-depressive. Whoop, it's back in my cheek!

One thing my solicitor did earn his legal aid payment for was getting my curfew time moved back from 9pm to 11pm until my next appearance in court (morning of 24.10.05), by which time I will have seen the probation officer to see if she thinks the ETS course would help my rehabilitation.

No cops bothered to turn up to give evidence, and their statements seemed to have been made anonymously. Turns out the security guard at the garage only noticed me when, after finishing with the jeepy-things, I took on the CCTV out of spite because it had recorded everything while I'd forgotten to pull up my bandanna. He sounds pretty dozy, as his initial witness description of me, which wasn't mentioned, had me down as being white.

Sonj tells me he cast a hex on the prosecution lawyer's mouth, which could explain some of her impotency, but did some of it spill over onto my man? A poor showing all round.

At the end I made a little statement to explain that my guilty plea didn't signify any feelings of guilt, or feelings that I should feel guilty for what I had done, and mentioned that I'd e-mailed the local Toyota people in sympathy with their staff.

Cheers for thinking of me,

Rene