And the second question, and this is very important: did he follow through on the legal letter and plead truth in a statement of defence to the court, and, if so, why? Here's why that matters. Because if he filed papers with the court, saying that he intended to plead truth, that is contradictory with what we now know to be the case, which is that he told Parliament, or the Governance and Administration Committee, that he knew within 24 hours he was wrong. Both things can't be true. Either what he told the court is right, which is that he was going to plead truth, or what he told the select committee is right, which is that he knew within 24 hours. Both are appalling. Either he's misled the court or he's misled Parliament, neither of which is appropriate for a Speaker. 