One of those two parties, the defendants, they are so often so powerless. And if we don't have a system that enshrines their dignity as a matter of absolute importance in our system, then we do not deserve to call ourselves a civilised society. We have to protect the rights, the dignities of defendants. We have to do that. We also, though, have to look at the truth, and the trial has to be an effective mechanism for the discovery and the investigation of truth—in balance with the dignity and the rights of the defendant. Hence, we get our evidence laws. Hence, we get things like the American version, no allowing of the "Fruit of the poison tree." These are important things, there might be evidence but if you've got it through the destruction of the defendant's rights, then that is enough of a block. We give up on truth when it affects the dignity of the defendant to that degree. It is a system of checks and balances, and when we interrupt something as crucial as that, then we should be nervous and we should be mindful, and by God we were throughout this process. It has been a careful, arduous, often circular, often spiralling back upon itself process, and so it should, because it's important.