((L'Antorcha's bullshit is always something nice to read
))
Faixòn kept his smile as the witnesses testified. Perhaps the Emperor's testimony might have any worth, but he doubted that.
"I can hardly imagine any more biased and thus false testimony then Cardinal Diego's. Clearly there is a great number of witnesses from that banquet who can testify that I clearly stated my intent not to break any law, even if I understandably had little respect for the man in question. 'Stripped him of his possessions'. You might excuse me me if I need to laugh a bit. A couple too many drinks? Might I remind you that I only had one glass of wine because I wanted a clear head for duels? As to Prince Lluís' credibility - might I tell you that his testimony has already been confirmed? If anyone, then you should reduce the amount of wine during mass, Cardinal. See? It doesn't need to be hidden behind a transparent veil.
But one witness isn't going to decide anything, nor am I wishing to convince the Prime W... Minister that he is wrong. It is for you as a court to decide. And as such I will have to point out that the prosecution has, even if he will vehemently deny it, conceded that no robbery took place, while just as vehemently denying that my actions have been justified through spying.
That Señor Borges is an employee of the Ministry of Justice merely hints very clearly at the abuse of a ministerial position. Even moreso considering that before admitting this connection, it has always been denied that there was any. Why should it be denied if there was no importance in that fact? The better strategy would have been to admit it from the beginning. Now it shows that there was something worth hiding. And if we in fact look at the invitations, prominent members of the parties were invited, and as someone who has never heard of Señor Borges before I can safely say he is not one of them. What purpose would his presence at the banquet serve, how did he enter? For the one and only purpose of spying. On political opponents. For no other reason than political gain. And this is what government resources are used for? Scandalous!
Yes, this is the entire purpose of this trial. The man himself obviously didn't believe himself to be a victim of any crime, or he would have called a trial himself. The entire aim is to weaken the side which doesn't simply follow the guidance of the miraculously ducal Señor Alejandría.
If I need to apologize, then only insofar as I didn't inform anyone of the trap I had set, so to His Highness. Which I would hereby do again if I haven't done it before. But as to return to His testimony, I certainly concede the point that if the trap hadn't worked, the same spying would certainly be said of me. But unlike the prosecution, I would understand if someone used convincing methods to prevent any further, let's call it intrusions. These 'convincing methods' of course have to be effective. Being 'on hostile territory', I doubt that nicely asking would have been enough to prevent another man immediately sent after me. For until the revelation that it was the Minister of I... Justice which was responsible, the Prime Minister remained my prime suspect. It was an effective way, and the least harming too. As for mind-reading, I am certain there are a lot of witnesses able to remember - if the moment of this trial hasn't been too conveniently chosen - that I proclaimed to be a law-abiding citizen and hardly showed any suicidal tendencies. As I said before, it doesn't need witchcraft to notice that I could just as well have silently dealt with the problem and that attracting attention is not the best way to act if I truly intend to cause harm.
Now of course there are first steps before drawing a weapon, such as telling someone that he isn't welcome first, but at some point you should be able to act, especially if it is the Ministry of 'Justice' itself that sends its men after you. The right in question is of course protected, not just by the crime the Prime Minister has accurately described. If someone listens to another by chance, then so be it. But spying is not protected by law. And was this trial not so perfectly timed, we could certainly reconstruct that this man has always been following me throughout the banquet, perhaps even before. Can you truly enjoy your life if someone follows and observes you everywhere? Not even with a reason? That kind of harassment is nothing one should be subjected to. Is the solution to live as a hermit? No, the solution is to stop that shadowing. I chose the least obstructive, yet still efficient way.
The question you as a court must ask yourself is if it constitutes a crime to discourage spies. What would my alternatives have been? Continue to live with that shadow - does it feel right? Inform the Ministry of I... Justice? If they are responsible for it in the first place? Tell him to leave? Just to be relayed? No, it was my best course of action. And was anybody harmed? No. Would you prefer it had the man suddenly vanished? Or if I sent spies of my own? Is this how we wish our society to be formed? That nobody is allowed to walk around this great realm without a human shadow? Are we a reactionary economic disaster like France, based on distrust? Or is Hispania based on mutual understanding and trust ever since the days of the creation of the CJC? What are we standing for? It is up to you as the court to continue the path Hispania walks. Everything the prosecution wants to hear is the contrary. Full control of every bit of your public life without any reason, or a bunch of hermits. For hermits don't pose any problem. A society based on trust should be above it, or do we want to return to Joan's times of oppression? This would be a first step. Of course the prosecution will vehemently deny whatever I said, but form your opinion. I ask you if your measure of trust has increased with the revelations of this trial. Mine certainly hasn't. Do you prefer no harm caused - or people killed, shadows everywhere outside your home?
