Crown Court - Public Lives (1973) - video Dailymotion

Jezza

Crown Court: the gripping courtroom drama from the 1970s and 1980s.  A theatre production company is charged with breaching obscenity laws following the performance of a play at the Fulchester Palace Theatre.  Some familiar faces here: the defendant is Jim Norton, who would find later fame as Bishop Brennan in "Father Ted". Brian Wilde, known for Porridge and later Last of the Summer Wine, plays Mr Appleby. Kevin Stoney, known for his villains in Doctor Who, plays Nathaniel Stockman.

Transcript

00:00:00So far as I am a

00:00:29aware Mr. Latterby this is the first prosecution of a Turing play for obscenity or indeed of any play at all under the Theatres Act 1968.

00:00:36That is so my lord.

00:00:38Yes I thought it was thank you.

00:00:40Very well Mr. Latterby would you begin?

00:00:42My lord.

00:00:43Members of the jury according to the Theatres Act 1968 a play should be deemed obscene if taken as a whole its effect is such as to tend to deprave and corrupt those persons who are likely to see it.

00:00:54Now from the 21st to the 23rd of April last a play called Public Lives was presented at the Fulchester Palace Theatre by the defendant Alexander Pastor a theatrical manager and directed by Jeremy Williams who is his co-defendant.

00:01:08Now it is the prosecution's case that this play was obscene within the meaning of the act.

00:01:13My lord I produce a script of the version of the play performed on the 23rd of April the night to which this charge relates and I suggest that this might be the appropriate time for the jury to read it.

00:01:27But you're suggesting that we now adjourn while that is done.

00:01:30Yes my lord.

00:01:31On our point of law in the case of a trial of a theatrical entertainment it isn't sufficient evidence for the jury simply to read a script.

00:01:39Mr. Parsons the act does not specify what is or what is not sufficient evidence but the prosecution could rest its case entirely on the script.

00:01:47With respect my lord no the moral and emotional effect of a theatrical production can only be judged in the atmosphere of a complete performance in the theatre.

00:01:57Yes but Mr. Parsons until the passing of this act the sole basis upon which a play could be judged was the script.

00:02:04Yes my lord and the Lord Chamberlain's office gave its judgment before a performance could be given.

00:02:09Now this whole form of censorship caused much distress to actors and artists throughout the profession and in consequence deprive the public of much work of artistic merit.

00:02:22It was because of this that the 1968 act was passed.

00:02:25I would draw your lordship's attention to section one of the act abolition of censorship of the theatre.

00:02:32Yes but nevertheless the establishment of a system of post facto judgment that is to say a system of being wise after the event rather than before it does not mean that a script is not of assistance when judging a play.

00:02:45I am of course referring to a script which has all the stage directions in it as the act prescribes and there is no indication in the act that the jury should be subjected to a full performance of the play and surely Mr. Parsons that is impracticable.

00:03:02I mean the production was stopped by the police some three months ago was it not?

00:03:06Well that is correct my lord on April 23rd.

00:03:08And the production includes how many people?

00:03:11Well according to my information my lord there were six actors, an orchestra of eight musicians plus the director and a stage staff of nine.

00:03:19That is of course not including the staff of the palace theatre who were involved with the production during its time there.

00:03:26So that is upwards of twenty-four people to be reassembled and some of them scattered all over the country and possibly in other work.

00:03:33That is correct my lord.

00:03:34And since the play has not been performed for three months I presume some sort of rehearsal will be necessary.

00:03:40Yes my lord.

00:03:41How much?

00:03:42Well I am no expert on the subject my lord but I should have imagined something in the nature of two weeks would be customary.

00:03:49Two weeks?

00:03:50Yes my lord.

00:03:51Mr. Parsons even you surely must agree that to subpoena twenty-four people from their present occupation.

00:03:58For a period of up to two weeks to give one performance fifteen people is to say the least of it an uneconomic venture.

00:04:05I cannot even imagine the Arts Council having much sympathy with that proposition.

00:04:10Nevertheless my lord I do feel that in this case above all justice must be seen to be done.

00:04:17Now it is my understanding that when the 1968 act was passed it was the intention to bring control of theatre performances into line with that of television productions and films.

00:04:29Now in the case of television the decision as to whether a programme may be shown is made by either the BBC or the independent broadcasting authority after the programme has been made.

00:04:41Similarly the British board of film censors sees a film when it has been completed and makes its decision then not on the basis of a script.

00:04:51I am sorry to have to pursue this argument so rigorously my lord but it does seem necessary as this is by its very nature a test case.

00:05:00Yes well Mr. Parsons even if there are reasons for saying that the jury should see this allegedly offensive material I think it should be within the precincts of this court.

00:05:10Well with respect my lord that would be entirely lacking in the trappings and atmosphere of a theatre.

00:05:16The play in question requires many properties and scene changes not to mention costume changes.

00:05:23And I would also point out that certain acts performed on a stage a certain distance from an audience under carefully controlled lighting might seem less offensive than in a room such as this.

00:05:36I suggest that the jury sees the play in a theatre with a full theatre audience.

00:05:42The context in which it would normally be seen by the public.

00:05:45Yes whether the play would normally be seen in the context of a full house is I suggest Mr. Parsons open to question.

00:05:51However considering the allegedly offensive material and the publicity that it has received perhaps you could be right.

00:06:00However I clearly cannot allow it to be seen by members of the public since it is at present some due to say.

00:06:07If Mr. Lotterby has no objection yes I am prepared to allow it to be shown in the setting of the theatre for which it was intended if that can be arranged.

00:06:19Thank you my lord.

00:06:20My lord for all my learned friend's eloquent argument I simply cannot see how a performance given by a group of actors subpoenaed by this court can possibly resemble the original article.

00:06:30Oh they'll all know the purpose of the performance and they'll obviously try to do their best to modify their actions accordingly.

00:06:37A television or a film performance once recorded is immutable but a theatrical performance can be altered radically.

00:06:45Especially if extra rehearsal is to be allowed and this is to be conducted by one of the accused.

00:06:49What do you say to that Mr. Parsons?

00:06:51With respect to my learned friend my lord no doubt prosecution witnesses are going to refer to certain actions in the play.

00:06:58Now the only way for the defence to discuss whether these actions took place or what effect they had is to demonstrate them.

00:07:06And clearly the defence can't do this in the confines of a witness box.

00:07:12I'd like to refer your lordship to the decision in the Crown v Quinn and Bloom 1962 when the court of criminal appeal ruled that the reconstruction of an entire scene brought into existence for the purpose of constituting evidence could never be admissible.

00:07:31Yes well I hear what you both say and I am inclined to think that a theatre performance might help us in this matter.

00:07:38I think I may distinguish Crown v Quinn and Bloom in that that was concerned with a play without a script.

00:07:46In other words a striptease act performed in an alleged disorderly house.

00:07:52But I must make it clear to the jury that it is the performance of April the 23rd upon which you will be asked to pass judgement and the performance that you will view can therefore act only as a guide.

00:08:05But of course that performance must follow the original as closely as possible.

00:08:09Do you have detailed written record of that performance of April the 23rd Mr. Parsons?

00:08:14Yes my lord I do have the script of the deputy stage manager of what is known as the prompt copy.

00:08:20Will you place it in evidence?

00:08:22Yes my lord.

00:08:23And will either of you be calling witnesses who were present at that performance on April the 23rd?

00:08:27Yes my lord.

00:08:28Then I think advisable that they should also attend the performance.

00:08:32Well we shall now adjourn until the performance can be viewed and I must say that I look forward to it with some trepidation.

00:08:40So with respect my lord.

00:08:41Yes Mr. Parsons.

00:08:42Is that entirely the proper observation for your lordship to make?

00:08:46Possibly not Mr. Parsons but it expressed my feelings.

00:08:51The court will now adjourn.

00:08:52My lord.

00:08:53Oh what is it now Mr. Parsons?

00:08:55With your pardon my lord.

00:08:57I am somewhat worried about costs.

00:09:00Now it is not the fault of the defence that this trial could not be brought until three months after the production was closed down.

00:09:07Now the cost of mounting a new production will be considerable.

00:09:11The payment of artists, the compensation to other managements who have lost these artists at short notice, the hiring of a theatre, the building of new...

00:09:19Mr. Parsons it is your eloquent pleading that has persuaded this court that it is legal to adopt this policy.

00:09:26Now if the defendants are found to be guilty then it is they who must bear the costs of the legal process.

00:09:32If they don't like that we can easily dispense with this performance that you have persuaded me should take place.

00:09:39Yes my lord I do feel however that in this case...

00:09:42Mr. Parsons that is my ruling.

00:09:45The court will now adjourn.

00:09:47Mr. Parsons.

00:10:01Six weeks have elapsed since the adjournment of the court.

00:10:04The judge, the jury, counsel and witnesses have seen the play that is the subject of the charge.

00:10:09You are Alice Jane Rosewall?

00:10:11Yes.

00:10:12And you live at Ahern Cottage, Withington, Fulchester?

00:10:14Yes I do.

00:10:15What is your occupation Mrs. Rosewall?

00:10:17I run a youth club.

00:10:18Are you a married woman?

00:10:19Yes I am.

00:10:20With children?

00:10:21Yes two boys.

00:10:22Were you in the audience at the Fulchester Palace Theatre on the night of April the 21st?

00:10:26Yes I was.

00:10:27And did you see a play called Public Lives by E.W. Rossiter?

00:10:30Yes.

00:10:31And did you on the 22nd of April go to Fulchester City Police Station there make a statement giving evidence that the play you had seen was obscene?

00:10:38Which provided a basis for the police closing down that play.

00:10:42That's true yes.

00:10:43And did you write letters to newspapers about it?

00:10:46Yes to the Times and the Fulchester Echo.

00:10:49And I had 57 letters back agreeing with me and not a single one...

00:10:52Thank you Mrs. Rosewall.

00:10:53Now would you tell the court why you did all this?

00:10:56Well because I felt it was my duty to do so.

00:10:59It was quite revolting.

00:11:00Distasteful.

00:11:01It shouldn't be available for anyone to walk in and see it.

00:11:04Were you present at the performance given last week in the presence of his lordship and the jury?

00:11:09Yes.

00:11:10And I may say that I could have done without having to sit through it twice.

00:11:13Quite.

00:11:14Now was this performance substantially the same as the one you saw on the 21st?

00:11:18Yes.

00:11:19It was if anything even more revolting.

00:11:21Would you tell us something about the play please?

00:11:24Well you've seen it for yourselves.

00:11:27Yes but I'd like you to tell us about it.

00:11:30Well it obviously sets out to be some kind of parody of Noel Coward's private lives.

00:11:34That's why it's got that title.

00:11:36Well that's one of the saddest things about it really.

00:11:39That a marvellous funny play by a great man of the theater who's just died

00:11:44should be degraded in this kind of way.

00:11:47You say this is a parody of private lives in one way?

00:11:50Well in Noel Coward's play two newly married couples are sharing adjacent hotel bedrooms.

00:11:56And the comedy of the situation is that the woman of one couple has previously been married to the man of the other

00:12:01and they've divorced.

00:12:02And in this play?

00:12:03The two women occupy one room and the two men the other.

00:12:08And what kind of relationships are these?

00:12:11Now come Mrs Rosewell they aren't married couples are they?

00:12:15No.

00:12:16What is their relationship explicitly shown on the stage?

00:12:21Homosexual.

00:12:23So a male homosexual and a lesbian relationship is shown on the stage.

00:12:26Now is this a relationship in mind only?

00:12:29No it is not.

00:12:30A physical relationship no less?

00:12:32Yes it is.

00:12:33Now Mrs Rosewell would you describe to the court some of the things that you saw that happened between these couples?

00:12:43I can't repeat them.

00:12:45I'm sure we all understand that you find it difficult to describe what you saw on that stage Mrs Rosewell.

00:12:50Especially here in open court.

00:12:52Yes.

00:12:53Why don't you try to tell us what you saw?

00:13:00I'm sorry I can't.

00:13:02Well perhaps you could write it down.

00:13:04A piece of paper taken a pencil.

00:13:07Now we all saw the play and we shall know what you're getting at.

00:13:11Yes.

00:13:12Of course you understand that what you write will be shown to counsel, the jury and myself.

00:13:17Yes.

00:13:18How many times did such acts of obscenity take place during the course of the evening?

00:13:28I lost count.

00:13:29How many times was the complete sex act simulated on stage?

00:13:33Three times.

00:13:35Until what finally happened?

00:13:38They just rolled about.

00:13:41All of them.

00:13:43Doing everything.

00:13:44And how did you react Mrs Rosewell?

00:13:47I was revolted.

00:13:49I was sickened.

00:13:51I couldn't talk to anyone.

00:13:53I couldn't look at my husband.

00:13:56The world was suddenly a filthy place.

00:13:59It had been polluted for me.

00:14:03I went to the police the next day.

00:14:06What would you say about what is called the fabric of your life?

00:14:09Was it changed in any way by this experience?

00:14:12Oh yes.

00:14:14I wonder now what on earth we're all up to.

00:14:17Where on earth we're all going.

00:14:20And how about its effect on other people?

00:14:22I think it would have an extremely harmful effect.

00:14:25On impressionable people.

00:14:27It would debase them.

00:14:28Deprave and corrupt them.

00:14:30Mr Lotterby as you must know the very recent appeal court decision in the case of

00:14:34The Crown v Oz Publications Inc Limited showed that the jury and jury alone

00:14:39must decide whether something is likely to deprave and corrupt.

00:14:44The jury will disregard that last question and the witness's answer.

00:14:49Thank you Mrs Rosewell. I won't cause you any further embarrassment.

00:14:53May I have sight of this witness's statement again please?

00:14:59Mrs Rosewell.

00:15:01Are you a theatre going person?

00:15:05Of course you are.

00:15:06You must be because you are very knowledgeable about private lives and the work of no coward.

00:15:11Yes I'm a theatre girl.

00:15:12Yes.

00:15:13Is this theatre going confined to visits to the local amateur players?

00:15:18No it isn't.

00:15:19I go to the Palace Theatre fairly regularly.

00:15:21Yes.

00:15:22What sort of plays should you go and see there?

00:15:24I go and see the ones I want to see.

00:15:26Are the plays that you've seen there of a decorous nature?

00:15:30Oh yes.

00:15:32You haven't seen anything there that might be called indelicate?

00:15:35Well not before this no.

00:15:37No.

00:15:38Now why do you go to the theatre?

00:15:40As a spokesman or should I say a spokeswoman for upstanding members of your community?

00:15:45No.

00:15:46I go to enjoy myself.

00:15:48I see.

00:15:49Now have you never seen full frontal nudity on the stage of the Palace Theatre?

00:15:55No.

00:15:56Well there have been four plays in the past year there

00:15:59in which actors have appeared naked on stage.

00:16:02You haven't seen them?

00:16:04No.

00:16:05Now as a regular theatre goer how did you manage to miss them?

00:16:11Well I usually read about them beforehand in the Echo and I choose not to go and see them.

00:16:16Yes.

00:16:17Did you read about this one beforehand in the Echo?

00:16:19Yes.

00:16:20Yes.

00:16:21And did it say that it was in keeping with these theatrically permissive times

00:16:27don't go if you're against sex education because you will be literally force fed

00:16:32with a lesson on the madhouse nuptials of two of the zaniest couples in anybody's marital red school book.

00:16:39And it went on to say it's the funniest his and her story of our age.

00:16:43You begin to wonder what's his and what's hers and does it really matter?

00:16:48Now did you read that?

00:16:50Yes.

00:16:51Now then should it that gave you an indication that this wouldn't be your cup of tea?

00:16:57Why did you go?

00:16:58I felt it was my duty to go.

00:17:01Duty?

00:17:02To whom?

00:17:03To decent-minded people.

00:17:05But you've just told us now you went to enjoy yourself.

00:17:09Well this was an exception.

00:17:10Ah.

00:17:11So you are a self-appointed spokeswoman.

00:17:14Do you appreciate how far the theatre has moved since private lives, Mrs Rosewell?

00:17:19Yes.

00:17:20I've just seen this play.

00:17:21Mm-hmm.

00:17:23Now you've written on this paper the word penis.

00:17:27Why couldn't you say that word in this court?

00:17:31Oh come now, Mrs Rosewell.

00:17:33You work with children.

00:17:34What would you call this part of the male anatomy if they asked you about it?

00:17:38I hope that situation wouldn't arise.

00:17:41Well what would you call it when you were bringing up your own boys?

00:17:48These are disgraceful questions to ask.

00:17:50I assure you they are not, Mrs Rosewell.

00:17:53You see I'm trying to put it to you that when writers write about overtly sexual situations

00:17:58and use words like winky and penny piece to describe such parts

00:18:03it would provoke a roar of merriment from the reader.

00:18:06And I also put it to you that the same goes for a theatrical presentation.

00:18:11Now just because you haven't kept up with this genre

00:18:14doesn't give you the right to act as a spokeswoman for a minority, does it?

00:18:18It is not a minority.

00:18:20Mm-hmm.

00:18:22Now are you also an opponent of Shakespeare, Mrs Rosewell?

00:18:25For instance.

00:18:26Ahem.

00:18:27Lady, shall I lie in your lap?

00:18:28No, my lord.

00:18:29I mean my head upon your lap.

00:18:30Aye, my lord.

00:18:31Do you think I meant country matters?

00:18:32I think nothing, my lord.

00:18:33That's a fair thought to lie between maids' legs.

00:18:34Well what do you think about that, Mrs Rosewell?

00:18:38I think it's Hamlet.

00:18:39But I've never thought about it in that way.

00:18:40And I don't intend to start now.

00:18:41Yes, you see, I would suggest that in the evidence of that reply alone, it would be fair to call you a rather bigoted person, wouldn't it, Mrs Rosewell?

00:18:51Certainly not.

00:18:52And I'm not going to be drawn like this.

00:18:53Well, didn't you find this play at the Palace Theatre funny?

00:18:54No, I did not.

00:18:55Not at all funny.

00:18:56No.

00:18:57How is one expected to laugh when one's sensibilities are being assaulted in this way?

00:18:58I was scammed.

00:18:59I was scammed.

00:19:00I think it's Hamlet.

00:19:01I think it's Hamlet.

00:19:02But I've never thought about it in that way.

00:19:03And I don't intend to start now.

00:19:04Yes, you see, I would suggest that in the evidence of that reply alone, it would be fair

00:19:05to call you a rather bigoted person, wouldn't it, Mrs Rosewell?

00:19:06Certainly not.

00:19:07And I'm not going to be drawn like this.

00:19:09Well, didn't you find this play at the Palace Theatre funny?

00:19:12No, I did not.

00:19:13Not at all funny.

00:19:14No.

00:19:15How is one expected to laugh when one's sensibilities are being assaulted in this way?

00:19:20I was scandalised by it.

00:19:22Ah.

00:19:23Scandalised.

00:19:24Yes.

00:19:25And you said you felt the world had been, what was it, polluted for you, didn't you?

00:19:30I did.

00:19:31Yes.

00:19:32Did you at the same time feel that you had been corrupted?

00:19:39I felt dirty.

00:19:40No, I said, were you corrupted?

00:19:42No.

00:19:43Or depraved?

00:19:45No.

00:19:46You weren't?

00:19:47Well then, who do you think would have been corrupted and depraved?

00:19:52A lot of people.

00:19:54Well, let's try and narrow that field down a bit, shall we?

00:19:58Now, we know it can't be children under 16, because wasn't there a sign outside the theatre

00:20:03that said they would not be admitted?

00:20:04Yes, but you know perfectly well that if young people...

00:20:06I said, was there a sign outside the theatre?

00:20:09Yes.

00:20:10Yes.

00:20:11Yes.

00:20:13Now then, we can dispose of that category of being depravable and corruptible.

00:20:18Now, what about people like you?

00:20:20You said you would not be corrupted or depraved.

00:20:24Yes.

00:20:25So we can exclude people like you?

00:20:28Yes.

00:20:29Yes.

00:20:30Whom just now you claimed to be a majority of the people.

00:20:33But there are people who are susceptible to this form of titillation.

00:20:37Well, who are these people?

00:20:39Young people who might be encouraged to take part in these practices.

00:20:43Well, if they saw this production?

00:20:44Yes.

00:20:45Now, do you like a good Agatha Christie thriller, Mrs. Rosewall?

00:20:51Yes, I do.

00:20:53Now, would you agree that the subject of murder is treated rather lightly in such plays?

00:20:58I mean, murder is simulated frequently on stage.

00:21:01In a way it's parodied, isn't it?

00:21:03Yes.

00:21:04Yes.

00:21:05And you would agree, would you not, that murder is a far more culpable act than any you saw

00:21:09that night on stage at the Palace Theatre.

00:21:11Of course.

00:21:12Yes.

00:21:13But you wouldn't call in the police to stop a show like that, would you?

00:21:17Of course not.

00:21:18No.

00:21:19I mean, it might even be the people who go to see that sort of play indulge in their hate

00:21:26fantasies, fantasies about murdering somebody, and thereby provide a form of release, mightn't

00:21:33it?

00:21:34I mean, it could be a good thing, yes?

00:21:36But I know what you're trying to say, but I don't see how this could be a good thing.

00:21:40Well, because it was shocking.

00:21:41Yes.

00:21:42But even more shocking than murder.

00:21:43Yes.

00:21:44Do you mean that, Mrs Rosewall?

00:21:48Well, yes, I do.

00:21:53Because we've come to accept the stage convention of murder.

00:21:58Yes.

00:21:59Exactly.

00:22:02My learned friend has been trying to suggest that you were some kind of blackwoods lady,

00:22:10Mrs Rosewall.

00:22:11I know what he's suggesting.

00:22:13I've brought up my two boys to be healthy, responsible citizens.

00:22:23I've looked after many hundreds of children.

00:22:25A great number of whom are adult now, who come back and see me and thank me.

00:22:31I object to filth no matter in what age it was first written.

00:22:36What I saw that night was deplorable.

00:22:41Thank you, Mrs Rosewall.

00:22:45You may leave the witness box.

00:22:49What is your occupation, Miss Jenkins?

00:22:51I'm an actress.

00:22:52On the 28th of May of this year, were you engaged by Pasta Productions to take part in a play called Public Lives?

00:22:58Yes, I was.

00:22:59I was contracted for a six week pre-London tour prior to West End, opening at the Fullchester Palace Theatre.

00:23:04When you signed the contract, you had of course read the play.

00:23:07Of course.

00:23:08Was there any reference to undressing in the play?

00:23:10Yes, there was.

00:23:11What was the nature of the undressing?

00:23:14I'm sorry.

00:23:15I mean, was there any physical movement in the news?

00:23:18No.

00:23:19Just taking my clothes off, standing there for a few moments and then being chased off.

00:23:24How many times was this to happen in the course of the action according to the original script?

00:23:29Only twice.

00:23:30And what was your attitude to taking your clothes off like this?

00:23:33Oh, it's quite normal.

00:23:34I don't mind that at all.

00:23:35So you began rehearsals?

00:23:37Yes.

00:23:38And what happened next?

00:23:39Well, we'd been rehearsing it for over two weeks like that.

00:23:42When Mr Pasta and the backers came to see the first run through.

00:23:46And, er, yes?

00:23:47Well, er, the next day Mr Williams called the cast together

00:23:51and said that not only was there to be more nudity,

00:23:54but the script was being changed and we would have to simulate intercourse of different kinds.

00:24:00Did he give any reason for these changes?

00:24:02He said the producer felt the show needed spicing up.

00:24:05It needed spicing up?

00:24:06Did he agree with the producer?

00:24:08Oh, yes.

00:24:09Well, what did you think about it?

00:24:11Well, I was revolted by what I was expected to do.

00:24:13So what did you do?

00:24:14Well, I refused to do it.

00:24:16Well, what happened then?

00:24:18I was replaced.

00:24:19So you were sacked?

00:24:21I was sacked.

00:24:22I was sacked.

00:24:23The case of the Queen against Pasta and Williams will be resumed tomorrow in the Crown Court.

00:24:44Thank you very much.

00:24:45Thank you very much.

00:24:50THE END

00:25:20It was to be shown on April the 23rd of this year at the Fullchester Palace Theatre a comedy entitled Public Lives, which contained acts and words which, taken as a whole, could be termed obscene.

00:25:32Miss Mandy Jenkins, an actress who was engaged to play one of the parts, says she was dismissed by the defendants when she refused to perform certain scenes that she considered to be obscene.

00:25:42So you're saying, Miss Jenkins, that the play you were contracted to perform, in fact, turned into a very different play indeed.

00:25:48Yes, that's right.

00:25:49What's the first play? The one you read when you agreed to appear in it, was it a respectable play?

00:25:54Oh, perfectly respectable.

00:25:55When you performed it at rehearsals, it was a respectable play?

00:25:58Yes. Well, it was a very witty, near-the-knuckle piece of theatre.

00:26:03I mean, two men in a bed dressed in pyjamas can be very funny.

00:26:08Two men stark naked doing what they were supposed to do, it went right over the top.

00:26:12I mean, the same for the women. I just couldn't wear it.

00:26:14Wouldn't wear it, Miss Jenkins?

00:26:16I wouldn't not wear it, I should have said.

00:26:19Yes. So when you refused to go over the top, as you call it, another actress was engaged to play your part.

00:26:25Yes.

00:26:26Did you attend the opening night?

00:26:27Yes, I bought a ticket.

00:26:28And what did you think of the play, Miss Jenkins?

00:26:30It was worse than I expected.

00:26:33It really was obscene.

00:26:35It didn't surprise me at all that they closed it down.

00:26:37Why do you say it was obscene?

00:26:39Well, you just don't do that sort of thing undressed on a stage.

00:26:44Thank you, Miss Jenkins.

00:26:46Have you seen Ocalcutta, Miss Jenkins?

00:26:49I have.

00:26:50What did you think about that?

00:26:52It gave me the shudders.

00:26:55Fool houses for over three years didn't give all those people the shudders.

00:26:59Chacun a son goût.

00:27:00Exactly. I was about to make that precise point.

00:27:03And on y soit qui m'allie pense.

00:27:05Do you mind if we continue the evidence in English, Mr Parsons?

00:27:10I'm sorry, my lord.

00:27:10I was simply making the point that evil is in the eye of the beholder.

00:27:14And I believe the witness was agreeing with me.

00:27:16I think we all agree with that.

00:27:18How long have you known the defendant of Mr Williams' form, Miss Jenkins?

00:27:23About two years.

00:27:24Have you known him intimately?

00:27:26Oh, my lord, with great respect.

00:27:27That question can have no relevance to this charge.

00:27:30We will see, Mr Lutterby.

00:27:32Is it relevant?

00:27:33It's relevant to the evaluation of this witness's testimony, my lord.

00:27:37Very well.

00:27:38Ask your question.

00:27:39Thank you, my lord.

00:27:40Have you known him intimately?

00:27:42Yes, I have.

00:27:43Very intimately?

00:27:45Yes.

00:27:45Indeed, there was talk of marriage, was there not?

00:27:48Yes.

00:27:48And over the night of a dress rehearsal,

00:27:50when you say you were given the sack by him,

00:27:52you were living with Mr Williams, weren't you?

00:27:55I was.

00:27:56Yes.

00:27:57And you had a row with him, and you walked out of him.

00:28:00I had a row with him about performing those acts on stage.

00:28:03You had a row with him about a young man called Marcus Ellingham, didn't you?

00:28:08Come now, Miss Jenkins, it was nothing to do with those acts.

00:28:11He objected to your association with this Marcus Ellingham, did he not?

00:28:15My lord, do I have to answer this kind of...

00:28:17I'm afraid you do.

00:28:22That came into it, yes.

00:28:23No, that was it, wasn't it?

00:28:26You were quite prepared to do those things on stage

00:28:28until Mr Williams accused you of disloyalty.

00:28:32Now, come on, Miss Jenkins,

00:28:33you say he kicked you out of this production,

00:28:35but Mr Williams had told you five days prior to the run-through

00:28:39about these changes in the text, had he not?

00:28:42I don't remember if he did, he might have done.

00:28:45Now, now, now, now.

00:28:47You don't remember something so traumatic

00:28:51as having to do these things in public,

00:28:53these revolting acts, you call them,

00:28:56and you don't remember?

00:28:57You've confused me.

00:28:59Then I put it to you in order to clarify your mind

00:29:03that you knew you might have to perform these acts in public,

00:29:07and this row on the dress rehearsal

00:29:09blew up about your association with this other man,

00:29:12and you used this business about being revolted

00:29:14as a pretext to leave Mr Williams high and dry.

00:29:18you walked out on your contract,

00:29:20and in order to save face,

00:29:22you're appearing here and giving evidence against him.

00:29:25That is a real lie.

00:29:28No, not at all.

00:29:30It is not a very inspired performance you are giving, Miss Jenkins.

00:29:35Miss Jenkins,

00:29:35were you ever prepared to perform these acts

00:29:39of simulated sexual intercourse on a public stage?

00:29:42No, I was not.

00:29:44Thank you, Miss Jenkins.

00:29:46Very well.

00:29:50You are Arthur Appleby of 6th Grover Avenue, Hampstead?

00:29:53Yes, I am.

00:29:54Now, what is your occupation, Mr Appleby?

00:29:56I'm a writer.

00:29:57What is it that you principally write?

00:29:58I write plays.

00:30:00Have you written plays that have been performed on the English stage?

00:30:03Oh, yes.

00:30:04I've had three in London.

00:30:05What kind of plays were these?

00:30:07Comedies.

00:30:08And are you the author of the play Public Lives,

00:30:10which was performed at the Fultchester Palace Theatre

00:30:12on April the 21st, 22nd, and 23rd of this year?

00:30:15Mr. Lotterby,

00:30:15it has already been given in evidence

00:30:17that this play was written by E. W. Rossiter.

00:30:20My lord,

00:30:20it was in fact originally Mr Appleby's play,

00:30:23and he will tell us that at his request

00:30:25the defendants took his name off the play

00:30:26and substituted an entirely fictitious name.

00:30:29But Mr Appleby is the original author.

00:30:31Is that so, Mr Appleby?

00:30:33Yes, my lord.

00:30:33I see. Thank you.

00:30:35Now, would you be good enough, Mr Appleby,

00:30:36to describe your original play to us

00:30:38and tell us something about your style of writing?

00:30:41Yes, well, it's always rather difficult

00:30:44to talk about one's own work,

00:30:45but I'll try.

00:30:47Well, I write somewhat brittle comedies,

00:30:51you know, situation farces,

00:30:51with an attempt at least at Wildean dialogue.

00:30:55What was that?

00:30:57Oh, dialogue in the manner of Oscar Wilde, my lord.

00:31:00Whether or not I succeed is not for me to say.

00:31:03More for the critics.

00:31:04They have, of course.

00:31:05They have what?

00:31:06They have said.

00:31:07They have said what?

00:31:09Oh, more often than not that I haven't succeeded.

00:31:13I believe, my lord, Mr Appleby's indulging

00:31:15in an exercise in self-denigration

00:31:17in some court is his work is most highly thought of.

00:31:19My lord, with respect, that has yet to be established.

00:31:24I agree.

00:31:26Mr Appleby, you were explaining about your style of writing.

00:31:29Oh, yes, I am sorry.

00:31:31I like to take a situation in the manner of Shaw

00:31:34and reverse it.

00:31:36In the manner of whom?

00:31:37George Bernard Shaw, my lord.

00:31:40Now, Noel Coward's private lives

00:31:42is by now part of the legend of the British theatre.

00:31:44It's the story of two honeymoon couples.

00:31:46Mr Appleby, am I to take it that you write

00:31:48in the manner of Wilde, Shaw and Coward?

00:31:53Oh, I hope I have my own distinct style of writing, my lord,

00:31:56but it is to these authors that I feel I owe my origins.

00:31:59Hmm.

00:32:02Oh, private lines.

00:32:03Well, it's the story of two honeymoon couples

00:32:05who find themselves in adjacent rooms

00:32:07at a Riviera hotel.

00:32:08Now, one of the men has been married previously

00:32:12to the others newlywed.

00:32:14And the play is a very clever and witty account

00:32:18of the melange that follows.

00:32:20Now, that's Mr Coward's play, Mr Appleby.

00:32:22Now, what about yours?

00:32:24Ah, yes, well, now, to reflect the times that we live in,

00:32:27you know, permissive society and all that,

00:32:29I mixed the couples up even further, you know,

00:32:32just to see what would happen.

00:32:34I put the two men together in one room

00:32:36and the two women together in the other room.

00:32:39And I suggested two homosexual relationships

00:32:43and tried to develop the ensuing confusion

00:32:47in terms of situation and dialogue.

00:32:50And what happened to this play, Mr Appleby?

00:32:52Oh, Mr Pastor liked it, and we drew up a contract.

00:32:55I went to the read-through, and, you know,

00:32:57I enjoyed every minute of it,

00:32:59and I attended three rehearsals.

00:33:02You know, the whole thing was coming along splendidly.

00:33:03It was going like a house on fire.

00:33:04And then I went to the dress rehearsal,

00:33:08if you could call it that,

00:33:09and I was absolutely flabbergasted.

00:33:11Why were you flabbergasted?

00:33:14Well, the actors were playing some of the scenes stark naked.

00:33:19I mean, the point of those scenes was completely destroyed.

00:33:23The play was transformed from a sophisticated comedy of manners

00:33:27into a, well, a quite objectionable display of sexual happenings.

00:33:33Were there changes in the text from the original?

00:33:35Oh, yes, it is unrecognisable.

00:33:37So what did you do?

00:33:39Well, I pleaded for a return to the text.

00:33:41I pleaded with both Mr Pastor and Mr Williams.

00:33:45Well, what did they say?

00:33:47They said,

00:33:47It's better like this.

00:33:49And besides, you'll make a mint out of it.

00:33:52Ah.

00:33:53So what did you reply to that?

00:33:55I replied that I would sooner not make a mint

00:33:58out of the baser instincts of humanity,

00:34:00and I asked for my name to be taken off it.

00:34:04And they complied with this request?

00:34:05Yes.

00:34:06Thank you, Mr Appleby.

00:34:07Mr Appleby, I have some press cuttings here

00:34:14which refer to certain first nights that took place last year.

00:34:18I read a couple of extracts for you.

00:34:22The dialogue is so banal

00:34:24that I won't embarrass the author by printing his identity.

00:34:28But judging from the origins of his name,

00:34:31I suggest he returns to the cider trade.

00:34:35And the writing was so tedious

00:34:40that by the middle of Act Two,

00:34:42not only the audience, but the actress as well

00:34:44had fallen into a state of soporific insensibility.

00:34:49Now, can you tell me who wrote these plays?

00:34:52I did.

00:35:03Four seconds, three seconds.

00:35:05Now, in Act Two, Scene Three of your original text,

00:35:13set in the bedroom, being shared by the two ladies,

00:35:17you have Angela Thompson saying to Virginia Pick,

00:35:20a love affair shouldn't start with love,

00:35:22it should start with psychoanalysis

00:35:24and finish with understanding.

00:35:27I think that's moderately funny.

00:35:29Yes, but wouldn't it be even funnier

00:35:31if it hadn't been lifted almost line for line

00:35:34from an ideal husband?

00:35:37Act Three, Mrs. Cheveley.

00:35:39Romance should never begin with sentiment.

00:35:41It should begin with signs and end with a settlement.

00:35:45I was simply adapting Wilde's dialogue to suit my situation.

00:35:49Yes, well, adapting other people's words

00:35:50would appear to be your forte, Mr. Applebear.

00:35:53But wasn't it explained to you by Mr. Pastor

00:35:56that he thought there was a lack of imagination

00:35:59shown in some of your scenes

00:36:00and that's why he was compelled to change them?

00:36:04That's what he said, yes.

00:36:05Yes.

00:36:06Now, didn't Mr. Williams tell you

00:36:07that he thought your play was too suggestive,

00:36:11too indirect, in fact, too smutty.

00:36:15And that's why he wanted to bring everything out

00:36:17into the open.

00:36:19That's what he told me, yes,

00:36:20but I didn't believe him for a moment.

00:36:21No.

00:36:23Would you not conceive, Mr. Applebear,

00:36:24that while a thing like sex remains hidden,

00:36:27sly references to it make it appear dirty

00:36:30and hole in the corner?

00:36:32No, I wouldn't.

00:36:33No?

00:36:33But isn't that the basis

00:36:34of all smutty music-hall humour?

00:36:37Yes, I suppose it is, but...

00:36:38I mean, isn't it the nature of the beast

00:36:40that when you release it to full view,

00:36:42you can concentrate on the reality

00:36:45and depth of the situation

00:36:46rather than dwelling on its suggestive qualities?

00:36:50Would you agree with that?

00:36:52Well, no, I wouldn't, my lord.

00:36:54No, but then no one would expect you to agree,

00:36:56would they, Mr. Applebear?

00:36:58I mean, after all, your text had been changed.

00:37:00No matter how it had been changed,

00:37:02you would have objected.

00:37:04Yes, I would.

00:37:05But I still think it's obscene,

00:37:07the way it turned out.

00:37:09But what I really do want to object to,

00:37:12however, is the reflection that's been cast on my work.

00:37:16Now, you have chosen to read out

00:37:18some particularly bad notices.

00:37:20Now, I do have good ones

00:37:23and I think it only fair to mention that fact.

00:37:26And besides, would Mr. Pastore and Mr. Williams

00:37:28have bought my play if they thought it was that bad?

00:37:31Yes, but you know it is their case

00:37:33that they were improving your play.

00:37:35Now, that doesn't mean to say

00:37:36they thought it a bad play,

00:37:38just one that could be bettered.

00:37:40Yes, well, that's a matter of opinion.

00:37:41So you think you've written a play

00:37:43that can't be improved on?

00:37:45Well, certainly not by making it more sexually explicit.

00:37:48I mean, in fact, it wasn't.

00:37:49It was destroyed.

00:37:50Yes.

00:37:53The acts that were finally performed on stage,

00:37:56all this perverted behavior,

00:37:57none of this was your intention, Mr. Appleby?

00:37:59No, not at all.

00:38:00You had no part in it whatsoever?

00:38:02None at all.

00:38:03Thank you, Mr. Appleby.

00:38:05You may leave the witness box.

00:38:08Now, Mr. Stockman,

00:38:09are you the chief drama critic

00:38:10of the London Daily News?

00:38:12I am.

00:38:13And how long have you held that appointment for?

00:38:16Nine years.

00:38:17And on April the 21st,

00:38:19did you travel from London to Fulster

00:38:21to see a performance of the play

00:38:24Public Lives by E. W. Rossiter

00:38:28in your capacity as a reviewer?

00:38:30I did.

00:38:31Now, are these the words you wrote

00:38:33in your review of this play,

00:38:34which appeared in the Daily News on April the 22nd?

00:38:37Once you get over the shock

00:38:39of seeing the naked antics

00:38:41of two pairs of homosexuals,

00:38:43male and female,

00:38:45it is a very perceptive play indeed.

00:38:48Yes, those are my words.

00:38:49So you enjoyed the play, did you?

00:38:51Very much.

00:38:53It's not a world-shattering piece, of course,

00:38:55but it moves the horizons a bit.

00:38:57It's very entertaining

00:38:58and contains a serious criticism of society.

00:39:01Now, did you find it,

00:39:02or any part of it, objectionable?

00:39:05Certain of the jokes lack point.

00:39:07It's always slightly objectionable to me

00:39:09when humour misses its target.

00:39:12But that's not the kind of objectionable you mean, is it?

00:39:14No, I mean obscene.

00:39:16Not in the least, no.

00:39:18Even those sexual antics

00:39:20that you referred to in your review?

00:39:22No, as I said,

00:39:23once you've accepted that anything goes,

00:39:25that part of it fades away.

00:39:26You hardly notice it.

00:39:28In fact, it becomes an essential background

00:39:29to the words.

00:39:30You'd miss it if it weren't there.

00:39:31It's like a good score in a musical.

00:39:35Yes.

00:39:36Now, what do you mean by

00:39:37it moves horizons a bit?

00:39:40Well, every year in a world

00:39:42that is developing as fast as ours,

00:39:44some work of art,

00:39:45good, bad, or indifferent,

00:39:47rolls back the carpet

00:39:48from over the dark corners a little

00:39:49and reveals a little more

00:39:51of our human condition.

00:39:53And does this play do that?

00:39:54It does.

00:39:55Yes.

00:39:56And how does it roll back the carpet?

00:39:59I think in the form it uses,

00:40:02by completely revealing the human body

00:40:04and by showing us behaviour

00:40:06that we've never seen on a stage before.

00:40:08It says to us,

00:40:09this shouldn't really be a taboo, you know,

00:40:11and then proceeds to show

00:40:13that something we thought beforehand

00:40:14might be objectionable

00:40:15is either a therapy

00:40:16or a drug

00:40:17or an errant pastime.

00:40:19But it's quite natural.

00:40:21We all do it.

00:40:23If we don't do it,

00:40:24we want to do it.

00:40:26If we don't want to do it,

00:40:27we know it goes on.

00:40:28And if we don't know it goes on,

00:40:30we'd better get our heads

00:40:31out of the sand pretty quickly.

00:40:32Yes.

00:40:33But you say

00:40:33it is all done

00:40:35with great humour.

00:40:37In fact, it is satire, isn't it?

00:40:39Indeed it is.

00:40:40Yes.

00:40:41Thank you, Mr Stockman.

00:40:42Mr Stockman,

00:40:44I'd like you to listen to this review.

00:40:48The play is a loose, dreary account

00:40:50of three insignificant, selfish characters.

00:40:54It has no significance

00:40:55or literary merit.

00:40:57Do you recognise that remark?

00:40:59No, I don't think I do.

00:41:00That's curious, Mr Stockman,

00:41:02because you wrote it.

00:41:03I can't be expected

00:41:04to remember quotations

00:41:05from all my writings.

00:41:07I've been a theatre critic

00:41:08for 12 years, you know.

00:41:10Can you remember what play it was

00:41:11that you were reviewing

00:41:12when you wrote that?

00:41:14I suppose it was

00:41:15The Caretaker.

00:41:16That's always been quoted

00:41:17back at me.

00:41:18Yes, it was indeed.

00:41:19The Caretaker,

00:41:20a play by the distinguished

00:41:21English dramatist

00:41:22Harold Pinter.

00:41:24That play is now

00:41:25universally acclaimed,

00:41:27is it not?

00:41:27Yes, it is.

00:41:28So you were wrong about it?

00:41:30Oh, no, I was right.

00:41:32What, and all the other

00:41:33drama critics were wrong

00:41:35and experts on drama

00:41:36the world round

00:41:37and millions of people

00:41:37who've seen it

00:41:38and enjoyed it?

00:41:39Yes, if you'd like

00:41:40to put it that way.

00:41:41There have been

00:41:42greater errors of judgment

00:41:43than that, you know.

00:41:44No judgment on this play,

00:41:46for instance,

00:41:46would that be one of them?

00:41:47It is my opinion

00:41:48that it is a good play.

00:41:51But you must admit

00:41:52that you could be wrong

00:41:53about it, Mr Stockman.

00:41:54Of course I could.

00:41:55My opinion was thought

00:41:56and I'm giving it.

00:41:58You don't expect me

00:41:58to change my mind

00:42:00because other people

00:42:01didn't like it, do you?

00:42:02No, but our opinions

00:42:03are fallible, are they not?

00:42:05And unrepresentative.

00:42:07Certainly.

00:42:08That goes for you, too.

00:42:10Now, my opinion

00:42:10is not being sought,

00:42:11Mr Stockman.

00:42:13But if this play

00:42:13is found to be obscene,

00:42:15it will be the opinion

00:42:15of the establishment,

00:42:16won't it,

00:42:17of which you are a part?

00:42:18It will be the opinion

00:42:19of twelve members

00:42:19of the jury

00:42:20who've been selected

00:42:21to represent their peers.

00:42:22But then it will become

00:42:23a precedent

00:42:23and will go into law.

00:42:24Mr Stockman,

00:42:25Mr Lotterby,

00:42:26you are not here

00:42:27to conduct a Socratic dialogue

00:42:28and you are not here,

00:42:30Mr Stockman,

00:42:31to give us your opinion

00:42:31on the process of the law.

00:42:33Simply answer

00:42:34learned counsel's questions.

00:42:37You said

00:42:38once you had got over

00:42:39the shock.

00:42:41Now, what shock

00:42:42are you talking about?

00:42:45I would have thought

00:42:45I had made that

00:42:46abundantly clear.

00:42:48Well, you didn't,

00:42:49Mr Stockman,

00:42:49and I, for one,

00:42:50would appreciate it

00:42:51if we could have

00:42:51less of your arrogance

00:42:52and a little more cogent

00:42:54and thoughtful answers

00:42:55to my questions.

00:42:57What shock?

00:42:59The shock of seeing

00:43:00simulated acts

00:43:01of a homosexual nature

00:43:02performed naked

00:43:03in the theatre.

00:43:03Yes, in this you call

00:43:04rolling back the carpet,

00:43:06revealing the dark corners?

00:43:08I did.

00:43:09Perhaps crossing new frontiers

00:43:11would have been

00:43:12a more appropriate expression.

00:43:13Oh, I think I'm quite happy

00:43:14with dark corners,

00:43:15Mr Stockman.

00:43:16We should expose

00:43:17all the dark corners,

00:43:18should we?

00:43:19In time, yes.

00:43:20No matter whom we affront,

00:43:21no matter whom we shock.

00:43:23It is the duty of the artist,

00:43:24among other things,

00:43:25to shock and affront.

00:43:27And disturb and paralyze

00:43:28with fear,

00:43:29torment and drive mad.

00:43:30Would you count those

00:43:31among the artist's duties?

00:43:32If it happens,

00:43:33it happens.

00:43:35Well, I have heard

00:43:36that answer

00:43:37with some horror,

00:43:38Mr Stockman,

00:43:39coming as it does

00:43:40from a critic

00:43:41of your established reputation.

00:43:43What is happening

00:43:44in a theatre

00:43:44or on a piece of canvas

00:43:46is merely

00:43:47a representation of life.

00:43:50My sense of horror

00:43:50is reserved

00:43:51for those tragedies

00:43:52and disasters

00:43:53that really happen

00:43:54to people outside,

00:43:55on battlefields,

00:43:56after floods,

00:43:57in prisons,

00:43:57Yes, well,

00:43:58it may surprise you

00:43:58to know,

00:43:59Mr Stockman,

00:43:59that I completely

00:44:00agree with you there,

00:44:01but that,

00:44:01as you well know,

00:44:02is an entirely

00:44:03different question.

00:44:05Now, you said

00:44:06either we all do it

00:44:08or we want to do it

00:44:10or we know it goes on

00:44:11or our heads

00:44:12are in the sand.

00:44:14Now, what category

00:44:15do you fit into,

00:44:16Mr Stockman?

00:44:19The third.

00:44:21Which one was that?

00:44:23We know it goes on,

00:44:25my lord.

00:44:26Oh.

00:44:27Are you sure

00:44:28you don't fall into

00:44:29either of the first

00:44:30two categories as well?

00:44:31My lord,

00:44:31quite apart from

00:44:32the impropriety

00:44:33of that remark,

00:44:34what on earth

00:44:35is its relevance

00:44:36to this charge?

00:44:37If this witness

00:44:37has those tendencies,

00:44:38his evidence

00:44:39is bound to be coloured by them.

00:44:40Well, I'm not a homosexual

00:44:42and I've never wanted him.

00:44:44I rule that question

00:44:45irrelevant

00:44:46and I invite you

00:44:47to withdraw it,

00:44:47Mr Lottwey.

00:44:48Oh, no,

00:44:49don't withdraw it.

00:44:49There's no slur these days.

00:44:51Or haven't you heard

00:44:53between consenting adults?

00:44:54Will you be quiet?

00:44:56I'm sorry.

00:44:56I withdraw the question

00:44:57unreservedly, my lord.

00:44:59I regret that it was put.

00:45:00Now, members of the jury,

00:45:01you will eradicate

00:45:02from your mind

00:45:03any reflection

00:45:04upon this witness's

00:45:05good character

00:45:06that was implied

00:45:07in that last question.

00:45:08So far as you're concerned,

00:45:10it was not asked.

00:45:12I put it to you,

00:45:13Mr Stockman,

00:45:13that your views

00:45:14about what should go on

00:45:15on the public stage

00:45:16are a danger to society.

00:45:18Utter nonsense.

00:45:19You've just admitted

00:45:20that you think

00:45:20artists have no right,

00:45:22no duty

00:45:22to respect the feelings

00:45:23of their audiences.

00:45:24They can manhandle

00:45:25their minds

00:45:26with impunity

00:45:26for all you care.

00:45:28If truth manhandles

00:45:29the mind,

00:45:30then I'm for it.

00:45:32Truth,

00:45:33Mr Stockman?

00:45:35I have no further questions.

00:45:38No re-examination,

00:45:39my lord.

00:45:40You may go.

00:45:43I don't think

00:45:44I could be regarded

00:45:45as a successful

00:45:46man of the theatre.

00:45:47I don't have a penny

00:45:49to my name.

00:45:50But I suppose

00:45:50I could have done

00:45:51a bit better financially

00:45:52if I'd given in

00:45:52to compromise.

00:45:54What do you mean

00:45:55by compromise?

00:45:56Well,

00:45:56there have been

00:45:57occasions when

00:45:57I've been offered

00:45:58a play which was

00:45:59obviously going to

00:46:00make a lot of money

00:46:00at the box office,

00:46:01but was so awful,

00:46:03I mean in such

00:46:03terrible bad taste

00:46:04that I've turned it down.

00:46:05Yes.

00:46:06Sir,

00:46:06what sort of plays

00:46:07have you directed,

00:46:08Mr Williamson?

00:46:09Well,

00:46:10I suppose it would be

00:46:11called experimental theatre,

00:46:14although I don't like

00:46:14the word.

00:46:15plays of deep meaning

00:46:17where sometimes

00:46:18the literal meaning

00:46:19is obscure,

00:46:20but where a new

00:46:20experience is shared

00:46:22with an audience.

00:46:23Yes.

00:46:23Have you ever directed

00:46:24sex plays?

00:46:26I'm sorry,

00:46:27I don't recognise

00:46:27that category.

00:46:29All plays are sex plays.

00:46:30Now,

00:46:31what do you mean by that?

00:46:32Well,

00:46:32I say all plays

00:46:33are sex plays.

00:46:33They are sexy.

00:46:35If they're not,

00:46:35they are not true

00:46:36to our existence.

00:46:37I mean,

00:46:37I am sex,

00:46:38you are sex,

00:46:39the gentlemen of the jury

00:46:40are sex,

00:46:41the usher is sex,

00:46:42and you,

00:46:42my lord,

00:46:42you are sex,

00:46:43and sex is you.

00:46:44Are you obsessed

00:46:47by sex,

00:46:48Mr Williams?

00:46:49Now,

00:46:49listen,

00:46:49I am as obsessed

00:46:50by sex

00:46:51as I am by love

00:46:52and hate

00:46:52and appetite

00:46:53and loyalty

00:46:54and repression

00:46:55and injustice.

00:46:56And when I say

00:46:56that you are sex,

00:46:57my lord,

00:46:57I could equally well

00:46:58say that you are love

00:46:59and you are hate

00:46:59and you are repression

00:47:01and injustice

00:47:01and, of course,

00:47:03compassion and mercy.

00:47:05If you mean

00:47:06that a person

00:47:07contains within himself

00:47:08a capacity

00:47:09for all these qualities,

00:47:11it would seem to me

00:47:12that you're stating

00:47:13a truism.

00:47:13Yes,

00:47:14but it is part

00:47:14of the theatre's job

00:47:15to reveal to people

00:47:17these capacities

00:47:18within them.

00:47:20So you are not a man

00:47:21of the commercial theatre,

00:47:22Mr Williams?

00:47:23Well,

00:47:23so my bank manager

00:47:24tells me.

00:47:25Yes.

00:47:26In fact,

00:47:27it would be true

00:47:27to say,

00:47:28would it not,

00:47:28that this search

00:47:29for the inner truth

00:47:30has cost you dear.

00:47:32Yes,

00:47:32it has.

00:47:33Yes.

00:47:33Now,

00:47:33what about Mr Paster?

00:47:34Is he a man

00:47:35of the commercial theatre?

00:47:37Well,

00:47:37yes,

00:47:37he's a producer.

00:47:38He naturally wants

00:47:39a return on his capital.

00:47:40Yes.

00:47:41Now,

00:47:42can you tell us all

00:47:43the sequence of events

00:47:44that led up

00:47:44to the production

00:47:45of this play?

00:47:47Yes.

00:47:47Well,

00:47:49Mr Paster received

00:47:50this play

00:47:51from Mr Appleby.

00:47:53He read it,

00:47:54he liked it,

00:47:55he called me

00:47:55and he asked me

00:47:56to direct it.

00:47:57Well,

00:47:58at first I liked it,

00:47:59it had a wit,

00:48:00you know,

00:48:00a kind of panache

00:48:00but there was

00:48:02something deeper

00:48:03which intrigued me.

00:48:04Now,

00:48:04Mr Paster was quite happy

00:48:05with the play

00:48:05but I was not.

00:48:07You see,

00:48:07its sexual nature

00:48:10was embarrassing me

00:48:11and I was of the opinion

00:48:13that,

00:48:15well,

00:48:15it was a sniggering

00:48:16piece of theatre

00:48:16because it made nasty fun

00:48:18at the expense of people

00:48:19who had sexual hang-ups.

00:48:22Then,

00:48:22one day,

00:48:22right at the end

00:48:23of rehearsal,

00:48:24I had it,

00:48:24I knew exactly

00:48:24what was wrong with it.

00:48:26It had to be played

00:48:27or some of it

00:48:28in the nude

00:48:29with the characters

00:48:30actually performing

00:48:31their sexual acts

00:48:31with each other.

00:48:33Yes.

00:48:33How did Mr Paster

00:48:35react to that?

00:48:36Well,

00:48:36he stood by me.

00:48:38He saw it through

00:48:39and it worked

00:48:39and I still say

00:48:40it worked

00:48:41and there's nothing

00:48:42obscene about it.

00:48:44In fact,

00:48:44it's removed any obscenity

00:48:45that was in the play.

00:48:46It's now completely

00:48:47pure.

00:48:57The case of the Queen

00:49:07against Paster

00:49:08and Williams

00:49:08will be resumed

00:49:09tomorrow

00:49:09in the Crown Court.

00:49:11なさん INس beleeld

00:49:12and표

00:49:26and

00:49:26when

00:49:28you

00:49:28hear

00:49:28your

00:49:29commitment

00:49:29to cook

00:49:30in the Int'm

00:49:31and there's nothing

00:49:31like the

00:49:32erc 혹

00:49:32or

00:49:33you

00:49:33were

00:49:34positive

00:49:34and

00:49:34what you

00:49:35were

00:49:36I

00:49:39Jeremy Williams, a theatre director, and Alexander Pastor, a theatre producer, are facing charges

00:49:49in the Crown Court that they caused to be shown an entertainment which contained acts

00:49:54and words which, taken as a whole, could be termed obscene.

00:49:57The charge refers to a play which was presented by the defendants at the Fullchester Palace

00:50:02Theatre on April the 23rd called Public Lives.

00:50:05The witness in the box is Mr Jeremy Williams, the play's director.

00:50:10Now, Mr Williams, is Mr Pastor a man who has a reputation for presenting plays which might have been called indecent or obscene?

00:50:20Not at all, no, he's a producer of light comedies of a frothy nature.

00:50:24Yes, and you yourself, beside these fringe productions you spoke of?

00:50:28I'm sorry?

00:50:28I mean, have you yourself ever been associated with stage presentations which might have been called indecent or obscene?

00:50:35No, no, none of my plays, no.

00:50:36And your work has included some distinguished appointments?

00:50:39Well, yes, for four years I was an associate director of the National Theatre of Canada.

00:50:43Now, what about this play? What was the reaction you had on the first night?

00:50:47Oh, very good indeed. I was delighted with the notices.

00:50:50They really understood what I was trying to get at in the bar, you know, after the performances.

00:50:53I was, um, well, I don't know how you'd put it.

00:50:56Acclaimed?

00:50:57Yes, yeah.

00:50:58Now, did anyone tell you how appalling the simulated intercourse was, both homosexual and heterosexual?

00:51:06How it had damaged them, or how they had been corrupted or depraved by it?

00:51:12No, quite the reverse. In fact, I recall somebody saying that he would think twice about engaging in such activities

00:51:17because he would remember this play and start laughing.

00:51:19Yes.

00:51:20No, that was a lady who said that, sorry. It was a lady.

00:51:21You see, it had the effect of reducing these so-called obscenities into an absurdity.

00:51:29Yes, but I mean, you are concerned that sex should play some relevant part in human relations.

00:51:34I mean, you are not saying that it's absurd.

00:51:37Well, of course not. Quite the reverse.

00:51:39But surely you understand. I mean, you've all seen the play.

00:51:42But what I was trying to get at is that sex has become absurd.

00:51:47As absurd as that gown that you are wearing, and that wig.

00:51:50Now, I say this with great respect, my lord.

00:51:52But their only function is to act as a token.

00:51:55The real purpose ceased when modes of dress changed.

00:51:58They survived to remind us of justice.

00:52:01Just as sex survives to remind us of such things as love and procreation.

00:52:09And now a simple contact between human beings.

00:52:11Are you saying that sex has become a substitute for these values?

00:52:15Yes, I am.

00:52:16And the more we yearn for these values, the more we tend to exaggerate the importance of sex.

00:52:21Yes, sir, your play, far from being a play that set out to trample on values,

00:52:25actually used these sexual devices to show or suggest a lack of them and a need for them.

00:52:32Yes, that's right.

00:52:32My lord, I'm sure we're all deeply fascinated by this philosophical discussion.

00:52:36We've all had the privilege of being singled out as sex objects.

00:52:41And we've had scorn poured over our attire.

00:52:44And we've listened to a discourse on the uselessness of sex.

00:52:47Could I plead with my lady friend to return to the evidence?

00:52:49No, my lord, I submit that everything this witness has said so far is relevant to the production of this play.

00:52:56I suppose the people of a theatrical nature must be permitted to embellish their points, Mr. Latterby.

00:53:03My lord, with great respect, that is palpably unfair.

00:53:07It is placing theatrical people in a minority category who need to be humoured.

00:53:11I would request that an equal amount of weight be given to this witness's testimony as to that of the others.

00:53:18I, for one, have listened to him most carefully, Mr. Parsons,

00:53:21and I've noticed Mr. Latterby listening with great respect.

00:53:24Indeed, everybody in the court here has given your witness a good hearing.

00:53:28If I impugned theatrical people by my remark, I unhesitatingly withdraw it.

00:53:35I'm grateful to your lordship for that.

00:53:37Now, it was therefore your idea to show these so-called perverted acts on stage.

00:53:46Yes, mine entirely.

00:53:47Mr. Parsons saw it through.

00:53:49He was very tolerant.

00:53:51Then, of course, he is a very open-minded person.

00:53:53Yes.

00:53:53Now, it has been suggested that you and people like you have no concern for the sensibilities of their audiences.

00:54:01Now, what do you have to say to that, Mr. Williams?

00:54:04But my life is tied up in audiences.

00:54:05I want them to understand that what I'm doing is for their own good.

00:54:10In this play, I wanted them to laugh at themselves, not just at objects of fun on a stage.

00:54:15I mean, laughter's a great healer, you know.

00:54:17It's a pity you can't get it on the National Health.

00:54:19Yes.

00:54:20Now, Miss Jenkins claimed that you told her to get out

00:54:22because she wouldn't subject herself to the indignity of being exposed on stage

00:54:27in these rewritten situations and naked to boot.

00:54:30Yeah, well, we had a terrible run, you know, about this chap that she was going out with

00:54:36and she turned it into a refusal to appear in the play in the nude and she walked out.

00:54:41Well, did you attempt to do anything about this?

00:54:44Well, we were going to sue her, but, you see, I had told her five days before I made the announcement

00:54:49to the rest of the cast that she would be asked to simulate intercourse on stage

00:54:53and she had no objection then.

00:54:55Indeed, she quite seemed too warm to it.

00:54:58Yes.

00:54:59Now, Mr Appleby says that you tampered with his text to such an extent

00:55:03that he asked to have his name taken off it.

00:55:06Yes, well, I'm sorry about that.

00:55:07It must have been a bit of a surprise to him.

00:55:09You see, I do rather tend to ride roughshod over writers

00:55:12and then think better of it afterwards.

00:55:14But, you see, Mr Pastor and I were going to send him a letter of apology

00:55:16and with a lump sum on top of his royalties

00:55:19when the atmosphere had died down a bit.

00:55:22Of what atmosphere?

00:55:24Well, the rather heated relationship between Mr Appleby and myself.

00:55:28But I still think it was a vastly better play the way I did it.

00:55:32Yes. Yes, thank you, Mr Wames.

00:55:36Pure?

00:55:37I'm sorry?

00:55:38Did you call this play pure?

00:55:41Yes.

00:55:42Are we talking the same language, you and I?

00:55:45I'm sorry, I don't...

00:55:46A public performance of an act of sodomy, that is pure?

00:55:50It is possible.

00:55:50Well, it's abominable, isn't it?

00:55:52It is used merely as a background to the dialogue.

00:55:55Ultimately, you hardly notice it.

00:55:57You just speak for yourself, Mr Williams.

00:55:59You may hardly notice it.

00:56:00No, no, no, please.

00:56:01It is possible to put something on stage

00:56:03that is there to act as a counterpoint to what is being said.

00:56:06And eventually, you hardly notice it.

00:56:08Let me give you an example.

00:56:10Shall we say, the crucifixion.

00:56:11Now, that was barbarity beyond anybody's imagination.

00:56:14A man pleading slowly to death.

00:56:16But put two people in front of it,

00:56:18having an argument about whether the sheets are going to be black silk or white silk.

00:56:22And you've got a point.

00:56:23And when the point is made,

00:56:24the background and the foreground become subsumed into something else.

00:56:28Are you comparing what you put on at the Fulchester Palace Theatre with the crucifixion?

00:56:34No, no, no, no, no.

00:56:35Only in form, not in content.

00:56:38I see.

00:56:40Yes, well, let's examine your claim to have made these changes in Mr Appleby's script

00:56:45for a purely aesthetic motive.

00:56:47You said you were far from being a commercial man of the theatre.

00:56:50That's right, yes.

00:56:51What was it you said to Mr Appleby?

00:56:53You would all make a mint?

00:56:55Well, I didn't put it exactly like that,

00:56:57but I did expect to make some money out of it, yes.

00:56:59Why?

00:57:00Why would this one make money and not all the others you've directed?

00:57:02Because people would want to see this play.

00:57:05Yes, because of its nudity,

00:57:06because of its frankness,

00:57:08its adult nature,

00:57:09as advertised in the Fulchester Echo.

00:57:11Yes, I fully expected some people to come for the wrong reasons.

00:57:14You were therefore intending to make money

00:57:16by encouraging people who saw this advertisement to become voyeurs.

00:57:19I was confident that once they were inside the theatre,

00:57:22watching the play,

00:57:23they would benefit from what they saw.

00:57:25And anyone was allowed to come along

00:57:26and partake of this frank and adult experience?

00:57:29No, not everyone.

00:57:29There was a notice outside the theatre

00:57:31saying that children of 16 and under would not be admitted.

00:57:33Yes, yes, but you would accept

00:57:34that there are people of adult years

00:57:36who have the mental age of a child?

00:57:38Yes, yes.

00:57:39And these people might be admitted?

00:57:42Yes.

00:57:42Would the childlike state of their minds

00:57:44be adversely affected by it?

00:57:47Well, it's possible, but I don't think it's likely.

00:57:48So you admit it's possible

00:57:49that your play might deprave and corrupt?

00:57:51Mr. Lotterby, I feel I must remind the members of the jury

00:57:54that even if you establish the point you are trying to make,

00:57:57that does not render the work obscene.

00:58:00To be obscene,

00:58:01it must tend to deprave and corrupt

00:58:04those most likely to attend it.

00:58:06And a significant proportion, in fact.

00:58:09You cannot establish a general tendency

00:58:12to corrupt and deprave

00:58:14by reference to a tiny minority of the population.

00:58:17As your lordship directs.

00:58:21Well, let's come right down to the nub of this issue, Mr. Williams.

00:58:23Now, you've appeared to be knowledgeable

00:58:25about certain aesthetic values.

00:58:27You appear to know what's good

00:58:29or what's bad for an audience.

00:58:30And I don't say that.

00:58:31Let me finish, please.

00:58:34Sorry.

00:58:34You've advertised this play in a certain manner,

00:58:36Frank and Adult.

00:58:37You've also admitted that many of the people

00:58:39entering the theatre

00:58:40to see your display of sexual gymnastics

00:58:43would come as voyeurs

00:58:45and then they'd see tragic situations,

00:58:47perverted mentalities,

00:58:48treated as if they were comic.

00:58:50Look, let me explain.

00:58:51In the theatre,

00:58:52we often treat tragedy in that way.

00:58:55You see, we need the comedy

00:58:56to emphasise the tragedy as a contrast.

00:58:59I mean, Shakespeare does that all the time.

00:59:01Yes, but these perversions

00:59:03were treated in your play

00:59:04as though they were attractive.

00:59:06I would not say they were treated

00:59:07as though they were attractive.

00:59:08I would say they were treated

00:59:08as though they were laughable.

00:59:10Are you aware of what Dr. Coggan,

00:59:12the Archbishop of York,

00:59:13said recently about the theatre?

00:59:15No, I'm afraid I'm not, no.

00:59:16Well, he said,

00:59:17the stage is being disgraced

00:59:20by the kind of stuff being put on in London

00:59:22where sex is lampooned

00:59:24instead of reverenced.

00:59:25Are you not disgracing the stage?

00:59:28I'm afraid I can't answer

00:59:29to the Archbishop's views on the theatre.

00:59:31Do you know if he's seen this play?

00:59:33I put it to you, Mr. Williams,

00:59:35that your advertisement,

00:59:37your publicity,

00:59:39attracted innocent people

00:59:40to a display of perverted acts,

00:59:42a display which encouraged them

00:59:43to go out and do likewise.

00:59:45Look, people are attracted

00:59:46to what they have a leaning towards.

00:59:48Art does not encourage or deter them.

00:59:51You don't care about these people,

00:59:53Mr. Williams.

00:59:54You don't give a damn.

00:59:56I do!

00:59:56Yes, you do care,

00:59:59don't you, Mr. Williams?

01:00:01Listen, I care very much

01:00:02about the effect

01:00:03that my work has on people.

01:00:05I just don't believe

01:00:06that I put anything on stage

01:00:07that's obscene, that's all.

01:00:08Yes.

01:00:09Thank you very much, Mr. Williams.

01:00:11No further questions, my lord.

01:00:12You are Anthony Nigel Grillham,

01:00:14standing of 13 Porton Road,

01:00:16Chelsea, London.

01:00:17I am.

01:00:18What is your occupation?

01:00:19I'm the Member of Parliament

01:00:21for the Naismith Constituency in London.

01:00:23Yes.

01:00:23And on April 22nd,

01:00:24did you travel to Fuchster

01:00:25and attend a performance

01:00:26of the play Public Lives

01:00:28at the Palace Theatre?

01:00:29I did.

01:00:30Now, what do you have to say,

01:00:32speaking as a responsible public figure

01:00:34and as a theatre-goer,

01:00:36to the charge that this play

01:00:37was obscene?

01:00:38Oh, I would say nonsense.

01:00:40And I found it enjoyable.

01:00:42Yes.

01:00:42Now, were you a member

01:00:43of a parliamentary select committee

01:00:46on broadcasting?

01:00:47Yes.

01:00:48And do you have a 17-year-old daughter,

01:00:50an only child?

01:00:51I do have, yes.

01:00:52And on the night you went

01:00:53to see this play,

01:00:54did she accompany you?

01:00:55She did, yes.

01:00:56And what did she think of it?

01:00:57She thought it was huge fun.

01:00:59So, how would you describe this play,

01:01:16Mr. Standing,

01:01:17if it is not obscene?

01:01:19I would describe it as risque,

01:01:20perhaps a little more risque

01:01:21than others I have seen.

01:01:23Yes.

01:01:24Now, in your capacity

01:01:25as a member of that select committee

01:01:27on broadcasting,

01:01:28you have been involved

01:01:29with problems of the selection

01:01:31of material for television.

01:01:33Yes, I have.

01:01:33Now, do you think

01:01:35that this play

01:01:36should be shown on television?

01:01:38No, I don't.

01:01:39Now, why not?

01:01:40Because the level of judgment

01:01:43in television is different.

01:01:46So, we must not judge the theatre

01:01:48by the rules applied to television.

01:01:49Is that what you're saying?

01:01:50I am, yes.

01:01:51Yes.

01:01:52Now, is this play,

01:01:53in your opinion,

01:01:54in advance of its time?

01:01:55Well, I think its form is.

01:01:58And that's the point

01:01:58about the theatre.

01:01:59If it does exist

01:02:00in advance of its time,

01:02:02it performs one

01:02:02of its valuable functions.

01:02:03And that's what you see

01:02:04this play doing?

01:02:05I do, yes.

01:02:06Yes, yes.

01:02:07Thank you, Mr. Standing.

01:02:11You appear to equivocate,

01:02:13Mr. Standing,

01:02:14over censorship at large.

01:02:15Oh, do I?

01:02:16Sorry to hear that.

01:02:17One ruling for television

01:02:18and another for the theatre.

01:02:20Well, let me put it this way.

01:02:22The box in the corner

01:02:23is part of the furniture.

01:02:26Its programmes are available

01:02:27to all at the turn of a switch.

01:02:29It controls millions of minds.

01:02:31It has taken the place

01:02:32of newspapers and other media.

01:02:34The theatre has little direct influence

01:02:36over the public mind.

01:02:37You said you wouldn't like

01:02:38to see this play on television.

01:02:40Well, I said I wouldn't advise

01:02:41its performance.

01:02:43It's like giving chocolate cake

01:02:44to a starving man.

01:02:45I would, however,

01:02:46like to see a free television service

01:02:48where advanced programmes

01:02:49like this could be performed.

01:02:49Oh, yes, thank you.

01:02:50Thank you, Mr. Standing.

01:02:51Now, you went to see

01:02:52the second performance

01:02:53of this play.

01:02:55That's right, yes.

01:02:56Did you pay for your seats

01:02:57or were you invited?

01:02:58I was given complimentary tickets.

01:03:00Yes, isn't it a fact

01:03:00that you were invited

01:03:01when the management got wind

01:03:03of the fact

01:03:03that there was going to be trouble

01:03:04and that the police

01:03:05were going to be called in

01:03:06the following night?

01:03:07I think you could say that, yes.

01:03:08You were invited

01:03:09because you're a well-known supporter

01:03:11of so-called liberal causes

01:03:14in the arts, were you not?

01:03:15I don't think there's

01:03:16any doubt about that.

01:03:17And there's nothing so damning

01:03:18as that word so-called, sir.

01:03:20They are liberal causes.

01:03:21Yes, of course.

01:03:22Now, you were the elected

01:03:23Member of Parliament

01:03:24for a division of London

01:03:25which is quite wealthy,

01:03:26are you not?

01:03:27Yes.

01:03:27Like such areas

01:03:28as Chelsea and Hampstead.

01:03:30It contains a high proportion

01:03:30of professional people.

01:03:33A concentration of people

01:03:34who work in the arts.

01:03:36That is true.

01:03:37Would you not agree

01:03:38that the standard of morality

01:03:39that you come into contact with

01:03:40is very different

01:03:41from that of the rest

01:03:42of the country?

01:03:43Oh, I would.

01:03:44It's a very high standard.

01:03:45I'm very proud

01:03:46to represent it

01:03:46and I'm delighted

01:03:47to hear you give it its due.

01:03:49It also makes you

01:03:50fairly unrepresentative

01:03:51of the national viewpoint,

01:03:52Mr. Stalling.

01:03:53Oh, do you think so?

01:03:54Oh, doesn't it?

01:03:55Well, if you're implying

01:03:56that the standards of morality

01:03:58in the rest of the country

01:03:58are low,

01:03:59you are mistaken.

01:04:00No, I didn't suggest

01:04:01they were low.

01:04:01Well, you're the one

01:04:02who brought up standards.

01:04:03What I'm suggesting

01:04:03is that the people

01:04:04you come into contact with

01:04:05may be less easily shocked.

01:04:07Well, if you mean

01:04:07that better educated people

01:04:09are liable to be

01:04:09more broad-minded,

01:04:10I'm inclined to agree with you.

01:04:11That's an argument

01:04:12in favour

01:04:12of the better education system.

01:04:14Do you mind

01:04:14if we get to the point

01:04:15of this exchange,

01:04:16Mr. Lutterby?

01:04:17I'm sorry, my lord.

01:04:19Let me put it like this,

01:04:20Mr. Stalling.

01:04:20There is a general

01:04:22level of acceptance

01:04:23of what can be shown

01:04:24in public, is there not?

01:04:25I mean, people just

01:04:26don't accept other people

01:04:27walking down the street

01:04:27without their trousers on.

01:04:28Well, they don't

01:04:29in my constituency.

01:04:30Right.

01:04:31Now, if there is

01:04:32this general standard

01:04:33throughout the country,

01:04:34shouldn't the theatre

01:04:34comply with it?

01:04:35Oh, no.

01:04:36The theatre should be

01:04:36in advance of its time.

01:04:39Yes, but you see,

01:04:40these standards are safeguarded

01:04:41by laws on obscenity,

01:04:43Mr. Stalling.

01:04:43Now, I gather that

01:04:44by being in advance

01:04:45of your time,

01:04:46you are in conflict

01:04:47with the law.

01:04:48Well, I personally,

01:04:49I'm not in conflict

01:04:50with the law, sir.

01:04:51I do, however,

01:04:52support all moves

01:04:53for changes

01:04:54in the obscenity laws.

01:04:55You would remove

01:04:56all censorship?

01:04:56Well, practically

01:04:57all of it, yes.

01:04:58Which makes you

01:04:58completely unrepresentative

01:05:00of public opinion.

01:05:01Now, wouldn't you agree?

01:05:02Of enlightened

01:05:02public opinion, no.

01:05:04Do you support

01:05:05the public exhibition

01:05:06of fornication,

01:05:07homosexual behaviour,

01:05:08adulteress,

01:05:09perverted acts?

01:05:09Oh, no, no, no.

01:05:10I didn't say

01:05:11I would support

01:05:12anything of the sort.

01:05:13My pleasure

01:05:14came from seeing

01:05:15it integrated

01:05:16into an artistic entity

01:05:17which was so amusing

01:05:18and revealing

01:05:19in describing

01:05:19society's shortcomings.

01:05:22Have you ever done

01:05:22any of the acts

01:05:23depicted on that stage?

01:05:25Oh, yes,

01:05:25of course I have.

01:05:26You have?

01:05:28Oh, it's an absurd question.

01:05:30I mean,

01:05:30I've opened doors,

01:05:31walked into rooms,

01:05:32had a conversation.

01:05:32Oh, you're fencing

01:05:33with me, Mr Stadding.

01:05:34You know perfectly

01:05:35well I was talking

01:05:36about the perverted

01:05:36sexual acts.

01:05:38Well, I don't think

01:05:39it's any of your business

01:05:39but as it happens

01:05:40I don't indulge

01:05:42in sexual perversions.

01:05:43You took your daughter

01:05:45with you.

01:05:45Now, supposing

01:05:46she were to try

01:05:47to copy some

01:05:48of the behaviour

01:05:48she saw on that stage.

01:05:50Now, what would you

01:05:51think of the play then?

01:05:52I think you've

01:05:53misunderstood this play, sir.

01:05:54You see, it says to us

01:05:56if we do it like that

01:05:58it's ridiculous

01:05:59but it's not an

01:06:00incitement to behave

01:06:01like that.

01:06:01It's the direct opposite.

01:06:02it's a warning.

01:06:04Well, the play

01:06:05may have said that

01:06:06to you, Mr Stadding

01:06:07but then, after all,

01:06:08you are in the fortunate

01:06:09position of being

01:06:10in advance of your time,

01:06:12are you not?

01:06:14No further questions?

01:06:15I have no re-examination,

01:06:17my lord.

01:06:21Members of the jury,

01:06:22this play, Public Lives,

01:06:23was written

01:06:24as a comedy of manners

01:06:25but during the course

01:06:26of rehearsal

01:06:27the two accused

01:06:27decided that this

01:06:28would not be

01:06:29commercial enough

01:06:29so they decided

01:06:30to change the play

01:06:31to dress it up

01:06:33if that's the right phrase

01:06:34with naked bodies

01:06:36simulating various

01:06:37perverted sexual acts

01:06:39mostly of a homosexual nature

01:06:41and culminating

01:06:42in a group orgy.

01:06:44Now, members of the jury,

01:06:45do you think it right

01:06:46to show on a public stage

01:06:48in full detail

01:06:49naked men and women

01:06:50indulging in perverted sexual acts?

01:06:54Is this not permissiveness

01:06:55taken to the extreme limits?

01:06:57Liberty turned into license?

01:07:01Now, we've been told

01:07:02that this entertainment

01:07:03is probing our social condition

01:07:05and pioneering new art forms

01:07:08but surely what it is really doing

01:07:10is trying to make a profit

01:07:11out of pandering

01:07:12to our baser instincts.

01:07:14Now, it seems to me, members of the jury

01:07:18that if you believe

01:07:19that this play was not obscene

01:07:21that it did not tend

01:07:23to deprave and corrupt

01:07:24then what you are saying

01:07:26is that there is no such thing

01:07:27as obscenity in the theatre

01:07:29and that I cannot believe

01:07:31you would say.

01:07:34When you are considering

01:07:35your verdict, members of the jury

01:07:36I ask you to remember

01:07:37the words of Mrs. Rosewall

01:07:39The world was suddenly

01:07:41a filthy place

01:07:42It had become polluted for me

01:07:45I wonder what on earth

01:07:48we are all up to

01:07:49Where on earth

01:07:51we are all going

01:07:52Members of the jury

01:07:55This trial is about freedom

01:07:58The artistic freedom

01:08:00to criticise society

01:08:01by satirising

01:08:03the sacred cows

01:08:04it holds most dear

01:08:06Now, let us get it quite clear

01:08:07The presenters of this play

01:08:09are artists

01:08:10who are deeply concerned

01:08:12to improve the society

01:08:14which we all live in

01:08:16Now, it is true

01:08:18that freedom involves risks

01:08:20but restrictions

01:08:21lead to secrecy and guilt

01:08:24Now, what are the risks

01:08:27that freedom involves?

01:08:29Well, if we are to allow it

01:08:31we must from time to time

01:08:33expect to be exposed

01:08:35to situations

01:08:36we did not expect

01:08:37to experiences

01:08:39we did not expect

01:08:40and even at the time

01:08:41perhaps

01:08:42that we did not want

01:08:44but sometimes

01:08:45it is right

01:08:46that we should be shocked

01:08:48in order

01:08:49that we might see

01:08:50more clearly

01:08:51and clearly

01:08:52we mustn't fear

01:08:54that we've been corrupted

01:08:55or depraved

01:08:56simply because

01:08:57we've been shocked

01:08:57and do not be put off

01:08:59by the fact

01:08:59that this play

01:09:00provoked laughter

01:09:01Laughter

01:09:02is the great cleanser

01:09:04you don't hear laughter

01:09:05in strip clubs

01:09:06or in shows designed

01:09:08simply to titillate

01:09:09or stimulate

01:09:10sexual impulses

01:09:11this was not that

01:09:12sort of show

01:09:13it did not set out

01:09:15to do that

01:09:15and so far

01:09:16no one has stood

01:09:17in that witness box

01:09:18and said that they

01:09:19were corrupted

01:09:20or depraved

01:09:21now you have seen

01:09:24this play

01:09:24gentlemen of the jury

01:09:25and you are

01:09:26twelve representatives

01:09:28of your countrymen

01:09:29were you corrupted

01:09:31or depraved

01:09:32if you are not

01:09:33then how on earth

01:09:34can you find

01:09:35these defendants guilty

01:09:36because you are

01:09:37upstanding

01:09:38and decent men

01:09:39and if you are not

01:09:40corrupted or depraved

01:09:41then who are we

01:09:42talking about

01:09:43and if you are

01:09:44if you are corrupted

01:09:45and depraved

01:09:46then how is it

01:09:47that twelve

01:09:48corrupted and depraved

01:09:49men can give a verdict

01:09:50in a crown court

01:09:51is that what

01:09:52British justice

01:09:53is all about

01:09:53now perhaps

01:09:55this play

01:09:57embarrassed you

01:09:57but I put it to you

01:09:59that the day

01:10:00that artists

01:10:00and playwrights

01:10:01stop embarrassing

01:10:03and disturbing

01:10:04and shaming us

01:10:06then that is the day

01:10:07we must stop

01:10:08and ask them

01:10:09what they are doing

01:10:10I ask you

01:10:12to find the defendants

01:10:14not guilty

01:10:15now members of the jury

01:10:18the law relating

01:10:19to obscenity

01:10:20is notoriously difficult

01:10:22in the last twelve years

01:10:24a number of verdicts

01:10:25have been reversed

01:10:25on appeal

01:10:26because of a faulty

01:10:27direction to the jury

01:10:28as to the law

01:10:30recently in the trial

01:10:33relating to the book

01:10:34Last Exit to Brooklyn

01:10:36and in the trial

01:10:37of the magazine

01:10:38Oz 28

01:10:39convictions were reversed

01:10:41on appeal

01:10:42for that very thing

01:10:43so I must be very careful

01:10:46to give you a proper

01:10:47direction as to the law

01:10:49and I want you to listen

01:10:51very carefully

01:10:52the first question

01:10:53you must ask yourselves

01:10:54is

01:10:55have the prosecution

01:10:56proved beyond reasonable doubt

01:10:58that the performance

01:10:58of the play

01:10:59on April the 23rd

01:11:00was obscene

01:11:01now a play

01:11:03is obscene

01:11:04if taken as a whole

01:11:05its effect

01:11:06is such as to tend

01:11:07to deprave

01:11:08and corrupt persons

01:11:10who were likely

01:11:10having regard

01:11:12to relevant circumstances

01:11:13to attend

01:11:14it is no offence

01:11:16if a play

01:11:17merely shocks

01:11:18or disgusts

01:11:19the question is

01:11:21whether a significant

01:11:22number of people

01:11:23in the audience

01:11:24might have been

01:11:25depraved

01:11:26and corrupted by it

01:11:27now what is

01:11:29a significant number

01:11:30is for you

01:11:32to decide

01:11:32and the words

01:11:34taken as a whole

01:11:35mean you must

01:11:37consider the whole

01:11:38play

01:11:38and not an

01:11:39isolated line

01:11:40or episode

01:11:41if you are not

01:11:43satisfied

01:11:44beyond reasonable doubt

01:11:45that the performance

01:11:46was obscene

01:11:46then of course

01:11:47your verdict

01:11:48will be

01:11:48not guilty

01:11:49but if you think

01:11:51it was obscene

01:11:52you must then

01:11:53consider the defence

01:11:54that the giving

01:11:56of the performance

01:11:57was justified

01:11:58as being for the public

01:11:59good

01:12:00on the grounds

01:12:01that it was

01:12:02in the interests

01:12:02of drama

01:12:03but

01:12:04if this defence

01:12:06is not established

01:12:07then there would be

01:12:08no excuse

01:12:09for the obscenity

01:12:10and your verdict

01:12:11could be one

01:12:12of guilty

01:12:13well now

01:12:14members of the jury

01:12:16these are very

01:12:16difficult questions

01:12:17and I ask you

01:12:19now to retire

01:12:20and to consider them

01:12:22all sent

01:12:24answer this question

01:12:32yes or no

01:12:33have you reached

01:12:34verdicts on which

01:12:35you're all agreed

01:12:35yes

01:12:36do you find

01:12:37the prisoner

01:12:37at the bar

01:12:38Alexander Pastor

01:12:39guilty or not guilty

01:12:40of producing

01:12:41an obscene play

01:12:42guilty

01:12:42is that the verdict

01:12:43of you all

01:12:44yes

01:12:44do you find

01:12:45the prisoner

01:12:45at the bar

01:12:46Jeremy Williams

01:12:47guilty or not guilty

01:12:48of directing

01:12:49an obscene play

01:12:50guilty

01:12:50is that the verdict

01:12:51of you all

01:12:52yes

01:12:52mr justice

01:13:05campbell

01:13:05sentenced

01:13:06Alexander Pastor

01:13:07and Jeremy

01:13:07Williams

01:13:08to 15 months

01:13:09imprisonment

01:13:09in addition

01:13:10they were jointly

01:13:11ordered to pay

01:13:1262,000 pounds

01:13:13in legal costs

01:13:14next week

01:13:16a chance for you

01:13:17to join another

01:13:18jury in assessing

01:13:18the facts

01:13:19when our cameras

01:13:20return to watch

01:13:21a leading case

01:13:21in the Crown Court

Crown Court - Public Lives (1973)

Category

Transcript

Comments

Recommended