I understand that had entirely, and obviously there is an important dialogue to be had as to getting information or whatever. I can give an example from my own recollection, that during the investigation of the murders in Gloucester, I think -- I won't identify the tabloid but a tabloid newspaper found a photographer who had taken a photograph of one of the dead girls which was absolutely critical to part of the case. So I see the great value of the power of the press to help the police solve crime. What I'm really concerned about here is off-the-record briefings of opinion which may then colour how you present what you can present within the confines of the law. I'm not going into whether it's contempt or not -- I appreciate you have a view about that and you're pursuing an appeal -- but it's much, much more than the police could ever say. Their opinion is really neither here nor there. It's a question of evidence.
I'm bothered about that sort of currency of information which might very well encourage you to go further than propriety would otherwise suggest. It's that which I'm really asking you about.