You might do it on the basis that you invite the director to identify his policy on public interest. So then there are lots of levels. I think I've said this before. First of all, there's a decision for the director to make: can I prove the offence? What do I think of the public interest point? Then there are potential arguments on abuse of process. Then there's -- well, on the basis the judge has rejected that, then there's the jury, and one doesn't have to go far back in the past to see what juries have sometimes made of these cases. Then actually there's another protection. It's called the judge, who can decide that however much this was a crime, and even though it isn't quite in the public interest, because the jury obviously can't say that, there is a great force in the argument and therefore impose a nominal penalty. There are lots of routes.