1 00:00:05,921 --> 00:00:07,281 Speaker 1: Appoche Production. 2 00:00:13,281 --> 00:00:15,721 Speaker 2: Hello listeners to Real Crime with Adam Shanner. 3 00:00:15,681 --> 00:00:17,881 Speaker 3: I want to wish you a very safe and happy 4 00:00:17,921 --> 00:00:20,881 Speaker 3: festive season. We're going to be taking off over the 5 00:00:20,961 --> 00:00:22,640 Speaker 3: Christmas break, so I wanted to leave you with a 6 00:00:22,641 --> 00:00:26,840 Speaker 3: couple of excerpts from my favorite podcasts of twenty twenty five. 7 00:00:27,241 --> 00:00:29,081 Speaker 3: I hope you enjoy them, and I look forward to 8 00:00:29,481 --> 00:00:33,080 Speaker 3: giving you some new and excellent crime experiences on our 9 00:00:33,120 --> 00:00:34,481 Speaker 3: podcast in the new year. 10 00:00:34,841 --> 00:00:39,081 Speaker 2: I'll talk to you then. Enjoy. 11 00:00:39,321 --> 00:00:41,681 Speaker 1: Because when I saw that she was going to give evidence, 12 00:00:41,721 --> 00:00:45,441 Speaker 1: and she gave evidence, I thought that it reflected the 13 00:00:45,480 --> 00:00:49,400 Speaker 1: fact that defense felt that the prosecution was struggling with 14 00:00:49,840 --> 00:00:54,041 Speaker 1: actors raya mensraya guilty mind guilty act Where was the motive? 15 00:00:54,641 --> 00:00:57,241 Speaker 1: Was this actually a tragic accident? Is that what you felt? 16 00:00:57,481 --> 00:01:00,761 Speaker 2: No, I think that they the first thing. I don't 17 00:01:00,761 --> 00:01:03,081 Speaker 2: know what the EVNCH thought, and I didn't do the trial, 18 00:01:03,481 --> 00:01:07,441 Speaker 2: and they were very skilled, in experienced operators. But in 19 00:01:07,481 --> 00:01:10,081 Speaker 2: a trial, if we can talk about a circumstantial evidence case, 20 00:01:10,521 --> 00:01:13,080 Speaker 2: and in a trial where your clients told porky pies 21 00:01:13,961 --> 00:01:17,521 Speaker 2: in this case, no foraging for mushrooms or whatever it 22 00:01:17,601 --> 00:01:21,001 Speaker 2: might be, you've really got to weigh it up, and 23 00:01:21,200 --> 00:01:24,601 Speaker 2: sometimes you'll think the jury really wore to hear her 24 00:01:24,681 --> 00:01:26,920 Speaker 2: side of it or his side of it. But this 25 00:01:27,081 --> 00:01:30,761 Speaker 2: is a critical decision and it all goes back. Probably 26 00:01:31,481 --> 00:01:34,481 Speaker 2: there are two or three steps when you read the 27 00:01:34,521 --> 00:01:38,761 Speaker 2: brief and you will map out the chronology, the timeline. 28 00:01:39,200 --> 00:01:42,641 Speaker 2: You'll map out what is the objective or real evidence 29 00:01:43,441 --> 00:01:47,241 Speaker 2: that implicates the client in the crime. Then what are 30 00:01:47,241 --> 00:01:51,001 Speaker 2: the circumstantial evidences, what are the bits? And in this 31 00:01:51,121 --> 00:01:55,481 Speaker 2: case they relied on lies or post offense conduct. Now 32 00:01:55,721 --> 00:01:59,721 Speaker 2: what explanations are there for this conduct? So sometimes you 33 00:01:59,761 --> 00:02:02,321 Speaker 2: feel that you've got to do it. But the calling 34 00:02:02,361 --> 00:02:05,880 Speaker 2: of the client's always a big, big decision, And these 35 00:02:06,001 --> 00:02:10,240 Speaker 2: days barristers in Victoria have been trained in the Australian 36 00:02:10,241 --> 00:02:14,481 Speaker 2: School of Advocacy and they're trained to be cautious, so 37 00:02:14,761 --> 00:02:17,481 Speaker 2: it's uncommon to call your client in Victoria. 38 00:02:17,960 --> 00:02:20,361 Speaker 1: I felt it showed a certain confidence to things. But 39 00:02:20,401 --> 00:02:23,641 Speaker 1: I guess also could be interpreted as a moment where 40 00:02:23,680 --> 00:02:26,481 Speaker 1: they were trying to what you call look. 41 00:02:26,361 --> 00:02:29,121 Speaker 2: For the rat rather alternative theory. 42 00:02:28,960 --> 00:02:32,041 Speaker 1: Exactly that could explain these facts in a different way 43 00:02:32,121 --> 00:02:34,721 Speaker 1: rather than just leading to the inevitable conclusion that if 44 00:02:34,761 --> 00:02:38,481 Speaker 1: somebody lies and their post defense conduct is so revealing, 45 00:02:38,520 --> 00:02:39,721 Speaker 1: they can only be guilt. 46 00:02:39,841 --> 00:02:43,961 Speaker 2: That's right. So that in any case, the calling of 47 00:02:44,001 --> 00:02:49,001 Speaker 2: your client is a very weighty decision because the jury 48 00:02:49,001 --> 00:02:53,001 Speaker 2: will judge the client and the client's story. And as 49 00:02:53,081 --> 00:02:57,321 Speaker 2: Rumpol very wisely said, nothing sinks faster than a cast 50 00:02:57,321 --> 00:03:00,361 Speaker 2: iron alibi. You run your defense and they don't like it, 51 00:03:00,960 --> 00:03:03,081 Speaker 2: though the judge will tell them put that to one 52 00:03:03,161 --> 00:03:06,281 Speaker 2: side and look at the evidence. You're up against it. 53 00:03:06,800 --> 00:03:11,241 Speaker 2: You're up against it. So these are This trial will 54 00:03:11,281 --> 00:03:14,041 Speaker 2: be one that will be like the Lindy Chamberlain trial, 55 00:03:14,601 --> 00:03:17,001 Speaker 2: will be one that will be analyzed backwards and forwards. 56 00:03:17,561 --> 00:03:21,761 Speaker 2: And the prosecution led their evidence. The order in which 57 00:03:21,800 --> 00:03:23,721 Speaker 2: they lead their evidence is up to them. They did 58 00:03:23,721 --> 00:03:26,201 Speaker 2: it in a way that they would thought would be effective, 59 00:03:26,641 --> 00:03:29,361 Speaker 2: and the way that a fence cross examined and what 60 00:03:29,401 --> 00:03:32,601 Speaker 2: they cross examined on, and what decisions they made. Young 61 00:03:32,680 --> 00:03:36,201 Speaker 2: lawyers and older lawyers and academics and people like Adam 62 00:03:36,201 --> 00:03:39,801 Speaker 2: Shand will be examining it for quite some time to 63 00:03:39,841 --> 00:03:43,081 Speaker 2: come and then being wow, maybe we should have done this, 64 00:03:43,281 --> 00:03:46,801 Speaker 2: or maybe they should have done that. Because a circumstantial 65 00:03:46,841 --> 00:03:48,961 Speaker 2: evidence case and one of the very first of them 66 00:03:49,001 --> 00:03:51,241 Speaker 2: you learn in law school is the first conviction of 67 00:03:51,241 --> 00:03:54,721 Speaker 2: a murder trial where there was no body the body 68 00:03:54,721 --> 00:03:57,361 Speaker 2: that would overboard the boat, and so they had to 69 00:03:57,361 --> 00:03:59,761 Speaker 2: convince the jury and they didn't have a body. And 70 00:03:59,841 --> 00:04:05,441 Speaker 2: murder trials usually don't have the added complication that this 71 00:04:05,521 --> 00:04:11,401 Speaker 2: trial had, And this trial, when you attempted murders and 72 00:04:11,561 --> 00:04:15,721 Speaker 2: rapes are much more complicated for a defense council to 73 00:04:15,801 --> 00:04:18,281 Speaker 2: run his case, to think of his rival alternate theory. 74 00:04:18,761 --> 00:04:22,561 Speaker 2: But in a murder trial, you're usually missing the eye witness, 75 00:04:24,561 --> 00:04:27,761 Speaker 2: so the road is open for a lot of interpretation. 76 00:04:29,041 --> 00:04:33,281 Speaker 2: But in this case you had a survivor, Ian Werkinson, 77 00:04:33,641 --> 00:04:37,041 Speaker 2: somebody who sat at the table as each person cutting 78 00:04:37,081 --> 00:04:41,041 Speaker 2: to their beef Wellington and took a spoonful and chatted. 79 00:04:41,961 --> 00:04:45,361 Speaker 2: And the demeanor of the people around the table. And 80 00:04:45,401 --> 00:04:48,201 Speaker 2: if you picture that table, and I've seen that table, 81 00:04:48,401 --> 00:04:51,200 Speaker 2: I've sat at that table. But as the meal is 82 00:04:51,241 --> 00:04:55,281 Speaker 2: being consumed, as pleasantries are being exchanged, trifle colty are 83 00:04:55,401 --> 00:04:59,841 Speaker 2: bit warm today? How's Auntie Nelly? Oh, what do you 84 00:04:59,841 --> 00:05:02,641 Speaker 2: think of the vief Wellington. It's a picture which I'm 85 00:05:02,641 --> 00:05:05,640 Speaker 2: sure the prosecution would probably have painted in the minds 86 00:05:05,641 --> 00:05:09,001 Speaker 2: of the jurors, which paints once you found that she 87 00:05:09,041 --> 00:05:12,361 Speaker 2: put the mushrooms in. There a fairly chilling portrait of 88 00:05:12,481 --> 00:05:13,841 Speaker 2: the accused, it. 89 00:05:13,761 --> 00:05:17,361 Speaker 1: Really is, and the circumstantial evidence certainly weighed against her. 90 00:05:17,481 --> 00:05:21,481 Speaker 1: Things like on that table she served the deadly beef 91 00:05:21,521 --> 00:05:25,521 Speaker 1: Wellington's to her guests on the white plates, and her 92 00:05:25,561 --> 00:05:28,601 Speaker 1: own plate was a tan colored plate. Could just be 93 00:05:28,641 --> 00:05:31,520 Speaker 1: mismatching crockery. But in the hands of the prosecution, it 94 00:05:31,601 --> 00:05:35,521 Speaker 1: looks like somebody who's avoiding eating the deadly beef wellington. 95 00:05:35,801 --> 00:05:39,801 Speaker 2: That came from the survivor. And I would think that 96 00:05:39,921 --> 00:05:43,640 Speaker 2: the problem always was here, what's the motive to kill, 97 00:05:44,121 --> 00:05:48,001 Speaker 2: Not the motive to hurt, not the motive to annoy them, 98 00:05:48,041 --> 00:05:51,201 Speaker 2: not the motive to literally give them the shits right, 99 00:05:51,841 --> 00:05:55,161 Speaker 2: but what is the motive to bump them off? And 100 00:05:55,401 --> 00:05:58,281 Speaker 2: anybody with half a brain would say that if you 101 00:05:58,361 --> 00:06:02,601 Speaker 2: sit down with five guests and yourself minus the children, 102 00:06:03,320 --> 00:06:07,001 Speaker 2: and one person walks away, there's going to be questions asked, 103 00:06:07,641 --> 00:06:12,241 Speaker 2: And any half logical person would say, well, how come 104 00:06:12,801 --> 00:06:16,200 Speaker 2: you didn't perish as well? And this is the problem 105 00:06:16,281 --> 00:06:20,041 Speaker 2: for the crown case. The Crown case picked its skirts 106 00:06:20,121 --> 00:06:24,320 Speaker 2: up and skipped lightly along. When they had a survivor 107 00:06:24,361 --> 00:06:28,521 Speaker 2: who could talk about mismatched plates, I'd have thought it 108 00:06:28,561 --> 00:06:31,721 Speaker 2: was unlikely that she would have mismatched the plates to 109 00:06:31,761 --> 00:06:34,841 Speaker 2: give herself, because it's not the plate that's the problem, 110 00:06:34,880 --> 00:06:38,161 Speaker 2: it's what's on the plate, right, So I think that 111 00:06:38,320 --> 00:06:41,921 Speaker 2: was color and movement, and I think that's been misportrayed. 112 00:06:42,481 --> 00:06:46,161 Speaker 2: She made individual beef Wellington's, and she wouldn't have had 113 00:06:46,201 --> 00:06:48,081 Speaker 2: tis or crosses on them, but you would have been 114 00:06:48,081 --> 00:06:50,121 Speaker 2: able to distinguish. You wouldn't need to have a plate. 115 00:06:50,601 --> 00:06:52,440 Speaker 2: It's what's on the plate, not the plate. 116 00:06:53,001 --> 00:06:56,161 Speaker 1: Very interesting, good point, but I'll be checking carefully if 117 00:06:56,161 --> 00:06:58,080 Speaker 1: I ever get served beef Wellington and the plate's different, 118 00:06:58,081 --> 00:07:01,080 Speaker 1: that's for sure. But most of us are trying to 119 00:07:01,121 --> 00:07:03,400 Speaker 1: work out did she do it or did she not 120 00:07:03,561 --> 00:07:06,121 Speaker 1: do it? But the barrister, the defence barrister's job is 121 00:07:06,201 --> 00:07:09,881 Speaker 1: very different. It's about whether there's any doubt. Explain that difference. 122 00:07:10,641 --> 00:07:13,720 Speaker 2: In any criminal trial, the judge will tell the jury 123 00:07:13,801 --> 00:07:16,441 Speaker 2: right at the outset that the fundamental difference between our 124 00:07:16,521 --> 00:07:22,521 Speaker 2: system and say North Korea Iran is that the accused 125 00:07:22,641 --> 00:07:25,801 Speaker 2: person is presumed to be innocent. They don't have to 126 00:07:25,841 --> 00:07:29,281 Speaker 2: prove their innocent. The prosecution has to prove their guilt. 127 00:07:29,681 --> 00:07:33,921 Speaker 2: The jury actually is the safety valve in the legal system. 128 00:07:34,481 --> 00:07:38,121 Speaker 2: Police come at it with police think, please commit these 129 00:07:38,161 --> 00:07:41,361 Speaker 2: cases with police think. So a police officer will conduct 130 00:07:41,361 --> 00:07:44,401 Speaker 2: they conduct interviews in very much the same way, and 131 00:07:44,481 --> 00:07:46,401 Speaker 2: they will conduct things in the same way, and they 132 00:07:46,401 --> 00:07:49,841 Speaker 2: have their They're like a one eyed football supporter. I 133 00:07:49,921 --> 00:07:53,881 Speaker 2: know they are very very good and industrious and terrific 134 00:07:54,121 --> 00:07:57,801 Speaker 2: investigators in Victorian police, and there's some pretty average ones. 135 00:07:58,401 --> 00:08:02,481 Speaker 2: But police have a police view about the case. So 136 00:08:03,761 --> 00:08:06,601 Speaker 2: what they will do is they will be interpreting through 137 00:08:06,641 --> 00:08:09,801 Speaker 2: that lens. What the defense counsel has to do is 138 00:08:09,841 --> 00:08:13,321 Speaker 2: to say, I don't have to prove black is white. 139 00:08:14,081 --> 00:08:16,921 Speaker 2: I don't have to prove my client is innocent. What 140 00:08:17,041 --> 00:08:20,241 Speaker 2: I've got to show is there's a reasonable doubt about 141 00:08:20,281 --> 00:08:23,881 Speaker 2: the prosecution view. And so the standard line of attack 142 00:08:23,961 --> 00:08:26,840 Speaker 2: will be the police have been a bit one eyed 143 00:08:26,921 --> 00:08:29,601 Speaker 2: and how they've gone about their investigation. They started out 144 00:08:29,841 --> 00:08:32,201 Speaker 2: thinking she was guilty in it. They've tried to fit 145 00:08:32,241 --> 00:08:35,721 Speaker 2: Cinderella's slipper on the ugly sister. What they've done but 146 00:08:36,001 --> 00:08:40,001 Speaker 2: here in a circumstantial case. And I can think of 147 00:08:40,001 --> 00:08:42,881 Speaker 2: a ripper actually that I was involved in a fellow 148 00:08:42,921 --> 00:08:46,241 Speaker 2: called Peter Atos, the silver gun rapist. He charged with 149 00:08:46,321 --> 00:08:52,401 Speaker 2: eighteen rapes. The man was attired in a balaklava and 150 00:08:52,441 --> 00:08:55,801 Speaker 2: had a silver gun and nothing much else, and he 151 00:08:55,921 --> 00:09:00,121 Speaker 2: raped women. And in those days they didn't have DNA, 152 00:09:01,161 --> 00:09:04,041 Speaker 2: so they had eighteen different rape cases. And nowhere were 153 00:09:04,081 --> 00:09:08,001 Speaker 2: saying the coincidence is that the one person did the same, 154 00:09:09,241 --> 00:09:12,121 Speaker 2: and they pointed to various things in a circumstantial case. 155 00:09:12,561 --> 00:09:15,041 Speaker 2: In the defense case she had, all he had to 156 00:09:15,041 --> 00:09:18,001 Speaker 2: do is find have a reasonable doubt about one of them, 157 00:09:18,201 --> 00:09:19,721 Speaker 2: because then if you had a doubt about that, you 158 00:09:19,721 --> 00:09:23,121 Speaker 2: had a doubt about the lot. So in a circumstantial 159 00:09:23,201 --> 00:09:28,081 Speaker 2: case where you're relying on post defense conduct, wearing white trousers, 160 00:09:28,881 --> 00:09:31,441 Speaker 2: which is part of the theory, why would you get 161 00:09:31,481 --> 00:09:32,961 Speaker 2: diary would you wear white trousers? 162 00:09:34,721 --> 00:09:37,161 Speaker 1: That they're in Patterson who claimed she was ill, also 163 00:09:37,281 --> 00:09:39,241 Speaker 1: having eaten some of the beef. Wellington also and that 164 00:09:39,321 --> 00:09:42,801 Speaker 1: she claimed that she'd had gastro and wore white pants. 165 00:09:43,521 --> 00:09:47,521 Speaker 2: But these are arguments. There are arguments, and their arguments 166 00:09:47,521 --> 00:09:49,361 Speaker 2: made by people who are seen that through the lens 167 00:09:49,441 --> 00:09:52,801 Speaker 2: that she's guilty. The fact is there is no real, 168 00:09:52,881 --> 00:09:56,641 Speaker 2: definable motive, right, there is no motive. These are good people. 169 00:09:56,681 --> 00:09:59,561 Speaker 2: I mean, there's no personal beef whatsoever is the most 170 00:09:59,641 --> 00:10:03,361 Speaker 2: no motive. There's no motive. And if you apply ordinary 171 00:10:03,361 --> 00:10:07,161 Speaker 2: common sense and the plate thing is a furfee. Therefore 172 00:10:07,721 --> 00:10:11,681 Speaker 2: panicking afterwards when people have died, I mean all of 173 00:10:11,721 --> 00:10:14,161 Speaker 2: us have got children and my case grandchildren. You know, 174 00:10:14,361 --> 00:10:17,241 Speaker 2: you'll see how quickly people who took the chocolate biscuits 175 00:10:17,521 --> 00:10:20,161 Speaker 2: are not me, says little Johnny, wiping the crumbs from 176 00:10:20,201 --> 00:10:23,881 Speaker 2: his thing, because their first reaction is to avoid the conflict. 177 00:10:24,561 --> 00:10:28,881 Speaker 2: So I'm not so hypnotized by post defense livest and 178 00:10:28,921 --> 00:10:31,961 Speaker 2: I think I'm an intelligent jury. And you need a 179 00:10:32,001 --> 00:10:35,121 Speaker 2: Monday morning jury. What's the difference, Well, you need a 180 00:10:35,121 --> 00:10:37,401 Speaker 2: Monday morning jury. That is, you need the brightest of 181 00:10:37,441 --> 00:10:40,321 Speaker 2: the bright to run a case like this. You don't 182 00:10:40,321 --> 00:10:42,241 Speaker 2: need a Wednesday jury. You've got the dregs of all 183 00:10:42,241 --> 00:10:44,361 Speaker 2: the ones and the others that knocked back, right, So 184 00:10:44,801 --> 00:10:47,921 Speaker 2: you need an astute jury. You need a trial by 185 00:10:47,961 --> 00:10:49,681 Speaker 2: a judge A larnt I was. 186 00:10:49,641 --> 00:10:52,401 Speaker 1: Going to say, was that a potential risk choosing a 187 00:10:52,481 --> 00:10:53,441 Speaker 1: jury trial, or was. 188 00:10:53,401 --> 00:10:56,681 Speaker 2: That they had no choice. Why because in Victoria, unlike 189 00:10:56,721 --> 00:10:59,881 Speaker 2: other states, in Australia, we don't have that possibility of 190 00:10:59,881 --> 00:11:02,681 Speaker 2: having a trial by a judge alone, and a trial 191 00:11:02,881 --> 00:11:08,001 Speaker 2: judge alone works excellently when you have a person who's 192 00:11:08,481 --> 00:11:10,681 Speaker 2: been subject to a lot of bad publicity, so people 193 00:11:10,761 --> 00:11:14,681 Speaker 2: have preconceived views on the photos. Aaron Patterson was always 194 00:11:14,801 --> 00:11:20,801 Speaker 2: portrayed as an overweight, fat, mean looking woman. You don't 195 00:11:20,801 --> 00:11:23,481 Speaker 2: know Aaron Patterson, whether she's a charming woman or not, 196 00:11:23,601 --> 00:11:26,241 Speaker 2: but you see those photos and the photos that are 197 00:11:26,281 --> 00:11:29,881 Speaker 2: constantly played, I mean, are they kindly far from it? 198 00:11:30,321 --> 00:11:34,281 Speaker 2: This woman was blackguarded right from the start, right from 199 00:11:34,321 --> 00:11:35,441 Speaker 2: the start, and it's. 200 00:11:35,281 --> 00:11:39,481 Speaker 1: Really a feature of Australian trials involving women where their 201 00:11:39,521 --> 00:11:43,761 Speaker 1: demeanor is disproportionately held up as evidence of guilt. 202 00:11:43,921 --> 00:11:46,721 Speaker 2: Why were the Northern Territory police so focused on Lindy 203 00:11:46,801 --> 00:11:50,441 Speaker 2: Chamberlain And if you go back and analyze that case, 204 00:11:50,961 --> 00:11:53,001 Speaker 2: they thought that she didn't react in a way that 205 00:11:53,041 --> 00:11:56,681 Speaker 2: a mother would because she sat down and prayed quietly, 206 00:11:57,721 --> 00:12:00,721 Speaker 2: and therefore they did there's something dodgy about that, just 207 00:12:00,841 --> 00:12:04,001 Speaker 2: like the doctor in this case who thought there was 208 00:12:04,041 --> 00:12:07,961 Speaker 2: something dodgy about her reaction, well, Dr Chris Webster, Yeah, 209 00:12:08,001 --> 00:12:10,481 Speaker 2: at the host of light, embarrassment and upset and all 210 00:12:10,521 --> 00:12:14,121 Speaker 2: the rest of it, and somebody jumping to conclusions Lindy 211 00:12:14,201 --> 00:12:18,161 Speaker 2: Chamberlain was prejudged and the photos of her and the 212 00:12:18,201 --> 00:12:22,761 Speaker 2: way she is portrayed, and Aaron Patterson was blackguarded in 213 00:12:22,841 --> 00:12:25,521 Speaker 2: the press. If you look at the photos now, they're horrible, 214 00:12:25,681 --> 00:12:29,681 Speaker 2: they are horrible, and the reality is there's always a 215 00:12:29,761 --> 00:12:33,281 Speaker 2: real chance here at them that a real misjustice has happened. 216 00:12:33,481 --> 00:12:37,041 Speaker 1: Because we've also seen the normal body language experts come 217 00:12:37,081 --> 00:12:40,561 Speaker 1: out and they're analyzing her medio appearances and the police 218 00:12:40,601 --> 00:12:41,641 Speaker 1: interview and so forth, and. 219 00:12:41,721 --> 00:12:45,081 Speaker 2: They don't know, they don't they don't know. It's pseudo science, 220 00:12:45,081 --> 00:12:49,041 Speaker 2: isn't it real pseudoscience? It's crap. And somebody jumping to conclusion, 221 00:12:49,721 --> 00:12:53,280 Speaker 2: you know, and I know that when you jump to conclusion, 222 00:12:53,481 --> 00:12:56,281 Speaker 2: that doesn't mean you're right. You're often wrong when you 223 00:12:56,361 --> 00:13:00,521 Speaker 2: jump to am like somebody who forms an impression. The 224 00:13:00,561 --> 00:13:03,361 Speaker 2: reality is that one of the people survived, and the 225 00:13:03,401 --> 00:13:07,241 Speaker 2: elderly person survived, much younger person would have a greater 226 00:13:07,361 --> 00:13:11,041 Speaker 2: chance of survival. And if you start thinking in those 227 00:13:11,081 --> 00:13:14,721 Speaker 2: ways rather than saying well, how comes you wore white pants? 228 00:13:15,721 --> 00:13:23,321 Speaker 2: Oh oh, that's a bit more. Ah, that's very dodgy.