No, because that is child's play. [He flips open the book and starts flicking through it.] When you take a case, you can argue about whether or not your client did it, or you can argue about what was actually done. Did that woman maliciously murder her husband, or did a victim of relentless abuse finally free herself from a life of violence the only way she knows how? Either way, Mrs Allery's got a shotgun and her peace of mind while Mr Allery is on the floor, but in the second case, the Appeals court lets her walk free instead of slapping her with second degree murder. Would that work now? Of course not. The culture wouldn't recognize it. But they would recognize this.

[He shows her a page covering the insanity plea.] Everyone is crazy here, and almost no one can control when it happens. It's defence gold. In the US, almost every state shoves the burden of proof for insanity onto the defence after that reform act, but not here. Here the prosecution has to prove sanity beyond a reasonable doubt, and a successful plea of temporary insanity has little to no consequences because it happens to everyone, and it's just unlucky that it happened when you were holding a shotgun or driving a carriage. It's a hundred times easier than proving self-defence, because all I would ever have to do is show that they are capable of displaying insanity in this way. And that's a breeze when half of everyone here is out of their minds. Throw in a few words about the insignificance of this crime against the greater backdrop of the horror of the universe and I can wing anything.

[He is smiling really fondly at those pages now.] This place is amazing.