High Court judge does a 'Da Vinci'

Quantic · 28 Apr 2006 at 02:06

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-13520898,00.html

A secret code has been hidden in a High Court judgment by the judge at the centre of the Da Vinci Code copyright trial.

Mr Justice Peter Smith took a leaf out of Dan Brown's global best-seller to hide his own message in the 71-page court document.

It emerged that italicised letters in the first seven paragraphs of the document spell out "Smithy Code".

Over the next few pages more letters stand out from the text in italics, but in an apparently random order.

The move to hide a message in a formal High Court judgment is thought to be unprecedented in legal history.

pyro · 28 Apr 2006 at 05:24

I don't see how people get off with "hiding" stuff like this. They can play hide the salami instead.

Treefrog · 28 Apr 2006 at 11:12

Quantic said:
<snip>

Hehe, good on him. Like he says, there's no reason you can't have a bit of fun while you're doing your job is there?

As long as the hidden message doesn't affect the judgement then I see no harm in it.
As he says, it's a basic transposition cipher with each letter representing a different one, should be easy enough to crack along the lines of Sherlock Holmes' "Dancing Men."

Meridian · 28 Apr 2006 at 11:20

I take it you guys had never heard of the Word Game they play in court then? The two opposing barristers each select for the other a word that has to be dropped into something they say in court that day. They must not be obcenities, but anything else goes. The idea is that the word should be entirely unrelated to the matter at hand, so it is as hard as possible to introduce it into a speech without the whole court going "wtf?", and the judge asking: "Are you two playing the word game again? If so, it's two days in the cells".

M

Greenlizard0 · 28 Apr 2006 at 11:47

Meridian said:
I take it you guys had never heard of the Word Game they play in court then? The two opposing barristers each select for the other a word that has to be dropped into something they say in court that day. They must not be obcenities, but anything else goes. The idea is that the word should be entirely unrelated to the matter at hand, so it is as hard as possible to introduce it into a speech without the whole court going "wtf?", and the judge asking: "Are you two playing the word game again? If so, it's two days in the cells".

M

Hmm...urban myth? lol

VeNT · 28 Apr 2006 at 11:49

greenlizard0 said:
Hmm...urban myth? lol

wanna bet?

Greenlizard0 · 28 Apr 2006 at 12:42

VeNT said:
wanna bet?

Oh I suppose....I hadn't read the entire article just what the OP said.

Damn, maybe sitting up in that highchair all the time has caused all the judges to be bored...

Werewolf · 28 Apr 2006 at 13:33

I can guess what it says

"bloody conspiracy theorists", "stop wasting time" or "i bet this will drive them mad"

Quantic · 28 Apr 2006 at 14:50

SOLVED:

http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/article.as...n.co.uk/mediaexportlive&ks=0&mc=5&ml=ma&lc=en

Not very exciting

I take it you guys had never heard of the Word Game they play in court then? The two opposing barristers each select for the other a word that has to be dropped into something they say in court that day. They must not be obcenities, but anything else goes. The idea is that the word should be entirely unrelated to the matter at hand, so it is as hard as possible to introduce it into a speech without the whole court going "wtf?", and the judge asking: "Are you two playing the word game again? If so, it's two days in the cells".

When I was last advocating our favourite was fitting Sting songs into our bail applications. Song titles are much more fun than words.

Jumpingmedic · 28 Apr 2006 at 14:52

Although I do find this funny I just wonder if it might be grounds for an appeal. I'm no legal expert but couldn't the guys who lost the case claim the judge didn't take it seriously or he was biased towards Dan Brown because he obviously likes codes.

Quantic · 28 Apr 2006 at 14:54

Jumpingmedic said:
Although I do find this funny I just wonder if it might be grounds for an appeal. I'm no legal expert but couldn't the guys who lost the case claim the judge didn't take it seriously or he was biased towards Dan Brown because he obviously likes codes.

No grounds for appeal here. The document bears no relevance to the judgment he made. All he did was italicise some letters in his judgment. Doesn't mean he had any predisposition towards codes or Dan Brown.

Jumpingmedic · 28 Apr 2006 at 14:55

Quantic said:
No grounds for appeal here. The document bears no relevance to the judgment he made. All he did was italicise some letters in his judgment. Doesn't mean he had any predisposition towards codes or Dan Brown.

Fair enough, wouldn't be surprised if they tried anyway, heh. I doubt they're happy about it, sort of added insult to injury.

Quantic · 28 Apr 2006 at 14:57

Jumpingmedic said:
Fair enough, wouldn't be surprised if they tried anyway, heh. I doubt they're happy about it, sort of added insult to injury.

Yeah I agree there. They are probably a bit angry because, in a way, the Judge has treated it a bit like a game.