‘Less chortling and more news,’ I demanded sourly.

‘Ah, yes, well, you’re naturally anxious. By the way, you’ve no aged parents whose grey hairs you might bring down in sorrow to the grave? No? Well, that’s good news, I suppose. The rest is mostly bad. They’re not yet sure how many charges they’ll bring against you, half the clerks in the Attorney-General’s office are working day and night on it, smacking their lips over the dripping roast. The preliminary list of choices is as follows:

‘Breaking and Entering.

‘Acting an a manner likely to cause a breach of the peace.

‘Foul and disgusting language.

‘Obstructing a Police Officer in the execution of his duty.

‘Sacrilege under Section 24 of the Larceny Act of 1914: that carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, bet you didn’t know that, ha ha.

‘Sedition, well, yes, arguable.

‘Art. I de la Loi pour Empêcher le Mauvais Traitement des Animaux – that only carries three months. Oh yes, and a £200 fine.

‘Art. I de la Loi Modifiant le Droit Criminel (Sodomie & Bestialité) confirmée par Ordre de Sa Majesté en Conseil, I really do hope they don’t fix you up for that one: the maximum is life but the minimum is three years. Last chap was only deported, but he was potty.

‘Theft of one rooster or cockerel – no, the farmer swears Jock didn’t pay him for it. You might get that reduced to “Taking and Driving Away without Owner’s Permission”, ha ha.

‘Vagrancy. You didn’t have any cash on you, you see.

‘Failure to sign a driving licence.

‘Breach of the Drugs (Prevention of Misuse) (Jersey) Law of 1964 – that depends on what the stuff Fr Tichborne was burning turns out to be.

‘Breach – possibly – of La Loi sur L’Exercise de la Médecine et Chirurgerie Vétérinaire.’

I had no time to seek out a looking-glass, nor did I need to: I can say without hesitation that my face was white as any sheet – probably whiter than most.

‘That all?’ I quavered manfully.

‘By no means, Charlie, by no means. I’m afraid that all those can be doubled and redoubled in spades by repeating them with the words “conspiring to” in front of them. Then a number of civil actions would probably lie:

‘Trespass to the chapel and damage thereto.

‘Trespass to the dolmen and damage thereto.

‘Trespass to the Hougue Bie site generally and failure to pay the admission charge.

‘Damages in respect of the rooster or cockerel.

‘They’ll probably think of some more, they’ve hardly started. Then I’m afraid there’s all sorts of sticky possibilities under Ecclesiastical Law – and if that lot brings charges I’d plead guilty outright if I were you: cases in their courts drag out for years and the costs would break you.