“But that’s not enough. To become aware of analogies a jurist cannot be content with the rules of the discipline within 115which they work. It’s necessary to learn to observe these rules from the outside, in such a way as to grasp their nature and their limitations with the right degree of detachment.

“A jurist must – I emphasize must – devote a sizeable part of their time to things that to all appearances have nothing to do with the law: reading good novels, watching good films, even good television. In short, they must take nourishment from good stories.

“Why must? you could legitimately ask. Because it’s the art of the storyteller that reminds us that there is not just one single answer to human dilemmas. These dilemmas are inevitably ambiguous. The characters in good novels and good films represent various points of view about reality. Think of a brilliant work like Rashomon, where a story that might appear very simple becomes, in the accounts of the four protagonists, a plurality of stories that are actually incompatible with one another. Or think of that passage from The Brothers Karamazov where Ivan asks his brother Alyosha if he would be willing to torture a little girl to guarantee the happiness of the whole human race.”

I paused, to try to read in their faces the effect – if there was one – of what I was saying. They seemed attentive, although with different shades. Some looked sceptical – young magistrates often have very little sympathy for defence lawyers – and others curious. One young woman, more than all of them, attracted my attention for a few moments. She wasn’t beautiful, but had intense, slightly stern grey eyes.

“Now I want to propose a dilemma in the form of a hypothetical story. Imagine the undercarriage of a train engine that’s come loose and is hurtling out of control along a railway track to which five people have been tied. If the 116undercarriage reaches them they’ll all be killed. Imagine you’re on the spot and you can pull a lever that’ll divert the undercarriage onto another track where just one person is tied. What would you do?”

They hadn’t been expecting a question. After some hesitation, two or three replied that they would pull the lever.

“You’re in good company. The vast majority of those who are asked the question answer that way. It’s better for one person to die rather than five. Correct?”

Some nodded, others were puzzled, almost suspicious of falling into a trap. Decidedly, though, I now had their attention.