‘Ladies and gentlemen, it is now for me to address you on behalf of the Crown. In Scotland, persons accused of committing serious crimes are brought before the High Court at the instance of the Lord Advocate. He is in charge of our system of prosecution. He acts in the public interest. Clearly, it is in all our interests that crimes should be investigated, the perpetrators detected, prosecuted and, if appropriate, convicted and sentenced. As one of the Lord Advocate’s deputies, it is my responsibility to prosecute this particular case in the public interest. I do not represent the deceased or his family, the police or any particular interest. It is my duty to present all the evidence to you for your consideration and to ask you to return such verdicts as I consider are supported by that evidence.

‘It is for you to evaluate the evidence, to decide what to accept and what to reject, and in due course return your verdict. You will be looking for evidence which is both credible and reliable, bearing in mind that people may tell lies or make mistakes.

‘There are a number of legal rules which you must follow and although I will mention these in passing, his Lordship will explain them to you in due course.

‘Since the Crown have brought Mr Gallagher to court, it is for the Crown to prove guilt. By law, he is presumed to be innocent until proved guilty. That is not to say he is innocent, but he is presumed to be so. His guilt must be established to the standard of beyond reasonable doubt. It is a high standard, but it is not an impossible standard. It does not mean beyond any doubt or to some kind of mathematical certainty. If that was the case, no one would ever be convicted of anything. In the area of human affairs, no one can ever be certain of anything. When you examine the evidence and think about it, if you are satisfied of the guilt of Mr Gallagher, it is, quite simply, your duty to convict. You do not feel sympathy for the victim or hostility towards the man in the dock, however much that may be merited. Duty is above emotion.

‘Mr Muirhead, representing Mr Gallagher, is in a different position. He does not have to prove his client’s innocence. Indeed, he does not have to prove anything. Basically, his role is destructive rather than constructive. As you have already seen, he will use his considerable skills to harry and pressure the witnesses, to confuse, to muddy the waters, to obscure what in reality is perfectly plain. He does so in a convincing, occasionally dramatic, fashion. All very impressive. It does not make it so.