Jim Champ Reply to: 22039 - John Quirk: furthermore, in CASE 50, in the first sentence, it actually uses the term "genuine and reasonable apprehension" (this of course a standard used by courts with applications for an arrest in connection with non-bailable offences), and in the second sentence 'reasonable doubt' (again, a well-tested legal / court term). Quite some complexity for a competitor and PC to become acquainted with :).

Matt: RRS 63.5(a) tells us the basics of how to find 'the facts', but if you want to know more then it is well worth reading section F.5 of the WS Judges Manual which includes 2.5 full pages explaining the application of rule 63.5.

If there is conflicting evidence then the PC can always ask additional questions (of the parties or witnesses), weight the evidence, and may ultimately need to rely on the balance of probabilities. And if there are irrecooncilable differences of opinion between the the members of the PC then it can alsways be put a a vote.

And I appreciate it.

I never called you a blockhead.