My trial began at the Old Bailey.

When I asked my defence lawyers how on earth the jurors could concentrate on trivial claims from 30 years ago whilst planes were flying into the World Trade Centre, they answered...

"British Justice is not affected by minor global events".

Alice?

In the UK we write it 11/9/2001.

An American friend recently told me he thought our way of writing dates made more sense.

I think it's right that members of a jury focus on the case in front of them rather than on events elsewhere. What's wrong is that they are rarely given any actual facts to base their decision on, so end up having to choose one person's word over another.

It was that minor, that most of London's major businesses were closed from mid-afternoon onwards for fear of an attack on the UK. I had friends and family working in London and they were told to go home for that reason.

Where I worked at the time, we did no work for practically all afternoon due to this tragedy.

What a bloody stupid comment from the defence lawyers.

With the greatest of respect, you must have had a bad feeling that you may not get a fair trial, if you hear that. They must have realised you spent a fair amount of time in New York and had no doubt people you knew over there as well.

I agree also with JC's comment about factual evidence, it is very worrying that in the papers, they commented on 'seduction packs' and computers seized from your house, when that wasn't true. If their was no evidence, then you would think that all the convictions would be thrown out. One person's word is not good enough unless their is evidence.