Counsel's Opinion on the Patient's Latest Ridiculous Misfortune

To: My Instructing Solicitors (Messrs Casualty & Co)
From: David King's Bench QC
Re: The Patient Wade - Counsel's Opinion

My Instructing Solicitors tasked me with analysing the legal issues arising from the case of The Patient Wade (hereafter 'the Patient'). The primary concern of Instructing Solicitors was whether, in denying the Patient access to his surf blog, the medical staff of The Facility, led by Professor Pangloss, were guilty of interfering with the Patient's right to freedom of expression. Instructing Solicitors took the view that owing to the Patient's increasingly erratic behaviour, which culminated in the incident with the toy dog and the BBQ, he had scuppered such right to freedom of expression as may once have been his. In other words, a madman knows not of what he speaks, so how can he have a right to say it?

In my view, this analysis is flawed. Thanks to sundry laws that only I, as a barrister, know about, it is not correct to say that because an individual is mad he is disallowed from speaking. Indeed, I would go further and aver that the law expressly protects the right of the mad to speak. How else would we have seen the flourishing of such eminence grises of the literary world as the Patient himself?

There is, in short, no legal means of restricting the Patient from writing his surf blog.

However, in a footnote annexed by Instructing Solicitors to page 579 of their Brief, I see that the Patient ignored the advice of various doctors, as well as Mr P. Pilot, and went surfing on both Sunday and Monday. After the first session, the Patient is alleged to have said to Aerial Attack: "I'm stoked! The knee held up! What a result. Back in the water after just two weeks. And I got a couple of very nice head high rights. Can't argue with that at all." However, things took a turn for the worse on Monday. The Patient, seeing his son Harry drop in on him on a small left-hander at the car park end, decided to let him have the wave rather than, as was his first thought, to run him over. However, in turning away to the right he contrived to double the big toe on his right foot over itself so badly that it is now black, blue and swollen. Indeed, as the Patient told Mr J.H. A'Sbo: "I'm sure it's broken but there's no point going to hospital because, having previously broken a metatarsal in my other foot, I know they'll do nothing and just tell me to get on with it. This is not a result. I'm now limping on both legs."

I took the liberty, upon reading this, of investigating further. It transpires that the normally mild-mannered Patient rebuked a bodyboarder earlier during the same session. The Patient made the drop on a set wave of around seven or eight feet, bottom turned and came nicely off the top, only to see, as he set himself for another bottom turn, a kamikaze drop in by an unidentified sponger. The Patient flicked his board away from the sponger's head with inches to spare, and, in the process, came off his board. His ride over, the Patient was irked by this shameless slice of ignorance of surfing etiquette. As he paddled back out he pondered whether to say anything to the sponger, a man whom he'd never seen before and who, he would venture, is not from these parts. He did so, reproaching him in polite but firm terms, for, as he verily maintains, "My dear chap, my primary concern is for the safety of other water users. People can get hurt by doing things like that. Now go away and learn the drop in rule you total moron."

However, a number of people, including Jill Pierre and the Patient's son Harry, said that the Patient was not always innocent of the charge of dropping in himself. They claim that the Patient's latest injury is, in fact, a karmic thing. Or, in Harry's words: "Dad, aka 'the Fat Hawaiian' as I call him - because he's fat and quite tanned, not because he surfs like a Hawaiian - has dropped in on me more times than I've had hot dinners in Santa Cruz. At least now that he's injured again this won't happen for a while. Then again, who's going to take me to the beach?"

Having reviewed this vignette from the life of the Patient, it is, after all, my conclusion that he should be banned from his surf blog for another three months. He is clearly a danger to himself and has no conception of how to steer clear of injury. If he does not have the incentive of writing his surf blog, perhaps he will manage to stop surfing, making the beaches once again safe and tranquil for all concerned. Maybe, indeed, he should be encouraged to return to one of his former passions, mountaineering. On ridges such as that which is pictured, he will, as he contemplates a 3,000ft sheer drop, have plenty of time to reflect on karma.

I trust that this advice is, as ever, as useful as it is excellent. If my Instructing Solicitors have any questions, they know where to find me. Meanwhile please remit a cheque for £2.78m + VAT to my chambers (you will be pleased to note that I have not billed for disbursements of 74p).

Yours,

DKB QC

Comments

[Pete]

Hi,
Apologies that this is in the comments section and very off topic(I couldn't see a contact page anywhere)
I just wanted to ask whether you would consider adding a link/article about Corona Save the Beach ( http://www.coronasavethebeach.org/ ), who are raising awareness of beach and water cleanliness in a beach clean up campaign this summer. Similar to SAS, they're pledging to clean up britain and europes worst beaches.
As a resident of the Isle of Man (we have the worst beaches apparently according to this article: http://tinyurl.com/ocwfbm )I feel that this is a worthy campaign for surfers to support - if you can help that would be great.