You Are What You
Eat
Members of the jury, as
judge presiding in relation to this trial it is
now my task to sum up the case for the defence
before you retire to consider your verdict.
There is no doubt about the
circumstances that led to the demise of Mr Romano
‘Spud’ Wilja. Nor that his demise was
due to the deliberate actions of his wife. The
question you must decide upon is whether she is
guilty of murder.
You will recall that
exhibit A was a photograph of flamingos. The
defence pointed out that the pink colouration of
their feathers was not an inherent characteristic
but due to pigmentation absorbed from the
creatures on which they fed. The defence then
reminded you that there was much tribal folklore
based on the premise that the characteristics of
an animal would be assumed by those who consumed
it. The courage of a lion, for example, might be
gained by eating the heart of a lion. Expert
witnesses then testified that there was a
scientific basis to such beliefs. Indeed it had
been proven that food we consumed could alter the
very genetic structure of our cells.
The life history of Mr
Wilja was then related. You heard of his habitual
inactivity and his prodigious consumption of
chips, crisps, waffles and other potato based
food products. The defence thus contended that
the genetic profile of Mr Wilja had become
modified to the extent that his proper biological
classification should be that of a potato.
The defence acknowledged
that his wife had immersed him in boiling water,
skinned him, sliced him, plunged those slices
into a deep fat fryer and then eaten them. They
challenged the assertion of the prosecution,
however, that this constituted torture and
cannibalism of a most bizarre and psychotic
nature. They contended that her actions were, in
fact, the entirely normal behaviour of any cook.
In addition, the defence
went on to examine the genetic characteristics of
Mrs Wilja. It was reported that she had developed
a passion for chocolate from an early age and
that her DNA profile had thus become
indistinguishable from that of a bar of chocolate.
In this context you were reminded that there was
no legislation which governed the behaviour of
confectionery towards stem tubers.
If you decide that a
heinous crime has been committed against Mr
Wilja, then you must find his wife guilty of
murder. If, however, you accept the genetic
modification argument, then you might like to
join me in my office for elevenses, as I
understand that the clerk of the court, having
had a life long penchant for cocoa and biscuits,
is now officially categorised as a chocolate
digestive.
| 