ADV TEE
Necessarily when I am arguing for the applicants I am arguing not as one would do in a Court of Law.  In a Court of Law I would be arguing that you accept my clients and you demolish the opposition, that you crucify them.  That my clients are telling 100% accurately the truth.  Now, all judges know that a witness can come to a court and be totally, totally honest, but yet wrong.  That often happens.  There is a case which is sited in Hofman and Zeffit which is a fascinating case relating to two Barristers in England who identified a robber having been in London on the day of the offence and the Barristers gave evidence in court and the robber was on the point of being convicted when it transpired that in fact he was in a different place and that was capable of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
	What it means to say is this.  That a person with all  the good intentions of telling the truth can tell the truth as they perceive it, but it does not necessarily have to be factually correct.  Now, in a Court of Law one has to get truth and fact to coincide totally, but in a Commission where ...