" July 2012 (UTC) 

 ::You are welcome.  A few extra points: 
 ::*There was an appeal in the case of Ruth Ellis in 2003, referring to his decision not to make a closing statement after the trial judge Mr Justice Havers ruling that the defence of provocation was not available. 
 ::*There was a reference to the R v Balogh contempt of court case on your talk page, in which Stevenson's ruling was overturned by the Court of Appeal on two grounds (that the defendant should have been tried for theft of the gas cylinder, and the defendant had not actually disrupted the court proceedings; it continues to be cited relatively recently: for example, other contempt cases in 2005, 2006, 2008 and 2012; 
 ::*His ruling in the Divisional Court (where he gave the leading judgment) on the need to strictly follow the instructions of the manufacturer to rely on the results of a breathalyser test (on the basis that the instructions were an integral part of the test, so if the instructions were not followed, the test was not by an ""approved device"") seems to have been overruled unanimously by the House of Lords in DPP v Carey [1970] AC 1072; this was referred to in a 2006 case, where the barrister said ""I never thought I would ever agree with a pronouncement of Melford Stevenson J.""!; 
 ::*Detailed sources for the Schurch trial are difficult to find, but this looks good:  
 ::In addition, it is not right to say that all of the students in the Garden House case were convicted: several were acquitted.    21:06, 24"