"having information that they knew or believed might be of material assistance in securing the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of another person in the UK for an offence involving the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism, failed to disclose that information as soon as reasonably practicable to a constable"
That's what two sisters have been accused of re the london bombings - here
Now how many people here can honestly say that they understand all of that.
But why do they have to make legal jargon so blooming difficult? Imagine having that lot thrown at you 'verbally' by a police officer - I wouldn't have been able to give them any answers as I'd be spending the next 10 minutes trying to work out what they'd said/
Surely something along the lines of "witholding potentially vital information about the terrorist attacks from the police" might have been a little easier for all of those that don't have a degree in legal wotsits
While I understand that when being charged they have to cover all 'aspects' of the law - I still don't understand the need to use the longest words in the dictionary to come up with the law in the first place
I think Queen of Quotes, that your dilemna over this matter could be dispersed, isolated, severed, and furthermore concluded by the statement commonly known as "the law is an ass" and a complicated one at that.
I understood it by the way because I work with legislation a lot, and that is bleeding impossible to understand too (unless you're me of course)
What was the prize for understanding it? Did I win???