---

Terrorism Bill

My Lords, I shall have a word with the accompanist later. My point is that it is obviously incumbent on a defendant to raise the defence. He has to say, ““I did not see it”” or ““I did not endorse it””, but once he has done that the burden of proving a serious criminal offence should, as in the generality of cases, rest on the prosecution, which would have to either discredit him by cross-examination or produce evidence to rebut the defence he was seeking to put forward. It would then be for the jury to decide. As it stands, with the burden being placed on the defendant, these alleged defences are not real or acceptable defences at all.