101 YEARS OLD AND STILL OF UNSOUND LEGAL MIND...
THE CASE of Cat v Owl in the matrimonial court, Part Two. The plot so far: As we reported yesterday, Ms A Pussycat is appearing before Judge Alicia “Moose Horseblanket III” to ask for an annulment of her marriage to Mr Owl on the grounds of abduction (in a peagreen boat), cruelty (to a pig with a nose ring) interspecies incompatibility (a cat marrying an owl) and procedural abnormality (a ceremony conducted by a turkey). Now read on:
Judge: “I understand that Mr Hiller Beanz wishes to make a statement.”
Beanz: “Too right I do. I wish to inform the court that my client Mr Owl is counter-suing Ms Pussycat for allegedly libellous comments she has tweeted on the #mewtoo site for abused Twittering cats.”
Judge: “I though tweeting was something birds did. Did she learn it from your client, Mr Owl?”
Beanz: “Certainly not. We believe she did it off her own bat.”
Judge: “Cats, owls and now bats. Let’s try to get on with things, can we? I believe your case, Mr Threadbare, is that turkeys are not empowered to conduct weddings in Thailand.”
Beanz: “Objection! We have not established that the wedding was in Thailand, only that it was a land where bong trees grow. That may apply to lands other than Thailand.”
Threadbare: “But if it is Thailand, then since Thailand used to be known as Siam, it is the home of Siamese cats, Siamese twins and presumably also Siamese twin cats, so would face no problem joining cats together which might as well be done by a turkey as anyone else. Our case is that joining a cat to an owl is a step too far.”
Judge: “Right, that ends the case for the plaintiff. Mr Beanz, do you have any questions for Ms Pussycat?”
Beanz: “I certainly do. Ms Pussycat, I ask you to take your mind back to the night of the wedding.”
Pussycat: “I’d rather not. It was a real turkey of a wedding, I can tell you. Is Owl really suggesting that we should be bound by a ceremony conducted by a fowl using a ring ripped from a pig’s nose? I hated every moment of it and the sooner it’s annulled the better.”
Beanz [waving a piece of paper with the name E Lear on it]: I have here a witness statement saying that you appeared very happy on the night in question and that after the wedding you were seen blissfully dancing on the edge of the sand by the light of the Moon with Mr Owl.”
Pussycat: “Blissfully dancing? That’s a laugh – I was trying to drown him.”
Beanz: “No further questions. Call Mr Owl. [Owl takes the stand] Did you, Mr Owl, at any stage of the relationship with Ms Pussycat, receive any indication that Ms Pussycat was unhappy with the arrangements you were making for your marriage.”
Owl [in tears]: “No. Not in the slightest. I thought she was beautiful and she congratulated me on the charm and sweetness of my singing.”
Judge: “Case dismissed. There’s no such thing as the light of the Moon. It’s reflected sunlight.” And surprisingly, the Owl and the Pussycat lived happily together ever after.