Favorite Courtroom Scene #137: A debate arises over the 'proper interpretation' of a particular law, or section of the law. None of the legal eagles with decades of experience in the study and practice of the law can agree, so the Judge orders a break in the action, whereupon everyone dives into mountains of information contained in both fresh and dusty graven tablets and eventually they all return to the courtroom to further disagree as to what constitutes obeying the law, and what constitutes a violation of the law. Finally, the judge makes a decision (which may be confirmed or overturned in the future by other people with even more years of study and experience in the practice of law) and the defendant becomes an innocent lamb or a fire-breathing devil, according to the judgement. The beautiful insanity of the preceeding is only fully manifested when the defendant protests that he hadn't really meant to transgress against the law of the land, and the Judge, who based her final decision on a single line of legislation enacted in 1854, and not noticed nor referenced since the day it was passed, tells the defendant that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." [Note: If you are unaware of whether the law in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, requiring pedestrians to walk on the 'right' side of the sidewalk, was or was not recinded, then your qualify as a member of the 'criminal element,' in potential, if not in fact.]