Secret Barrister gives Taylor Swift the law treatment

Emily Hinkley

1 year ago

🎵I think he did it but I just can’t prove it🎵

The Secret Barrister, an anonymous bar blogger who often tweets about the plight of criminal justice, has returned to social media after an extended hiatus.

And now they’re back, they’ve wasted not time in dealing with the big legal talking points — “How is Taylor Swift’s legal analysis in ‘no body, no crime’?”

There is something I’ve been reluctant to talk about.

I didn’t ever want to really talk about it. But the question has been asked, and if one person is thinking it, others may be too.

So I’ll address it head on:

How is Taylor Swift’s legal analysis in “no body, no crime”? 🧵 pic.twitter.com/4041xJ5iqa

— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) July 24, 2023

In a Twitter thread, the mysterious legal personality posted a video with the lyrics to Swift’s song encouraging readers to “listen in full” before they proceeded to set out the case:

First though, house rules:

Unfamiliar with the full lyrics? Then take the time to listen *in full* before going any further.

If you haven’t read the sentencing remarks, you’re in no position to comment.https://t.co/6Bav82ducB

— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) July 24, 2023

On the track featuring fellow pop trio HAIM, Swift sings about a fictional character called ‘Este’, who, after learning of his adultery, is murdered by her husband. The ballad’s haunting main refrain accuses: “I think he did it but I just can’t prove it. No body, no crime.”

SB starts their Twitter thread analysis with the adultery, explaining the song’s legal inaccuracies and errors:

For the uninitiated, Swifty (and her associates, Haim) are expressing concern for Este, whose husband’s behaviour “smells like infidelity” – red wine stains, odd transactions on his bank statement etc.

🎵I think he did it but I just can’t prove it. No body, no crime.🎵

Sigh.

— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) July 24, 2023

There is much wrong with this. For one, Este, adultery has not been a criminal offence since the Matrimonial Causes Act 1857 abolished the crime of criminal conversation. So no crime has been committed *at all*.

But worse than that, she misunderstands the power of inference.

— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) July 24, 2023

Moving on to Este’s murder SB sheds some light on the misconception that a body is required for a murder conviction:

🎵I think he did it but I just can’t prove it
no body, no crime🎵

Now while Swifty is correct that the standard of proof in criminal proceedings – making a jury “sure” – is high, and “thinking” someone guilty is not enough, she now seems to think ‘no body no crime’ is *literal*.

— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) July 24, 2023

We even get a little case law thrown in:

Swifty is, with respect, overlooking R v Onufrejczyk [1955] 2 Q.B. 388, which confirmed that the fact of death can be proved by cogent and compelling circumstantial evidence, notwithstanding that neither the body nor any trace of the body has been found.

This is kinda basic.

— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) July 24, 2023

Things pick up pace as the song’s narrator avenges her friend’s death by murdering the husband, erasing key evidence, and indirectly framing his mistress. SB is quick to point out the narrator’s unlikely belief that a good clean-up will ensure the perfect crime.

…worse, Swifty’s own misunderstanding of the basics of criminal liability appears to have given her a sufficiently false sense of security for her to *proceed to murder the husband*, believing that as long as she hides the body, there is “no crime”.

This is just not true.

— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) July 24, 2023

For what it’s worth, the steps that Swifty claims to have taken – dumping the body in open water, cleaning the house “to cover up a scene”, lining up Este’s sister as a false alibi – these would all assist her in her defence should she ever be charged. But they’re no guarantee.

— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) July 24, 2023

Rounding off this Twitter-based analysis, SB notes:

So where does this leave us?

Not in a great place. Hubby is dead. Swifty has confessed to murder, undoing all her hard work disposing of the body & fixing an alibi. And Este, for all we know, may be about to return home from a deserved city break.

Public legal education matters

— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) July 24, 2023

The thread prompted a barrage of comments with public and legal professionals alike weighing in with their take. One commenter recalled: “I marked an exam answer from a student who managed to mangle this maxim further into ‘In order to prove murder, the death of the victim is not essential’.”

It’s not the first time the legal blogger has given us a mash-up of pop culture and legal commentary, in 2018 we were treated to a full analysis of Bananarama’s 1987 hit ‘Love in the First Degree’.

Welcome back SB.