1:22:00
However, we are officers of the law...
1:22:04
and must not be guided by sentiment.
1:22:07
Though Mr. Barron
made a moving and powerful plea...
1:22:11
on behalf of his client...
1:22:12
a stirring appeal to the heart...
1:22:16
we, as law officers, must determine cases
with the head, not the heart.
1:22:21
Tom, have we lost?
1:22:23
l agree with my learned friend,
Justice Ferris...
1:22:25
-Yes, unless he says another ''however.''
-...that it is regrettable...
1:22:29
that no precedent has been cited
in support of Mr. Doyle's case.
1:22:37
However...
1:22:39
though no precedent can be found
in lrish law...
1:22:43
we can argue
from an analogous English case.
1:22:47
ln the Crown versus Clark, 1891 ...
1:22:50
the principle of a parent's inalienable right
to his or her children...
1:22:54
was enshrined in common law.
1:22:59
However...
1:23:02
...the parent's right...
1:23:03
could, as common law,
be overridden by statute.
1:23:11
-However...
-Yes, dear God.
1:23:14
...unlike the English...
1:23:16
we lrish have a written Constitution...
1:23:19
so that, in the words
of Evelyn Doyle's prayer:
1:23:23
''truth and justice may flourish.''
1:23:26
l find it unarguably true,
as Mr. Barron contends...
1:23:31
a parent has
an inalienable and God-given right...
1:23:34
to the society of his children.
1:23:37
l therefore find
in favor of the plaintiff, Mr. Doyle.
1:23:58
We did it!