I think it's important because of what you've just suggested. What we're trying to find out is whether there is a magical land through a wardrobe. The fact Edmund is a lying little shit doesn't change the fact - so what we have to listen to is his story. If we start bringing in his school reports, his fuck-awful record on gender-equality, his tendency to overeat with royalty, then we're going to dismiss what he says.

Let's put Lucy aside for the moment. Peter and Susan both checked the back of the Wardrobe and they knocked on the back of it. If they gave evidence that they did this, could we use Susan's propensity towards boys and stockings to discredit her position? Should we be allowed to take Peter at his word because he's the eldest?

What we have to do is stick to what they're saying and any evidence they provide. In the case of E.Pensevie vs The State; the court might wrongly conclude (based on his character alone) that Narnia doesn't exist. It may be overturned on appeal when Lucy joins him at the appellate court and put to bed when Aslan rocks up at the Supreme Court. :o)

Narnia is fun :o)