Monday, 30 December 2013

So Much For R v Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthy...

A judge allowed two solicitors accused of trying to cheat the legal system to hide behind a cloak of secrecy for ‘cultural reasons’, the Daily Mail can disclose.
He banned reporting of the case to prevent them allegedly being shamed in the eyes of their community.
'Their community'? Does he mean English people? Or lawyers?

Well, I left a word out of both those excerpts, of course. As well as the giveaway names...
In the latest farce involving secret justice, the pair were told they could enjoy the court’s protection because members of their family would pass judgment if the case was reported.
It is a privilege rarely bestowed on defendants in the justice system, which has operated on the principle of transparency for centuries.
Our justice system has officially become a joke (even faster than the US system). And part of the reason for this is the calibre of people entering it:
At the beginning of the hearings, Miss Khan’s barrister, Glenn Gatland, argued she would not give evidence properly in the presence of the Press because she was afraid of family repercussions.
He said she did not want to criticise her father in public – though she was quite happy to have her mother sit in the public gallery.
I'm actually ashamed to be British today.


Quiet_Man said...

They didn't want the publicity so attempted to use the 'm' word to sway the judge in their favour. Might have worked if it hadn't been for the Daily Mail.

Fahrenheit211 said...

Good on the Mail for challenging this blatant act of pandering.

Uncle Badger said...

No wonder the Left so hates the Mail!

JuliaM said...

"Might have worked if it hadn't been for the Daily Mail."

I'm sure Shamey Chukabutty was just getting ready to swing the might of her organisation behind this, and they just pipped her at the post... ;)

"No wonder the Left so hates the Mail!"

Quite! It is, at times, the 'anti-Guardian' and that's a good thing to be.