I Don't Think Joan Smith Understands What 'The Basic Job Of The Criminal Justice System' Is...

Some may be the type of case that the police and prosecutors find most challenging, where the accuser and alleged perpetrator are known to each other, and may have consumed alcohol before the attack. I don’t doubt that the assurances now being offered are sincere, but the risk of creating unrealistic expectations is very high.

We live in a society where half the population faces an ever-present threat of sexual harassment and assault at school, at work and in our own homes. But the criminal justice system is so intent on protecting the interests of men and boys accused of rape, it no longer does its basic job of providing justice for victims.

The criminal justice system doesn't 'protect the interest of men and boys' at all; it protects the interests of defendants. Of whatever sex, colour or creed.

It says 'the Crown alleges, and it must prove'. The kind of justice system that Joan seems to want would be one where the mere word of accusation suffices as proof. 

In short, she wants a reversal of the kind of justice system that feminists rail against in countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, where a woman's testimony is worth less than a man's...

Question: How Do You Guarantee More Extreme Demands?

Answer: by cravenly giving in at the first sign of defiance: 

The headteacher of a London school at the centre of a discrimination row has caved in and agreed to take down the Union Jack, amend 'racist' uniform rules and review the curriculum after pupils staged a mass protest.

Look at what they are demanding...that a UK school should not fly the UK flag!

Pimlico Academy has been at the centre of a mutiny by students and teachers alike this week after uniform rules were announced forbidding colourful hijabs and hairstyles that 'block people's view' - policies which critics claimed would penalise Muslims and people with Afro hairstyles at the school, where three quarters of children are from ethnic minorities.

So this acadamy is teaching pupils that 'my right to be myself' trumps other students' right to see the lesson? 

The British flag had been removed and burnt by pupils in September before it was put back up. Over the weekend, anti-flag graffiti appeared on the school walls saying 'Ain't no black in the Union Jack', 'White schools for brown kids are u mad' and 'Pimlico Academy...run by racists...for profit'.

If that's how they feel, then maybe a school overseas in Nigeria or Saudi Arabia would be more to their liking? 

The school's headmaster Daniel Smith has now acquiesced to some of the pupils' demands and even praised the protesters, saying the flag will come down 'pending a review'.

He said in a statement: 'The right to protest is a civil liberty which, in the United Kingdom, we all enjoy, one that was hard fought-for and which not everyone in the world is fortunate to have.

'Our students are bright, courageous, intelligent young people, passionate about the things that matter to them and acutely attuned to injustice. I admire them hugely for this though I regret that it came to this.'

Do you think employers all over the country are looking at this and saying 'Ah, must get the HR Department to look out for applications from Pimlico Academy students', David..?

Well, actually, they probably are. Maybe not for the reasons you may think, though.   

He added: 'The issue of the flying of the Union flag was discussed at length. We acknowledge that this symbol is a powerful one which evokes often intense reactions. We have listened to the concerns of students, parents and the wider community about it.

'After Easter, we will conduct a review of this and, as part of that, consult with all the academy's stakeholders to elicit their feedback. In the meantime, and until that review is concluded, the Union flag will not be flown at the academy.'

Why bother to hold the review, when you've already shown that, faced with the slightest pressure, you fold like a pack of cards? 

Hertfordshire - Twinned With The Pantanal...

Police have warned people not to approach a group of 'very fast and aggressive' rheas that are running wild across two sleepy villages.

Hertfordshire Constabulary told members of the public not to go near the 20 ostrich-like birds in Maple Cross and Croxley Green.

The animals, which stand at 5ft and can reach 40mph, have been causing chaos across housing estates near the M25 for the last two weeks.

No, I promise, it's not an April Fool's Day post! Well, it is, but astonishingly, it's true... 

Officers have searched for the owner of the birds but have now concluded they are wild.

Errr... Need an atlas, coppers?

Reports earlier this week spoke of one bird that went into Rickmansworth town centre and knocked on front doors with its beak.

"Could I interest you in the words of our Lord and Savior, Teratornis?"

 I wonder if Stuart Howe is still around? He's clearly the man to tackle this menace, since these birds are far, far faster than a seal.

Tweet Of The Month

Well played...

Post Title Of The Month

LegIron in uncharacteristically gloomy mood:

Quote Of The Month

Longrider lays into the witterings of vacuous 'celebrities' from the 'Harry Potter' franchise: 

"I suspect that most of those making noises, wibbling about some mythical “community” and issuing death threats to dissidents aren’t trans at all, just as BLM protesters are predominately middle class, white, clueless kids who have been propagandised by the cultural Marxists.

As is Rupert Grint."

Post Of The Month

A tie for March, with both Bill Sticker and DumbJon pointing out the success of Florida in fighting covid.

Oooh, Oooh, I Know The Answer!

Is it 'because the judge is a moron'? Sure seems like it.

Kieran Byrne punched David Harrison to the eye during a late night attack in Crawley. Mr Harrison said the unprovoked attack was unexpected and gave him no time to prepare or raise his defences.

"It felt like I had been hit with a brick," he said.

I expect you'll feel that way about the 'justice' you've received too... 

So, what's the excuse? First offence?

It was revealed that Byrne had committed a similar offence of inflicting grievous bodily harm when he was aged 16, and has a penchant for mixed martial arts.

Oh, Guess not.  

His defence barrister Kyri Argyropolous said Byrne has made efforts to turn his life around, and said sending the thug to prison would be "potentially catastrophic".

How has he made those efforts? What has he actually done? 

The Judge told Byrne: “You seriously affected the lives of three innocent people with this brutal and uncalled for aggression.

“It seems you have an interest in mixed martial arts, that potentially contributed to the serious injury on this occasion.

"The fact is I don’t really care. You chose to use extreme violence on innocent people.

“You were part of an assault on a gentleman who lost his tooth in a group attack that you all bear responsibility for.

“Another man walking along was doing his best to calm things down, and you subjected him to a cowardly and vicious assault. He could have died. He was attacked when he was not expecting it.”

The judge said work would need to be done to stop Byrne, of Shaws Road, Crawley, turning to violence in an “explosive way”.

That work being 'banging him up for a long time'. No?

No... 

Judge Mooney said there is a programme to work with Byrne, but also asked: “Would the public be appalled if I didn’t impose an immediate prison sentence?

“There is an extremely compelling argument that that is the approach I should adopt.

“But without addressing your use of explosive violence, would I instead be storing up a problem for a future judge?

“It seems that whatever the public reaction is, I have to take a longer term view.”

Touching concern for your colleagues. Little - if any - for the innocent members of the public who are likely to be on the receiving end of this thug's unprovoked violence. 

I Suppose A Pair Of Gloves Is Out Of The Question?

Before starting the job in May 2019 the personal trainer had told managers that her anxiety disorder would be 'triggered' by touching items with 'hygiene issues', The Sun reports.

So...maybe sweaty people aren't the best things to choose to work with? 

However bosses ignored the severity of her disorder, instead concluding that Ms Burton was hostile and difficult to work with, the tribunal heard.

Gosh, seems...actually reasonable, doesn't it? 

Ms Burton has a condition which causes her to suffer panic attacks and emotional distress when coming into contact with something she considers to have 'cleanliness issues'.

Problem solved! 

 

Speaking at an employment tribunal in Croydon, South London, Ms Burton told the judge that she was 'embarrassed at having to explain and justify my condition', The Sun reports.

You should be - you shouldn't be 'justifying' your condition, but seeking to overcome it. Or find another job! 

Bosses likened her decision to work at a gym to someone with a milk allergy taking a job as a barista, The Sun reports.

Quite! 

A judge ruled that Ms Burton had suffered unlawful harassment. She is expected to receive compensation of an amount not yet decided.

I'm strugging to suggest something appropriate here, unlike the last barmy decision. Over to you, Reader! 

Law Of Averages...

A new data study examining the hygiene ratings of chicken shops in every London borough has mapped your chances of getting hygienic food (or not) when choosing one of London's most popular take away meals.

'Most popular', or most dangerous..? 

It showed that Richmond, one of the capital's most affluent boroughs, in fact had the lowest average hygiene ratings of any borough in London...

Richmond...!? Seriously?  

...though that was based on the one registered chicken shop there included in the study, which had a hygiene rating of 1.

Oh.