An afternoon of ephemera,miscellanea, a Jedi job seeker, Christ quotes…..and a glass or two of Rioja

After the bug of last week (which has not entirely gone – I now have an absurdly deep / croaky voice which makes podcasts just too absurd to contemplate..Think Paul Robeson on benylin) I decided to have a glass of Rioja for afternoon tea.  Normally I wait until well after 7.00 in the evening – but ars longia vita brevis and all that..

I like this….You be The Judge from the Criminal Justice System Online - it does what it says on the tin. [Hat Tip to Brian Inkster of Inksters for alerting me to this ]  You hear the case and decide the sentence…and then see if it bears any resemblance to the ‘real thing’.  Floggers, hangers and deporters will…however, be disappointed. Nothing for you here… but I am sure you can make your own arrangements for something more suited to your tastes by using Google.

And, if you fancy a shock to your central nervous system this wonderful pastiche by the politically astute and leading Photoshop artist..Beau Bo D’Or… it really is worth a look… but I did warn you.

On, temporarily, to more serious matters….. a bit of law, even.

Keir Starmer QC ruled last week that he could not prosecute Baroness Uddin because of a change in the rules by the Lords. One leading barrister takes a very different line.  I extract the full letter from The Times – with due apology for a full extract – because it is rather interesting.  Here is The Times online reference.

Sir,

The decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions not to prosecute peers who may have committed a criminal offence is said to have been brought about by a loophole (leading article, Mar 13). It is no such thing. It would appear to be an extraordinary failure by the DPP to understand what is required to prove a case. The obvious (but not only) charge would have been one of obtaining property by deception, contrary to s15 Theft Act 1968. In order to establish such an offence the prosecution would have to prove that a defendant dishonestly obtained property belonging to another by deception with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.

The crucial aspect of the deception is the statement supposedly made by the peer that the address in question was that person’s main residence. Whether the address in question was indeed the main residence is a question for the jury. The opinion of someone else — eg, Michael Pownall, the Clerk of Parliaments — as to what constitutes the main address would not be relevant and would be no more likely to be admissible in evidence than Humpty Dumpty’s retort that when he used a word it meant what he chose it to mean.

If the decision not to bring charges was indeed brought about by the inadmissible opinion of the clerk that one visit per month would entitle a peer to designate that address as the main residence, the DPP should seriously consider his position.

Michael Cousens
Carmelite Chambers, London EC4

I am not a criminal lawyer..but is Cousen’s right? As always, I’d be interested in the opinion of practitioners in the field. It struck me, in the case of  Baroness Uddin for…in effect…. appearing to break the law … but a law circumscribed by definitions of  ‘a main address’  set down by the Lords  … that it would be rather difficult for the CPS to bring a credible prosecution. Over to you….

The Spurn of The Jedi

One of the great qualities of Rioja is that it allows me to read The Sun (and other tabloids) and not feel guilty.  It is probably also true that it is rather more difficult to read The Times, Indie, Guardian, telegraph et al after drinking a fair bit of Rioja..but be that as it may… there are no admissions being made this day by me.

The Sun reported..with the headline above…

A JEDI believer won an apology from a Jobcentre which threw him out for refusing to remove his hood.

“Star Wars fan Chris Jarvis, 31, was told he would have to leave if he did not take it down. Chris is a member of the International Church of Jediism – based on the sci-fi films – whose doctrine states that followers should be allowed to wear hoods. But when he protested, security escorted him from his local branch in Southend, Essex. He filled out a complaint form – and received a formal letter from the JobCentre Plus branch’s boss just three days later.”

Far be it for me…of libertarian leanings… to suggest that Chris Jarvis may well have a better prospect of success when he turns up for a job interview and keeps quiet about the fact that he is a Jedi.  I rather suspect that even the most liberal of Chambers would find it difficult to take a Jedi  on… but… you may know differently? Are there any Jedi barristers, clerks, supernumeries…Chambers butlers?

I am not a religious man…and I mean no offence by what follows to those who are… but I thought it might be interesting to match each of the main political leaders with a well known quote (albeit slightly modified for Clegg) from Jesus Christ….

And finally… may god have mercy upon my soul…mea culpa – but I just had to go back to that poster generating site… it woz the Rioja wot did it, M’Lud…

I may as well finish the bottle… an excellent way to ‘take afternoon tea’…. back later..perhaps….

Law Review: CPS problems, Human Rights in the heat of battle, and an unusual case of a barrister inflating legal aid fees.

Shortfalls in CPS leads to hundreds of defendants avoiding trial

The Times reports: ” Failings in the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in London have allowed hundreds of defendants to go free without facing trial, inspectors have found. A hard-hitting report published today says that defendants are more likely to escape trial because of prosecution blunders than they are to be cleared by a jury.It found that prosecutors have been bombarded with management initiatives that forced them to neglect their core duty of bringing criminals to court. Case preparation was weak with a “lack of intellectual rigour” and poorly-instructed advocates having to prepare cases on the morning of trial.  As a result, more cases are dropped before trial than anywhere else in the rest of England and Wales — a total of 15.4 per cent compared with 11.6 per cent elsewhere. Some of these are abandoned unavoidably, such as witnesses changing their minds or new evidence coming to light, but others are down to prosecution failings.

Keir Starmer QC, the Director of Public Prosecutions, said he was confident that the performance could be turned around. “I am fully aware that CPS London needs to perform much better than it does now and making that happen is a process which I will be closely involved with,” he added.”

Inevitably, with cuts, we are going to see a deterioration in all public services and the criminal justice system – policing through to prosecution – is going to shoulder some of that burden, no matter how ‘tough’ the politicians talk in terms of ‘Law and Order’. Is this, partly a problem caused by the CPS taking work in-house and not relying so heavily on the independent Bar? When I interviewed Keir Starmer QC back in the autumn of last year for a podcast, he told me, inter alia, that he disagreed with the views of the independent bar that the CPS was too reliant on in-house prosecutors. Chickens and coming home to roost… part of the issue here?  As always, I am interested in the views of those who practise at the sharp end.

‘Misleading’ rape conviction statistic will not be dropped, says solicitor general

“Britain’s low conviction rate for rape should continue to be highlighted according to the solicitor general despite the recommendations made in a report by Baroness Stern today.The landmark Stern review into the handling of rape complaints found that the common claim that only 6 per cent of rapes lead to a conviction was misleading and it should be emphasised that almost 60 per cent of those charged with rape are convicted.Baroness Stern said women might be put off by the low conviction rate and, in an attempt to encourage more women to report rapes, she suggested setting up specialist sexual violence centre within every police force area.

But Vera Baird, the solicitor general, said: “I do have reservations about ceasing to refer to the widely used 6 per cent figure, which reflects the percentage of reports that produce a conviction. “Although we don’t count any other offence in this way, it is particularly meaningful as it reflects the high number of rape victims who drop out before they get to court, and we really need to focus on that group, as Baroness Stern herself says.”

The Times

Police could face legal action over ‘unfair’ searches

It would seem that the Police have still not quite got the hang of policing with consent or a grip on the extent of their powers or the skill of using those powers effectively and sensitively.  The Independent reports: ” Police forces were threatened with legal action today as the Government’s equality watchdog said black and Asian Britons were still being unfairly targeted for stop and searches. Most constabularies in England and Wales are continuing to use the powers “disproportionately” against ethnic minorities, a review by the Equality and Human Rights Commission concluded.”

Are we in danger of running military campaigns through populist sentiment whipped up by the tabloids?

The Times reports: Giving soldiers human rights in war zones ‘will hamper battlefield commanders’

A mother’s battle to ensure that soldiers in war zones have their human rights protected will be challenged by the Government today as it argues that commanders will fear being sued for decisions made in the heat of battle. The Supreme Court will hear Ministry of Defence submissions over a landmark ruling that soldiers must be protected by the Human Rights Act when fighting outside their bases in countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq. Last May the Court of Appeal ruled in her favour, sparking concern among some commanders. Major-General Patrick Cordingley, who commanded 7th Armoured Brigade in the Gulf War and retired from the Army in 2000, said: “Life is hugely complex in battle situations and commanders cannot be expected to have to worry about every aspect of the Human Rights Act once they’re engaged in operations.”

The Ministry of Defence is worried that guaranteeing soldiers the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Human Rights Act when in an inherently dangerous situation would put an unreasonable burden on the Government and would affect the ability of commanders to make decisions that expose their troops to risk.

“British commanders engaged in battle with the Taleban in Afghanistan need to know that the decisions they take in hostile environments will not be challenged at a later date in the courts,” a spokesman for the MoD said.

Human Rights laws are fundamental to our society – although not all are convinced by a need for the Human Rights Act in its present form. There are dangers, however, in applying them in a way which raises the phenomenon of ‘unintended consequences’.  We have already seen how health and safety laws have hampered police in the execution of their duties – both for police officers and PCSOs – are we to go down the same route and hamstring commanders and soldiers in the field as well?   The problem, inevitably, is that there is a lawyer out there to put a case for every police officer, soldier or other public servant injured or killed in the line of duty – rightly, but are lawyers bringing cases too frequently which have no prospect of success and raising expectation in the mind of the victims and their families?  How far should the Human Rights Act and considerations of health and safety be applied to police and forces personnel – men and women who, after all, are not conscripted but volunteer, knowing the dangers and risks?

The base proposition  must be, surely, to ensure that our police and troops are properly equipped and trained to do the dangerous tasks we ask of them – but leave commanders and people in the heat of battle or criminal investigation to use their training  to best advantage without being worried that their reasoned and legal actions will result in legal liability later?

Cash rap for lawyer – The Sun

“a TOP-earning barrister was slammed yesterday for trying to increase his publicly funded fees.  Jeremey Rosenblatt had “brought discredit on the bar” in a payment claim which was “neither justified nor decent” a tribunal ruled. He was listed as the country’s highest-earning civil lawyer in legal aid in 2008, with an income of £500,000-plus.  London based Rosenblatt was found guilty of two cases of ‘discreditable conduct’ and cleared of three. The Bar Standards Board banned him from taking on new legal aid clients for three months.”

I phoned the Bar Standards Board to check the Sun’s report – only to be referred to Webber Shandwick who handle the BSB’s press and PR.I got through to an answerphone which, at 10.30 am, was a bit puzzling. While the BSB published the hearing and charges there is, as yet, no report on the tribunal’s findings on the BSB website.  This will, no doubt, go up soon. Curiously, and this may be pure coincidence… but after my phonecall to the BSB I tried to locate the BSB page with details of the hearing only to get a “404 Page not found”. Curious, indeed.

I always check acts when I see reports in newspapers about the behaviour of lawyers, in this case with the BSB.  I spoke to Webber Shandwick (using the cunning ploy of dialling their ‘direct’ number on their website,  and they provided me with a link to the story as reported in The Telegraph: Jeremy Rosenblatt: top-earning barrister guilty of inflating legal aid fee

The Telegraph report is interesting for it refers to ‘practices’  being encouraged by judges. The Telegraph noted: “The board said the barrister’s sense of personal responsibility was “anaesthetised by what he understood to be common practice”

Chambers and Partners, which publishes a directory of barristers and their chambers, describe Mr Rosenblatt as “a barrister with an uncompromising style” who “takes no prisoners” according to observers. Fluency of address and the will to win characterise this advocate, who “seems to have a tongue that runs on ball bearings”.

A tongue that runs on ball bearings?  I’ve heard of ’silver tongued’ and ‘forked tongued’ but ball bearing tongued? What on earth does that purple prose mean?  A bizarre business.

The Ides of March

Carte postale de la Cabines-on-Thames: Entente Cordiale edition

Cher Reader,

Je vous écris de ma Cabines (Staterooms) sur les questions relatives à la Entente Cordiale avec les Français … vendeurs de missiles Exocet à la ARGIES dans la guerre des Malouines, des perdants au Trafalgar et Waterloo,  et now having a larf at our economy.

The Independent reports: “David Cameron has become embroiled in an embarrassing row with Nicolas Sarkozy after it emerged that the French have complained about a series of jibes at their leader’s lack of height. French officials have lodged a protest after the Tory leader appeared to make a comment about “hidden dwarfs” in relation to a photo of himself and the 5ft 5in President Sarkozy, according to a report in The Mail on Sunday.”

The remark, made in a newspaper interview six months ago, was followed by another slight, when the Shadow Chancellor, George Osborne publicly described a box placed at a speaker’s lectern as a “Sarkozy box”.

This, following ex UKIP leader Farage’s extraordinary outburst against EU President Van Rompuy… “”Who are you? I’d never heard of you, nobody in Europe had ever heard of you,” Farage proclaimed. He said van Rompuy had the “charisma of a damp rag” and compared him to a “low-grade bank clerk”. For good measure he also insulted the EU President’s homeland, saying Belgium was “pretty much a non-country”. is ensuring that Britain is placed right at the heart of European politics.

I suppose it is fortunate that this year’s World Cup is in South Africa not Europe – because we do have form when it comes to sending yobs to Europe to run riot and behave badly to our European neighbours.

Tom Harris MP describes it as an act of political malevolence…but which Tory shouted ‘Object’ and scuppered Andrew Gwynne’s anti-poverty Private Member’s Bill?

The Guardian reports: “Pressure is growing on David Cameron to identify the mystery Tory MP who deliberately scuppered a landmark anti-poverty bill that could have stopped “vulture” bankers profiteering from the developing world’s debt burdens. Debt campaigners have reacted in fury and disbelief to the killing of the bill and Labour MP Sally Keeble, one of the bill’s backers, has accused the Conservatives of “duplicity” by pretending to back the legislation and then sabotaging it at the last minute.”

Pretty shoddy…and the failure to own up or report the MP (Pre-pubescent public school concerns about ’sneaking’? – surely not!) doesn’t really bode that well for what journalists are still calling ‘joined up government’ in the future. Why do journalists still use that awful old cliche…joined up government…joined up education policy etc etc etc..?

As Tom Harris MP said..“Whoever did it is no friend of those charities working hard to improve the lot of the developing world and to stop bankers profiting from misery.”

Hey ho… or should that be “heigh-ho, heigh-ho  its orf to work we go”… a new anthem from the Tories when they get stuck into CUTS, should they be elected on 6th May?

Anyway…. in the interests of political balance (!)… I am happy to report that Guido Fawkes is reporting..

+ + + Lord Paul Repays Fiddled £38,000 Expenses + + +

“Telegraph is reporting that Lord Paul has repaid the £38,000 in expenses he claimed for a flat he never slept in. He says it is not an admission of guilt. So why is he repaying it?”

Well…there we are… a fine Sunday morning.. le soleil is shining and all is well with the world.. now it is time for me to go and read the newspapers, drink some cafe at a cafe and smoke Les Gauloises…Bleu!  Vive la France … Vive la différence

Au revoir

Best as always

Charon

Barristerman rides again!

Barristerman
Pencil on paper
Charon
2010

Rive Gauche: Prosecuting politicians edition (and other ‘dodgy’ behaviour)…

Delighted to have a cameo role in GuyNEWS latest televised bulletin about the prosecution of MPs and the release of Nick Hogan. If you do not subscribe to Guido’s GuyNews, then you will have to wait until Monday – but you can subscribe for future GuyNews bulletins here and get them on the Friday. This week’s edition is amusing and Emily Nomates, Harry Cole and Old Holborn et al have done the business!

Update: As Lazyhena (Editor of GuyNEWS) has twittered the link to the film – why not have a look?!

I’ll come to the prosecution of the MPs shortly but, first, a word about alleged ‘trougher’ Baroness Uddin from Guido Fawkes and then a quick analysis of the extraordinary statement from Keir Starmer QC, the Director of Public Prosecutions…

+ + + Baroness Uddin – No Charges + + +

This isn’t a surprise.  The Clerk of the Parliaments, Michael Pownall, gave the Lords almost free reign to continue troughing by ruling that there is no definition of main residence for the purposes of expenses.  A ruling almost designed to make a prosecution impossible. Uncharged is not the same as innocent…

Lords place themselves beyond reach of the law

The Times reports: Peers who have claimed hundreds of thousands of pounds for homes they rarely visit will escape prosecution through a House of Lords loophole. Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions, denounced the change, which was made last month. It allows peers to designate as their main home a property they visit no more than once a month — a ruling Mr Starmer said caused him “very real difficulty”.

The Crown Prosecution Service announced yesterday that it could not bring criminal charges against Baroness Uddin, a Labour peer who received more than £100,000 in allowances by claiming that her main residence was outside London. Her family home is in Wapping, East London, where she has lived for more than a decade. Mr Starmer told The Times: “You could not have a looser definition. It would be nigh on impossible to find a neighbour who could act as a witness and who could say that a peer had not once stayed at a house — short of mounting 24-hour surveillance.”

It is quite extraordinary to have the DPP making a public statement that a prosecution cannot be brought because the Lords changed the rules. The Telegraph reports: “The Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer, has blamed the House of Lords for derailing attempts to prosecute Baroness Uddin over her expenses claims.”

While Baroness Uddin may well be relieved that she does not face prosecution, she now has to face a Lords internal investigation- as, some say, do up to 20 other peers.  This nonsense has gone on long enough.  Not all MPs worked the system and, certainly, most peers did not either.  If the Lords are to have any credibility and relevance, and win back the trust and approval of the electorate,  they have to be seen to act quickly and robustly with those of their members who have played the system.  For my part, Baroness Uddin is an irrelevance.  She has, clearly, not done anything for which she can be prosecuted, but it may well be that she has not acted with the integrity we are entitled to expect from those who sit in what, after all, is one of the Houses of Parliament. We shall see if the Lords are prepared to  deal with any form of corruption or inappropriate behaviour, whether proven in this case or not,  in their ranks.  As Guido Fawkes commented..perfectly reasonably…Uncharged is not the same as innocent…

Only the Lords can now reveal the truth of the matter.

In the meantime, the troughing MPs who are facing prosecution are pleading parliamentary privilege and argue that no court, save for Parliament, can deal with their behaviour. Guido Fawkes, as always, covers the appearance of the MPs and one peer at Westminster Magistrate: Oink! Oink!

MPs and peer to fight expenses prosecution with 1689 law

The Independent reports: Three Labour MPs and a Conservative peer told a judge today they will use a 320-year-old law to argue they should not be prosecuted over the expenses scandal. MPs David Chaytor, Elliot Morley and Jim Devine, along with Lord Hanningfield, will insist their case should not be tried by a jury and instead dealt with by House of Commons authorities.

I have no difficulty with lawyers using the law to present the best defence of their clients – it is for the courts to rule whether the argument raised in relation to the MPs is right or wrong in law.  We are, however, entitled, as many do, to argue that parliamentary privilege should not be used in this way on moral and ethical grounds.

The Independent reports:  Barrister Julian Knowles, for the MPs, told the court they would argue they were protected by parliamentary privilege, covered in the 1689 Bill of Rights. “My clients should not be understood as saying that they are above the law – that would be quite wrong,” he said. “Parliamentary privilege is part of the law – and it is for Parliament to apply the law in their cases.” He said the case was of “high constitutional importance” but added the criminal courts had “no jurisdiction” over them.

We won’t have to wait long…the troughers will have their opportunity to argue their position – hopefully from the dock – on March 30th when they appear at Southwark Crown Court. I may well exercise my right to see ‘justice being done’ and turn up myself.  I won’t need a mask… some say that my own visage is horrific enough… They are right.  In any event, the troughers are entitled to a fair trial…as everyone is and it is for the Crown Court – if it rejects the parliamentary privilege point,  to determine whether the troughing is criminal or merely “within  the (rather badly drafted) rules”

AND now… to other matters….

I am not a great fan of George Osborne as a potential Chancellor..and, it would appear that The City would prefer Ken Clarke – but I was amused by Osbore’s ridiculing of French president Sarkozy at a speech last year when he made reference to the removal of a box at the lectern, presumably used by a previous speaker, and asked if  it was Sarkozy’s box.  A career at the Foreign & Commonwealth Office may not be open to Osbore should Cameron (who is not afraid to sack Osbore), sack Osbore.

I’m afraid that I did find Osbore’s comments about the “Sarkozy box” amusing – but I was pissed when I saw it first on the news last night and I am not trying to be Chancellor. Have a look – it is amusing.

Good to see that our law firms are getting one up on American law firms…

British law firm cleared way for Lehman cover-up

The Times reports: “Linklaters, one of Britain’s leading law firms, approved controversial accounting practices that allowed Lehman Brothers to shift billions of dollars of debt off its balance sheet and mask the perilous state of the bank’s finances before its catastrophic collapse in 2008.A 2,200-page report into the collapse of the 158-year old institution has uncovered evidence that Lehman used “balance sheet manipulation” in the form of an accounting practice known as “Repo 105”, without telling investors or regulators, that made the business appear healthier.

Lehman initially had sought legal clearance from an American law firm to permit Repo 105 transactions but was denied. It then sought advice from Linklaters in London, which said that the deals were possible under English law.”

The Law Society comes under the steely gaze of RollonFriday News this week… The Law Society seeks slave labour…”The Law Society is offering a “internship” position in its Chancery Lane headquarters on no pay. For three months. The job is advertised as starting from mid May, would suit “a graduate or similar“, and is described as “varied and creative“. And a great degree of creativity will certainly be required to live in London for twelve weeks on a salary of absolutely nothing. A spokeswoman for the Society said that the internship “is an excellent addition to any CV” and claimed that “travel costs and subsistence are paid” – although there’s no mention of this in the ad.”

RollonFriday notes that law firms have been using the ‘internship ploy’ as a means of getting no cost labour (and internships may, in other areas provide good experience for young people), but asks whether The Law Society – representing the profession, should be doing so.  I’m not so sure they should be – they should pay at least the minimum wage and set an example.  Law is a business – it is not a vocation, an art studio, a craft shop, a not very well resourced publishing business….  a museum or art gallery.

Iain Dale decides to interview Nick Griffin for Total Politcs and the left starts a boycott….Crass to boycott..? Yes, I think so.

I was fortunate in having an old Punch cartoon print to scan and use  as a base – when the question of the debates between the three party leaders, soon to be shown on television, popped into my fevered brain. Do I really want to watch and listen  to Brown, Cameron and Clegg talk at me for half an hour each, with no clapping, jeering, heckling or probing questioning?  No… if I want that I can listen to the Chilcott Inquiry.  I think it may be a crashing bore – far better the anarchy of Newsnight last night with Paxo trying to control Ed Balls, Michael Gove, some guy from the Lib-Dems and a host of rather unusual people –   including one of Lord SurAlanSugarpuff’s sidekicks  who has a bit part on The Apprentice in the ‘interview’ episode towards the end. Mr Clive Littman did not look entirely comfortable being on Newsnight – politics is a bit more anarchic than business! I could be wrong and he was just bored.

I will watch the debates – well, at least one of them -  before taking a view – to do otherwise, of course, would be crass.
And talking about Crass… Left wing crassness was was drawn to my attention  by Tom Harris MP on Twitter.

Tom Harris MP writes:

Another day, another boycott in the blogosphere

“SOME might say that, as the author of a blog that did rather well in the last two Total Politics Blog Awards, I have more to lose than others by indulging in a boycott of this year’s contest, as proposed by Though Cowards Flinch.

The boycott is being suggested as a response to Total Politics publisher Iain Dale agreeing to interview Nick Griffin for the latest issue, a decision which resulted in the resignation of Labour MP Denis MacShane from the TP board.

And of course I sympathise. And I admit I raised an eyebrow when Iain announced on his blog that the interview was happening. But I won’t take part in the boycott, for a number of reasons.

The first of those is that Griffin and his odious chums are now democratically-elected representatives of the British people. I wish it were not so, but it is. And ignoring the BNP now isn’t too far from ignoring the views of however many people voted for them. Not a particularly democratic principle, I think you’ll find. And I trust that all those who now want to boycott Total Politics also refuse to watch Question Time…… “

Tom goes on to give further reasons..and I agree. I do not like the BNP.  I do not find Griffin an attractive politician.  I abhor his views – but if we are to learn, reason, combat extreme right wing ideologies,  fight our corner and have a real and mature democracy we have to be prepared to listen to people who think differently.  Just listening to other like minded  people means we tend to hear like minded things.. not for me.  I am open to all viewpoints – then I can think about what is said or done and respond accordingly.

So.. I may disagree with some of Iain Dale’s viewpoints, which is hardly surprising given that he is  Tory and I vote Labour - but Dale does analyse politics well, he is measured more often than not and particularly outside election fever time, he is prepared to publish interesting books/magazines and he is prepared to argue and stand his corner.  I for one will look forward to his interview with Nick Griffin.  I suspect that Iain Dale will ask awkward questions – and he did give readers a chance to suggest questions.

Here is the link John Halton refers to in his tweet above…

J.S. Mill on Holocaust denial

Well, sort-of. Here is Mill’s summary of the reasons for allowing open discussion of contrary opinions:

In the meantime…. since it is election time…. a bit of Labour propaganda for you in the pic above… subliminal messaging!

Nick Hogan behind bars again.. this time in a PUB! Good effort!

Old Holborn reports….. “Nick Hogan is safely back behind bars. Not the bars which the government sought to contain him behind for failing to act as an unpaid policeman and report his customers for smoking – even when he was not on the premises to witness them to doing so – but the bars, the snug, and the restaurant of his own private property, the Swan with Two Necks, in Chorley, Manchester. It was with the greatest pleasure that I was able to telephone Denise Hogan, his wife, a few minutes ago, and ask her to go and collect her husband from the Forest Bank jail in Pendlebury. The indefatigable Old Holborn had moved heaven and earth, above and beyond the call of duty, to arrive at the jail with £8,664.50p in cash, to exchange with the Custody Officer there in return for Nick Hogan’s freedom.”

An Excellent effort by the political blogosphere - and Gudio Fawkes’ extra push was noted recently by Old Holborn.  Those who donated when I gave this worthwhile campaign a bit of publicity on the blog ten days ago… I’m sure it was appreciated!  I gather that Emily Nomates and ToryBear covered this for GuyNEWS – video on Guido’s blog soon…

Manchester Evening News carried the full report, including a picture of Old Holborn turning up with the cash!

Can Osbore count on Number Eleven… or even count to 11?

Poll: City would prefer Clarke to Osborne

Politics Home: City workers would prefer Ken Clarke to George Osborne as Chancellor, according to new research by PoliticsHome and City AM. Vince Cable came in third place on the City’s preference list.

Law Review:Prisons, insider dealing, fraud and incest

Judges fear prisons will burst under new rules

The Times reports: “Britain’s leading criminal judges warn that a shake-up of sentencing guidelines could push prison overcrowding to crisis levels. They fear that the Sentencing Council, which comes into force next month with the aim of bringing more consistency to courts, will not curb judges’ use of custody, as hoped, but actually increase it.

The Council of Circuit Judges, which represents 600 judges in England and Wales, told The Times that they would be left with no freedom to fit punishments to the specific circumstances of a case. They fear that cuts to rehabilitation programmes will leave judges with no option in some cases but to jail offenders. Judge Keith Cutler, vice-president of the Council of Circuit Judges, said that the Sentencing Council requires that judges “must follow” guidelines, rather than “take account” of them.”

Criminal Law is not my specialist subject, so I would be particularly interested to have the views of Criminal Law practitioners who read my blog on this issue.  The argument is that the new guidelines will provide greater consistency.  What does this ‘consistency’ really mean?  Do criminals behave consistently across the country?  Is burglary, for example, always the same? manslaughter?  Surely not?  The tabloids are always keen to pick up on judicial leniency – often railing against the judicial system without actually attending the trial to listen to the evidence, to serve up ‘anger and outrage’ to those of their readers who wander about with flaming torches in one hand and a length of rope in the other hand.

The Tories say that this is a naked attempt to reduce pressure on prison places  because judges have to take account of the availability of prison places – but it seems that a possible ‘unintended consequence’ of the new principle will actually incease pressure on prison places as judges will not have the same discretion to leniency.

The Times notes: “A Ministry of Justice spokesman insisted that judges’ discretion would remain unfettered and would be respected. “There will not be an American-style sentencing grid or matrix,” he said. “Judges will still have the discretion and flexibility to give the sentence they think most appropriate. Judicial discretion in sentencing in individual cases is the cornerstone of our justice system. We are not going to change that.”

Ex-Cazenove partner found guilty of insider dealing

The FSA  has notched up a success with their well broadcast policy of getting tough on insider dealing.

The Times reports: Malcolm Calvert, a former partner at Cazenove, the Queen’s stockbroker, has been convicted of insider dealing and faces up to seven years in prison. A jury at Southwark Crown Court today returned a guilty verdict for Calvert, 65, on five counts of insider dealing after 18 hours of deliberation. He was acquitted of a further seven counts…..

….

Four people have been convicted of insider dealing in the past 12 months, three of whom received immediate custodial sentences and the other a suspended sentence. Calvert’s conviction is a significant victory for the Financial Services Authority, which is bringing a series of insider-dealing prosecutions as part of a wider campaign to clamp down on financial crime. Rob Moulton, a partner at law firm Nabarro, said: “This is a big victory for the FSA, as it is their first criminal success against a “city” name. At a time when FSA is fighting for its survival, this conviction is a real boost to FSA’s credible deterrence strategy.”

The good times seem to be coming to an end… this is clear when a City lawyer remarks..”"Prosecuting financial crimes has often proved problematic, but the FSA is on something of a roll. It has said it wants to be seen as a ’scary regulator’ and this case is going to help to get that message across.”

Margaret Cole, director of enforcement and financial crime at the FSA, said: “The guilty verdict is a shot across the bow for any City workers who may be tempted to trade using insider knowledge.”

It seems that the FSA may not be as clever as they think they are….. the comments section on the story is interesting… this, being an example of the criticism..

Pat Sheehan wrote:

“How on earth can you conclude that “Calvert’s conviction is a significant victory for the Financial Services Authority”?
Surely, they simply caught a sprat while the mackerel escaped: “… they could not identify who the inside source at Cazenove was …”
It would have been a significant victory only if we could all move forward in reasonable belief that from here on Cazenove (or Caz associations) would treat our affairs confidentially.”

In the meantime…

Fraud and corruption is costing Britain £30 billion a year

Jonathan Fisher QC, writing in the Times, has an interesting piece… “It is almost 25 years since the Roskill Report published its radical recommendations for improving the way complex fraud, corruption and financial market crimes are tackled. In that time the complexity of business transactions and the amount of activity in financial markets have both increased dramatically.

Yet the many institutions that investigate and prosecute these crimes, including the Serious Fraud Office, the Financial Services Authority (FSA), the Office of Fair Trading, the Crown Prosecution Service (Fraud Prosecution Service and Revenue & Customs Division) and the City of London Police Economic Crime Directorate, remain hamstrung by a haphazardly developed system of overlapping responsibilities, a dispersion of powers and unnecessary duplication of manpower and specialist resources. As if this weren’t enough, these agencies have to operate under differing statutory frameworks, further exacerbating the problems.

The advantages of establishing a unified agency, as initially proposed by Lord Roskill and advocated again today in Fighting Fraud and Financial Crime, my report published by Policy Exchange, are even more pertinent than they were then. Important changes to the criminal law also need to be made to enable our criminal justice system to cope with complex fraud trials and to bring the perpetrators of such crimes to account……”

And, an even more depressing case…

Litany of failures that let father rape his daughters for years

The Guardian: Authorities apologise over missed warnings of incest as report reveals culture of ‘quiet word’ rather than action

Nick Holmes of Binary Law asks… Tired of blogging? – tired of life

Nick notes that while the young are not blogging so much – this may well account for the fact thst Geeklawyer doesn’t blog as much as he used to.  On Twitter Geeklawyer regularly cites his age as being 28 or 29 depending on how pissed he is when he tweets! Nick also notes that he is p****d off with spammers and those who post comments like..”Great blog post… I’ve been looking for a site like this…I’ll come back@.

Nick – do what I do… re-direct their ’service’ to a dodgy porn site.  I did that with a law firm, sent them an email to say that I had done this and… hey presto… I had a very apologetic email back asking me to delete their comment – most satisfying.

I have a bit of ‘fever’… so not writing as much as usual… a very tedious fever which prevents me from even drinking a ot of wine. Brighter today, though..so, hopefully, normal service will be resumed on the Rioja and writing front.

And finally…
Romanian street sign warns drivers of ‘drunk pedestrians’

The Telegraph reports: “Street signs warning Romanian drivers to be careful of drunken pedestrians lying on roads were erected by road safety chiefs worried about the “despairing” levels of accidents.”

I am fairly sure that the bottle pictured above is not Rioja.

The concerns of our times!

College of Law Chief Executive Nigel Savage discusses the future of the legal services market in the wake of the Legal Services Act and questions the impact it will have on careers in the profession.

Max Clifford drops News of the World phone hacking action in £1m deal

The Guardian reports: “Tabloid accused of buying silence after persuading celebrity PR agent to drop case over interception of voicemail messages”

The News of The World appears to be rushing to stop a flood of litigation – as the Guardian states…“The News of the World was tonight accused of buying silence in the phone-hacking scandal after it agreed to pay more than £1m to persuade the celebrity PR agent Max Clifford to drop his legal action over the interception of his voicemail messages. The settlement means that there will now be no disclosure of court-ordered evidence which threatened to expose the involvement of the newspaper’s journalists in a range of illegal information-gathering by private investigators.”

Of perhaps greater interest to political animals, particularly those on the Labour or left, will be the effect this has on Andy Coulson, former editor of the News of The World and currently enjoying time in the sun as the Tory Party’s Malcolm Tucker/Alastair Campbell  communications supremo.

The Guardian notes: ” The case had potentially important implications for Andy Coulson, media adviser to the Conservative leader, David Cameron, who edited the News of the World at the time of the illegal activity and who has said that he does not remember any of his journalists breaking the law……..(NOTW Journos) – Goodman and Mulcaire were jailed in January 2007 for intercepting the voicemail of a total of eight victims, including Clifford and Taylor. The News of the World originally claimed that it had no knowledge of any of the illegal activity. Coulson resigned on the grounds that he carried ultimate responsibility.”

Hey ho…. but do have a look at Beau Bo D’Or take on the Max Clifford story….

I did enjoy this from Overlawyered…

From attorney Bob Ambrogi, on Twitter: “This felt wrong: Shortly after heated call with lawyer saying he’d sue my client, he sent me invite to connect on LinkedIn.” Related: Amy Alkon.

And this from John Bolch at Family Lore… “As humans, we need to evolve more” – John writes...”Nissenbaum explains how relationship breakdown brings out the worst in many people, especially where children are involved. “Every parent who has ever pushed for custody insists he or she is doing it out of love,” he says in his book. “Hate is more like it…. Parents throw everything they have at the other side, the more disgusting, horrendous and despicable, the better.” John ends…”Yep: been there, done that.”

Law Review:Big Bang and big bucks for lawyers and others…

Civil servants ‘told to imitate answering machines’

The Guardian reports: “Civil servants who continued working during yesterday’s national strike have revealed they were told to pretend to be answering machines to cope with an overload of calls from the public. Staff at the Department for Work and Pensions in Carlisle said today they were given a brief script to read out before hanging up, in the style found on telephone answering machines.

The instruction by managers was initially leaked on Facebook after chitchat between strikers and colleagues who had stayed at work. One worker said: “To begin with, we all found it hard to keep a straight face, and occasionally, I slipped up and I ended up giving my name to the person who was calling.”

The staff said their fake-robot message was issued for peak lunchtime, between midday and 2pm. The script read: “Due to the high volume of enquiries we are currently experiencing we are unable to take your call. Please call back later.”

I wake each morning at 4.00 (ish), more often than not looking forward to seeing what idiocy has taken place overnight in politics, so I was not surprised to read in my RSS feeder this absurd story about the civil service. I am almost tempted, as I have to telephone my local council today, to pretend to be an ‘electronic digital telephone machine’  myself and say…

“Good morning… if you would like to know why I am calling, press 1…if you would like to know if I have anything sensible to say when you do speak to me…press 2…. if you would like to do some work for your inflation proof pensioned up salary and actually do something of value for one of your clients…me…press 3″

The Times reports: City law firms are preparing to raise millions of pounds from external investors as the British legal market braces for its own version of Big Bang. At least 20 firms are planning to raise outside funding under rules that will allow non-lawyers to own a stake in legal practices for the first time, accountants advising the firms told The Times.

Three of these firms are planning to raise a war chest for acquisitions of more than £20 million, either through an initial public offering or from private equity investors. The new rules, which will come into force next year, are expected to transform the legal sector, as deregulation did financial services in the 1980s.

Jeremy Black, a partner at Deloitte, the Big Four accountant, said: “It’s going to change the way firms look at the provision of legal services. Nobody will be untouched by these changes.”

There is no doubt that change is coming and the traditional view of law as a ‘profession’ will finally cede to the values and mores of the markets… where business is business.  This does not, of course, mean that lawyers will be any less professional…they will have to be even more ‘professional’ (but in a different sense)  because if they go the full route and list on the stock exchange they will be subject to ’sentiment’…and sentiment can be a very hard task master.

I did like this paragraph from The Times…”Many partners remain sceptical. They argue that external funding will dilute their partnership culture and force them to give up too much control of their businesses.”

The writer forgot to add…“and too much of their profits”. It does, however, seem an attractive way of capitalising the business. Traditional law firm structures are ‘thinly capitalised’ given that partners withdraw much of the profit each year.  I suspect that full flotation may take some time…and a fair bit of ‘kicking and screaming’.  We shall, of course, see in time.

You may like to listen to a podcast I did for The College of Law Inside Track series with Sir Nigel Knowles, CEO of DLA Piper. Sir Nigel Knowles gave a very sanguine view of the future of the big law firms and the issue of external capital.

Bar Standards Board raps BPP Law School for taking on too many students

While I covered this some weeks ago, The Lawyer adds some interesting points about BPP plans to turn themselves into a fully fledged university.

Offenders who commit ‘grave crimes’ must be named, says judge

The Telegraph reports: “A judge said the public deserved to know the identities of offenders who committed ”grave crimes” as he allowed the naming of a juvenile who killed an innocent peacemaker with a single punch.

This judicial view does not, of course (hopefully), impact on the Venables situation where issues of a fair trial preclude identification.

Jon Venables could be killed if his identity is revealed, key judge warns

The Guardian reports: “Baroness Butler-Sloss, who granted anonymity to James Bulger’s killers, defends Jack Straw’s secrecy stance”

The Sun appears not to have anything on the Venables case this morning.  I suspect the bandwagon is moving on.. there are other more important stories for them t reveal to an adoring public.

It is not just the tabloids who are getting in on the ‘Shock’ act…

The Independent has this…

Paedophile ‘alarm button’ was rejected by Facebook, say police

And… if that isn’t enough to slake your taste for salacious titbits (with an intellectual spin)  this morning… they have this…

Jealous lover killed ex over web photos

Getting back to a bit of hard law….

Supreme Court rejects Christian registrar’s claim

The Independent reports: ” A Christian registrar who lost her job after she refused to carry out civil partnership ceremonies has been refused permission to appeal to the Supreme Court. Ms Ladele, who became a registrar in 2002, said she could not carry out such ceremonies “as a matter of religious conscience”. She claimed she suffered ridicule and bullying as a result of her stance and said she had been harassed and discriminated against by Islington Council in north London.”

Yesterday The telegraph reported: “A pharmacist refused to issue contraceptive pills prescribed by a doctor because it was against her religion.”

Given that employers were not entitled to discriminate against these employees when taking them on for jobs where, presumably, they knew they would have to carry out lawful work which may be contrary to their religions it is puzzling why they applied for the jobs in the first place.  I have little sympathy.

Professor John Flod (RATs – Random academic thoughts) has an interesting film on legal education to look at…

UKCLE’s Ideas on the Future of Legal Education

“My friend, Julian Webb, is who is director of UKCLE and professor of legal education, has put together an interesting short film about the influences on the future of legal education in the UK. I think it also informs discussion about legal education elsewhere.”

Hat Tip to John Flood for picking up this cartoon from The New Yorker

The Fat Bigot has an interesting piece on recessions…

We must avoid the Japanese problem – “Anatole Kaletsky wrote an interesting piece in the Times today highlighting the Japanese problem. In an attempt to stimulate its way out of recession in the early 1990s Japan increased government spending and borrowed to pay for it. This went on for several years and now, almost twenty years later, the cost of servicing the borrowing is so high there is no additional money available to repay the principal sums borrowed. Japan’s economy has, as a result, seen virtually no growth in GDP.”

Capitalists@Work are running with this... The end of free speech and flaming on the internet

***

Cassons
I am delighted to report that a leading Accountancy practice, specialists in dealing with the tax and financial affairs of solicitors and barristers is supporting our free resource project at Insite Law Magazine.  Cassons for Counsel have a couple of articles which students and practitioners may find of particular interest

Will my pupillage awards be taxed?

There are differences in the tax treatments of pupillage awards from Inns as opposed to those from Chambers.  Read here for more details.

HMRC clampdown on barristers!

A specialist unit has been set up by HMRC to conduct investigations into barristers’ tax affairs. See here for the areas in which they are most likely to be investigating.

Law review: Madrasas and the rule of the mob.

You have to laugh… the Tories are spending a fortune shoring up the idea that they are supporting the NHS and then the Young Britons Foundation pops up in the form of their Chief Executive, Donal Blaney – a lawyer – with talk of waterboarding, shooting down environmental protesters and another spokesman saying the NHS is the biggest waste of time in the UK.

See also: The next stunt? – A Tory ‘ Madrasa’… a Madrasa? Mon Dieu!

Many Tories, deny that there is anything sinister about the YBF and I accept that we are not dealing here with a group of crypto-fascists with muscle spasm problems in their right arms – but, clearly, the views expressed by Donal Blaney are a bit ‘right of sanity’ if he is not joking about waterboarding being acceptable.

The Tories are scrambling to disassociate themselves with the YBF – but they do have a bit of a problem…according to The Guardian they appear to be outsourcing training to the YBF at a cost of ‘hundreds of pounds per person’. Of course… it is possible (and in the minds of some Tories..probably a certainty) that The Guardian is putting the boot into the YBF for ‘political reasons’.

The Guardian noted: “A spokesman for the Conservative party said people attend YBF courses of their own volition and they are not financially supported by the party.

Conservative Central Office would not comment on whether the planned YBF training courses being promoted by Conservative Future will go ahead in the light of the revelations.”

Jon Venables and the Rule of Law

Our country may, according to Cameron et al, be ‘broken’, our country may be ‘broke’, our country may be dysfunctional and populated with venal, self important, self serving and selfish people – an apocalyptic vision made manifest each day by the Sun and The Daily Mail – but, thankfully they are in the minority.

I cannot begin to imagine the pain and misery suffered by Jamie Bulger’s mother and father – few have suffered the horror of having a child murdered, far more intense arguably than accidental death or even honourable death in military service and only those who have suffered such loss, truly, can even begin to understand and empathise meaningfully.  I do not, however, support the view taken by Jamie Bulger’s parents and 70,000 others who have signed The Sun’s petition that they have a right to know every detail about Jon Venables.  The principle of a fair trial trumps such individual rights and misery – for otherwise we return to the law of the lynch mob and not , as former DPP Sir Ken Macdonald QC states...” (the) steely progress of a criminal case to its just conclusion, whether that is conviction or acquittal.”

There is every prospect, if Venables’ identity is revealed – that some vigilante or criminal in prison will exact ‘ extra-judicial justice’ whether by throwing hot sugar water over Venables or worse, killing him – for the glory of being applauded as a hero by those who seek justice through the lynch mob’s rope.

I’m with Sir ken Macdonald QC on this…he writes: “None of us, of course, owns the truth in any of this. But we may suspect that, since he has been returned to jail, Jon Venables could have done something sufficiently serious to face trial in the future. And what if there are others to be tried alongside him? It is a racing certainty they will argue that any case must be abandoned if the jury has an inkling about their companion in crime. It would be a shame if a tabloid conclusion that this young man has done something awfully wrong turns out to be true and yet he can never be tried because a couple of editors were too blind to our system of justice to see how they might frustrate it.”

Today’s story for Editors eager to please and appease could well lead to far greater injustice.  There was a quote on twitter yesterday to the effect… “They should have hung them when they were 10.  Killing children is wrong”  Ignoring the unintended irony in such a quote… that, it would seem, is a very common view – but they do say that if there was ever a referendum on the death penalty in Britain – the majority would bring back the rope. I would not.  Flawed though our system of justice is (and probably always will be in an imperfect society)  – it is by far better than the rule of the mob.

Jon Venables: the right to know

Justice cannot be served at trial unless Jack Straw holds his nerve on unmasking Jon Venables
Sir Ken Macdonald

Jack Straw statement to Parliament on Jon Venables

Jack Straw was called to the house this afternoon at 3.30 to give a statement on the recall of Jon Venables to prison.  The press speculation on Venables’ return has been quite extraordinary.  Straw made it clear that he had every sympathy for the the parents of James Bulger – but at the request of the Police and DPP information on Venables was suppressed to ensure that there would be a fair trial.

Dominic Grieve, Shadow Justice Secretary, stated that the Justice Secretary was entitled to support but he had to earn that support by making a clear statement about the way the justice system worked.  Grieve also stated that the Justice Secretary could have avoided all the press speculation had he been more clear about how the recall system works and to explain the need for a fair trial.

For my own part – the rule of law, the principle of fair trials, is more important than individual needs, and while I can well understand the distress of James Bulger’s family, a fair trial on the new offences would be impossible, in all likelihood, if more information was given at this stage.  The mood of the house was with Straw’s position and the Rule of Law – thankfully.

The press has not been that helpful here and, I suspect, the reports they have published may well have added to the distress of James Bulger’s parents.  I would go further and say that the press has followed its own needs, rather than the needs of the Bulger parents.

Postcard from The Staterooms-on-Thames: Internet anger and other matters

Dear Reader

There is a lot of anger on the net, on discussion forums, in the comments section of blogs and even on Twitter.  Separating the techniques of the professional anger people who use ‘anger’ to make a point – for that can be useful, there do appear to be a lot of morons and trolls out there who have nothing better to do  after wetting their beds than to abuse and insult people on twitter or bloggers who try to express ideas and views.

John Bolch at Family Lore has had enough of people wanting to grind their axes on his blog…. Please, grind your axes elsewhere.

John writes…” I try to keep this blog a reasonably open place, where people can state their opinions freely, whether or not they coincide with mine (a quick read through the blog will confirm this to any neutral reader). Unfortunately, the privilege to comment freely is all too often abused by those with an axe to grind, and too much time on their hands (alas, it seems that this is probably the lot of family law bloggers). Too often, posts are hijacked by such people, whose comments often have little or no relevance to the point of the original post. I’m sorry, but if you want to grind your axe about lawyers biased against fathers/secret family courts/whatever went wrong when you experienced the family justice system, then please do so elsewhere, and let’s keep comments here relevant and civil.

So, if your comment is not approved, or is deleted, now you know why. Of course, defamatory or spam comments will also be rejected.

Politicians are used to maniacs turning up on their blogs and most have a policy of ‘be civil’. Richard Dawkins has now got involved…

Richard Dawkins takes on the Net

The BBC reports: Richard Dawkins has intervened in a dispute about the moderation of his official website. He says the nastiness of comments added to the site is a sign of “something rotten in the internet culture”.

It appears that the site, which describes itself as a “clear thinking oasis” has been muddied by thoughtless abusiveness.

Doubtlessly, some will say that the stridency of the new atheism movement may partly explain the aggressiveness one finds on the Dawkins website; that if Dawkins’s fan-base is populated by those who enjoy the sharpness of his verbal assault on belief and believers, then those acolytes might be tempted to outdo one another in futher sharpness.

But, to be fair, the Richard Dawkins I have met is a gentleman and a scholar, and I am not at all suprised by his stand against incivility.

We all get angry.  These days, I prefer not to…in fact, I go out of my way not to get angry. I prefer to laugh and I would far rather parody something than write a diatribe to make a point. Fortunately, I get interesting and surreal comments from relatively insane sane people on my blog and the bed wetters and trolls tend not to be terribly interested in anything I write or comment on. I have a pretty open policy on comments, but I don’t tolerate people slagging each other off – unless they do it with style, elan and panache - and anyone who comes on to my comments section to say “Great… I’ve been looking for a site like this..keep up the good work” runs the risk that I will divert their URL for their law service (or other commercial activity) to a dodgy porn site.

I am pleased to announce, should anyone be daft enough to be abusive, troll-like or unpleasant on  my blog, that I have a new award – Charon’s Bed-Wetter Award….

It is highly unlikely that I shall ever have to make this award… but I shall do so, possibly, if I get seriously tedious people writing unpleasant nonsense…or law firms (and other commercial organisations) who try to get free Google juice by putting inane and irrelevant comments on a post and then link to their crappy service!

++Target Reached++

Old Holborn and Anna Raccoon did the business with the help of a lot of people on the blogosphere… I was happy to support this (and did) and thank you to those of my readers who did

Anna Raccoon reports: “A quick update to let everyone know what the state of play is with Nick Hogan.

The Blogosphere has reacted in magnificent fashion, the target has been reached in a mere 4 days. There are legal technicalities which Denise is fully aware of, which will be sorted very soon – and he will be home.

I have spoken to Denise several times today, as has Nick, from prison.  He is very much happier than he was yesterday, considerably cheered by the huge bag of cards and letters he has received this morning, and Denise is fully aware of everything that is going on.

My heart goes out to Denise, she has been subject to constant rumour and scurrilous speculation, which has only made a difficult situation more difficult to bear, but rest assured, she is in constant contact with Old Holborn and myself, and wants me to thank you all from the bottom of her heart.

They said it couldn’t be done – well it couldn’t without Old Holborn’s help, or Guido’s final push, but this has been a non-partisan, non-political, non-campaigning, tour de force on behalf of ordinary people who were shocked at an ordinary man being jailed for failing to report his fellow citizens.

Well done everyone!”

Yes… indeed! (I nicked the No Smoking pic from Old Holborn’s blog) Best as always…. have a good week

Charon

Law Review: Balls – appropriation of, the Nanny state and dog’s to get legal representation.

The level of political debate, as the election gets closer, continues to decline.  The Guardian reports…

Peter Mandelson raises stakes in Lord Ashcroft row

Business secretary says Ashcroft has Cameron ‘by the balls’ and that affair reveals ‘fundamental weakness’

The Guardian reports: “In a highly personal attack, the business secretary said in an interview with the Guardian that Ashcroft had Cameron “by the balls”, the affair showed Cameron was “too weak to pick a fight with his own party” and the Tories were “fundamentally unchanged”.

The story is no longer about non-doms – Labour has a few of those lurking in the deep as well – but about integrity and controlling power. Ashcroft, having made  undertakings about tax to a point that Hague said publicly that Ashcroft would be paying tens of millions in taxes, did a quiet deal behind the scenes to ‘alter the effect of the undertaking’ and then, it would appear, kept Hague in the dark until ‘two months ago’.  Hague then seems to have kept Cameron in the dark, given Cameron’s statement that he knew only a month ago.   It is clear now why Cameron wanted to draw a line under the mater and tried to fob the Press off by saying that the horse was now dead so there was no need to continue flogging it.

Unfortunately for Cameron, the horse is very much alive and the left continues to probe and raise the issue.

Photography under threat: The shooting party’s over

The Times, a bit behind the curve on this issue, asks: Did you hear the one about the mother banned from taking a snapshot of her baby in the pool? Or the student prevented from photographing Tower Bridge at sunset? Be warned. The authorities now have the power to confiscate your camera — or even arrest you — for daring to take a picture in public…

The Independent covered this some time back and, indeed, so did the blogs but it remains, nevertheless an important issue about Police, Police Community Support Officers and others exceeding their powers and, of course, Parliament giving these people too many powers. While I am disposed towards the Labour party their record on civil liberties and the explosion of new criminal laws is very poor  and the Libertarians, left or right leaning, are right – government needs to curb its taste for knee jerking.  Clarkson got it right recently when he said that one man getting on to a plane with exploding underpants  has produced fear in the minds of Americans who seem curiously afraid of a lot of things compared to British and Europeans more used to terror outrages on our soil and our government has followed suit with a raft of poorly thought out laws giving poorly trained police et al the opportunity to ‘big it up’ in their high Viz yellow jackets.

Whatever flavour or colour of government wins the next election – the nanny state tendency and political correctness really does have to be looked at. I read somewhere at the weekend that Harriet Harman has now managed to ban use of  the term ‘Chairman’ in parliament.  I have never been a great fan of gender when it comes to nouns (This is something foreigners do with their languages!) and I can’t really get hot under the collar about a female leading a panel being described as ‘Chair’ or ‘Chairwoman’  when there are rather more pressing issues to worry about.  I am not running the country.  Ms Harman is.  Perhaps she could get on with doing so on the ‘bigger issues of our times’?

There is far too much interference in our lives from central and local government. CCTV cameras watch our every move, microchips are fitted in our rubbish bins to make sure we don’t overfill them or put in the wrong stuff, PCSOs, when they are not gathered in groups eating buns on street corners, are misapplying the law with tourists and members of the public, police officers are hesitating to break doors down to save people’s lives because of health & safety laws,… the list goes on and on and on… and worse, our government (and I doubt whether the Tories would be any better) continues with kneejerk policy making nd dancing to the tune of tabloids who are more interested in selling newspapers to their mass readership than the fine detail and intricacy of good government.

An example of dancing to the tune of the tabloids is the clamour for the government to release details as to why Jon Venables has been returned to prison.  I was appalled, as all were, by the horrific abduction and killing of a very young boy by two  juveniles all those years ago.  I have every sympathy for the family who continue to serve a ‘life sentence’ of misery as a result of their  son being  murdered, but I do also feel that as Venables now faces serious charges, law and procedure must be followed to ensure that Venables gets a fair trial for the offence he committed – a serious offence which merited his being returned to prison. Surely everyone is entitled to that… or do the tabloids have a greater right than the individual?

Iraq inquiry: Gordon Brown says war was ‘right’

The BBC reports: “Gordon Brown has told the Iraq inquiry the war had been “right” – and troops had all the equipment they needed. The PM also insisted he had not been kept in the dark by Tony Blair despite not being aware of some developments.”

Godon Brown gave a very competent performance at the Iraq Inquiry – perhaps aided by the lack of forensic questioning skills of the inquisitors which allowed him to evade the difficult follow up questions – or to be more accurate, move on to the next question because there were no penetrating follow up questions as there would have been had experienced counsel been handling the questioning. Armed Forces ‘top brass’ popped up on Newsnight and elsewhere to say various things – ranging from Brown being ‘economical with the truth’ to making disingenuous’ statements.  Certainly, Brown gave a far better performance than I expected – and he knew his brief and the detail.  More importantly, he had the balls… to use a metaphor from the opening section of this Review… to acknowledge the debt we owe to our armed forces and their families and to acknowledge the suffering of the families.  Blair did not do so.  Unfortunately, Brown is now being castigated by the press, bloggers and others for making political capital by going to visit the troops in Afghanistan.  Sometimes, a prime minister just cannot win.

Libel success fees limited to 10%

The Law Society Gazette reports: “The success fees charged by lawyers in defamation cases will be cut by 90% after justice secretary Jack Straw laid an order to amend the laws on ‘no win, no fee’ agreements. From April the maximum uplift charged by lawyers for winning defamation cases taken on under conditional fee agreements will be reduced from 100% to 10% of their original fee, subject to parliamentary approval.

The Ministry of Justice said the amendment is designed to prevent legal costs in defamation cases spiralling out of control. It follows its four-week consultation ‘Controlling costs in defamation proceedings’, which was published in January.Straw said the move would ‘help level the playing field’ so that journalists and writers can continue to publish articles that are in the public interest without incurring disproportionate legal bills.

So… are things looking up?

The Lawyer reports: Eversheds has become the latest firm to reopen its graduate recruitment programme after confirming it has offered positions to all of the trainees it deferred in 2009 as well as its scheduled 2010 cohort. In total the firm expects to take on 76 trainee solicitors in 2010 made up of 49 from its 2010 intake and the 27 candidates it deferred from 2009.

CEO Bryan Hughes said: “Whilst the economy remains fragile in some areas we’re seeing the benefits of having proactively managed our business as our performance continues to improve.”

Soon every Swiss dog could have his day in court

The Times reports: “There is no better place than Switzerland to be a chicken. Or a hamster. Or even — though the jury is still out on this — a goldfish.

The reason is that the country has an extraordinary set of animal protection laws that closely define the obligations of pet owners and farmers.

Now it is about to go a step farther: a national referendum tomorrow will decide whether to allow animals official legal representation.

The canton of Zurich already has an animal advocate, Antoine Goetschel, a kind of courtroom Dr Dolittle who, for the past two years, has been fighting the corner for flogged horses, depressed Dalmatians and tortured fish.

A “yes” vote will place publicly funded animal welfare lawyers, like Mr Goetschel, across the country. “Then I think the Government should create some form of academy or educational forum for animal barristers,” Mr Goetschel said. “These are not skills learnt at law school.”

This may well be a step too far for us… but we aren’t far behind.  I understand, following recent tabloid reports about dangerous dogs ripping faces off children, that the government plans to bring in a National Dog Owning test before anyone can keep a dog.  I’m reasonably sure, without needing to set up a Quango to look into it,  that the great majority of pet owners in this country love and  care for their animals well – but, yet again, a very small minority provides an opportunity for nanny to get her ruler out and be stern…. will this absurd knee jerking interference never end?

More later in the day…

The next stunt? – A Tory ‘ Madrasa’… a Madrasa? Mon Dieu!

Few things surprise me these days, so when I woke at 3.30 this morning and started reading the newspapers online I barely registered more than mild astonishment when I read the Guardian story on the new Tory Madrasa!  I’m afraid that I also started humming ‘Springtime for Hitler’ – a truly marvellous bit of parody from The Producers. (Watch Springtime for Hitler on YouTube)   I seem to hum that song quite a bit these days when I read daft stories about the Tories…. or should that be…. stories about daft Tories?  ( Update: I am more than prepared to accept that Eric Pickles is, as my friend Peter Groves has said in the comments section – a decent guy. I agree. He is usually entertaining on TV … and is known to have a sense of humour.  You only need to see his tweets on Twitter to appreciate that. ….  I am just faffing abart with my captions and what follows! It is Saturday!).

‘Tory madrasa’ preaches radical message to would-be MPs

The Guardian: Candidates trained by rightwing group that rubbishes NHS, dismisses global warming and backs waterboarding

Tory parliamentary candidates have undergone training by a rightwing group whose leadership has described the NHS as “the biggest waste of money in the UK”, claimed global warming is “a scam” and suggested that the waterboarding of prisoners can be justified. At least 11 prospective Tory candidates, an estimated seven of whom have a reasonable chance of winning their seats, have been delegates or speakers at training conferences run by the Young Britons’ Foundation, which claims to have trained 2,500 Conservative party activists.

The YBF chief executive, Donal Blaney, who runs the courses on media training and policy, has called for environmental protesters who trespass to be “shot down” by the police and that Britain should have a US-style liberal firearms policy. In an article on his own website, entitled Scrap the NHS, not just targets, he wrote: “Would it not now be better to say that the NHS – in its current incarnation – is finished?”

Blaney has described the YBF as “a Conservative madrasa” that radicalises young Tories. Programmes have included trips to meet neo-conservative groups in the US and to a shooting range in Virginia to fire submachine guns and assault rifles.

There is ‘another’ Guardian story on this …

Radicalised Tories ready to take on Labour’s big guns

Guardian: Rightwing group Young Britons’ Foundation has begun to earn reputation as ‘Conservative madrasa’

Given that Donal Blaney is a member of the legal profession – he is a solicitor and senior party of GriffinLaw – perhaps an unfortunate choice of name given another well known right wing Griffin? – I wanted to find out more about the YBF – Young Britons Foundation and Donal Blaney.

Donal Blaney is senior partner of Griffin Law – all perfectly straightforward and they offer a wide range of legal services. Griffin Law also had a ‘Legal first’ …  Griffin Law makes law by serving via Twitter

“Today the High Court showed that while it may be steeped in tradition, it is certainly not behind the times by granting an order which allowed service of an injunction via Twitter. The Order which is called a Blaney’s Blarney Order after the subject matter – a blog called Blaney’s Blarney (donalblaney.com) – requires an unknown Twitter user anonymously posting under the same name, and thus breaching the copyright and intellectual property of the blog’s owner, to stop posting and immediately identify themselves.”

When I tried to read Donal Blaney’s blog – in the spirit of wanting to learn more of the thoughts of this lawyer and Young Briton’s Foundation visionary… I was, sadly, met with this…

I rather suspect that I won’t be getting an invitation…

Thwarted… I then popped over to the Young Britons Foundation website. Donal Blaney is Chief Executive of the YBF.  There was talk of a ‘Rally’ in Parliament… a Rally?… and opportunities for visitors to the blog (unfortunate enough not to have been able to attend the ‘Rally’)  to look at pictures of happy radicalised Britons at the ‘Rally’

And then there was a case study of a Conservative Activist’… an ‘Activist’…?

YBF Activist Profile

“Emma Carr When did you first become an ‘active conservative’? I have been an active Conservative for about three years and I have known I am a Conservative for about five or six years.   It wasn’t until I went to University that I found opportunities to become involved in local campaigns and Conservative Future.”

I rather liked the phrase… “I have known that I am a conservative for about five or six years”.  It was after reading this phrase that I heard the dulcet Scottish tones of comedian Frankie Boyle, late (sadly) of Mock The Week, in my mind…and I am almost positive I could hear him say… “I’ve known I’ve had VD for  five or six years.”…

And Dan Hannan… who can be very amusing on television..and is a very good orator, whatever you think of his views, is President of The Young Briton’s Foundation.

Now I happen to think that it is a good thing to keep very young people busy with things like the Scouts, Cubs etc etc… I was a Cub in my youth..where I developed a penchant for awarding myself honours.  (I really should have been a Tory!)  A friend of mine and I found a box of badges and cub rank  stripes in a box in the ‘Scout Hut’.  We were the most heavily decorated cubs in Scotland… I had badges for absolutely everything down both arms of my green cub pullover… it was ridiculous.  I promoted myself to ‘Senior Sixer’ but was rumbled because I got greedy and gave myself three yellow stripes instead of two… c’est la vie, as I explained to the dodgy teacher – or Akela as we had to call him – who was a bit too keen on Scouting for Boys.(It’s a very old joke… but it is Saturday.)

I digress… and I do think it is a great idea for younger people to take an interest in politics by joining political groups at school and university. I’m not sure I swallow the entire Guardian line that 2500 people have been radicalised by attending YBF events and shoot em ups in the States… but it is a bit of a worry when one reads statements like this in the press…

The Guardian reports: “Writing openly on his own website, Blaney, a Kent-based solicitor, has argued that “humiliation or psychological interrogation techniques are, in my view, not a problem … Waterboarding doesn’t do the prisoner any permanent physical harm although he may be reluctant to shower or use a flannel again in the future when/if he is freed.”

This is passed off as humour. Humour?  I don’t think Mr Blaney will be appearing ‘Live at The Apollo’ anytime soon on the strength of that gag… if you forgive the unfortunate metaphor.

And then there is this… also from The Guardian report..

With strong links with the American neo-conservative movement, the YBF regularly sends activists on subsidised trips to conferences in the US. “We go into schools and we proselytise conservatism and we get hold of the best kids and train them up,” Blaney has said. “We have been described as a Conservative madrasa, so we bring the next generation out to the States and bring them back radicalised.”

This story is wonderful nonsense… or is it? Is The Guardian warning us that Donal Blaney is training a regiment of ‘Stepford Tory Activists’ who are going to march all over us if David Cameron manages to avoid snatching defeat from the jaws of Victory and actually wins the election with a working majority?

Iain Dale has the right attitude..! and if you want a pretty clear perspective on the Tory camp… his blog is worth a read.

I shall leave you, as I prepare myself for coffee, Marlboros and coffee with the newspapers on the King’s Road with two lines from the Springtime for Hitler lyrics…and a pic from the movie!

“We’re marching to a faster pace
Look out, here comes the master race!”

Don’t have nightmares…. as they used to say on Crimewatch..

Rive Gauche: Enim vero di nos quasi pilas homines habent -The gods use mortals as their playthings

As we get closer to the election, The Tories are finding that the Press is getting more interested in their policies and ‘other activities’. The Guardian reports this morning…

Lord Ashcroft faces new claims of tax avoidance

Exclusive: Bills for huge opinion polls for Conservatives ’sent to peer’s Belize firm’

Fresh concerns about Lord Ashcroft emerged tonight when he was accused of “systematic tax avoidance” by exploiting his offshore status to avoid paying VAT on opinion polls he commissioned for the Conservatives. Ashcroft privately ordered what he boasted was the biggest political polling exercise ever conducted in Britain in 2005, in order to aid the Tories as they targeted marginal seats. The cost of the polls, commissioned from YouGov and Populus, is believed to have approached at least £250,000.

But sources familiar with the transactions told the Guardian that the bills were paid by one his companies in Belize, meaning he did not pay VAT.

Tonight, the Liberal Democrats’ Treasury spokesman, Vince Cable, said: “This is quite serious. We are now not talking just about Ashcroft’s non-dom status, but about systematic tax avoidance in funding Conservative party activities such as polling. How far were the Conservatives aware that Ashcroft did not pay VAT, as would have been incurred by any normal polling activity?”

The Guardian also noted that Hague did not tell Cameron about Lord Ashcroft’s non-dom tax status until a month ago and “Ashcroft did not even reveal his tax status to Cameron when in December the leader approached him to discuss plans to ban non-doms from parliament, despite the fact that he had already told Hague.”

It is comforting  to know that Cameron is on top of things and running a tight ship when it comes to party affairs. Still… you have to hand it to the Tories, their strategy of pumping money into marginal seats may well win them the election….and Cameron is certainly ‘boldly going where no man has gone before’…or as we say down in Battersea while drinking Rioja…Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit.

I’m beginning to feel a bit sorry for Cameron….an aphorism by Horace may be of assistance in these difficult days, Dave…Aequam memento rebus in arduis servare mentem – Remember when life’s path is steep to keep your mind even.

Peter Brookes, in The Times, has caught the mood exceptionally well with this marvellous cartoon.

And talking of ‘unusual dealings’… RollonFriday reports…“Two ex HBJ Gately Wareing lawyers who were accused of attempting to extort money from the Duke of Buccleuch have appeared in court.

The Sun leads this morning with…

CHILD killer Jon Venables’ cover has been blown in the prison where he is held, The Sun can reveal.

The 27-year-old murderer of toddler James Bulger was given a new name nine years ago.  The Sun notes…”Fearful Venables is being given 24-hour protection inside jail as he gorges on burgers and chips in his cell.”

Venables, detained under his own name (kept from all but a few senior prison staff, is under 24 hour guard but, as The Sun reports, tough lags will be certain to know that he is in the prison.  The government continues to refuse to explain why Venables is back in prison.

Coverage of a serious news issue  having drained them, The Sun reverts to type and reveals that Mick Jagger did something with Angelina Jolie….. which is, clearly, in the public interest….I can’t even be bothered to extract the lurid details….!

I’ll be back later in the day… it is 6.45 am..and I feel the need for a walk up to World’s End for coffee, newspapers and, perhaps…some bacon and eggs. I’ll leave you with this reassuring story….

UK involved in my torture, says suspect

The Independent reports: Man claiming ill-treatment in Egypt says Britain ‘turned a blind eye’ to his rendition.

Britain may have colluded with America in the rendition of terror suspects that involved “torture flights” from UK territory, judges were told yesterday.

The claim was made by Mohammed Saad Iqbal Madni, 28, a former Guantanamo Bay inmate who was returned to Pakistan in August 2009 after seven years in custody.

Mr Madni alleges he was detained in Indonesia on 9 January 2002 and sent to Egypt, where he endured three months of torture. He alleges he was beaten, electrocuted, denied medical treatment and hung from metal hooks attached to the ceiling.

His lawyers, the legal charity Reprieve, say that there is “considerable circumstantial evidence” that the plane carrying Madni from Indonesia to Egypt passed through the British territory of the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia. Yesterday they asked the High Court in London to force the British Government to hand over all the information it might have about the flight, including the names of the US personnel Reprieve claims were aboard. They contend that documents held by the British Government could provide evidence that the UK authorities knew of the rendition flight and “turned a blind eye”.

Shock Horror: Tories cleared over Ashcroft… but there IS a wonderfully British twist!

Politics just gets better everyday…although I am beginning to wonder if the Rioja I drink is making me hallucinate when I read the newspapers and that the stories I read aren’t actually real.  The latest ‘Alice and Wonderland’ fable comes from The Independent…

Tories cleared over Ashcroft donations

An Electoral Commission report today cleared the Conservative Party and its deputy chairman Lord Ashcroft of breaching electoral law in relation to £5.1 million of donations from Bearwood Corporate Services.

The Commission rejected allegations that Bearwood – which is controlled by Ashcroft – was not carrying on business in the UK and was therefore ineligible to donate money to political parties.

However, the Commission has asked to meet Conservative officials to ensure that they are clear about their responsibilities for complying with the law.

It transpires, however, that the Electoral Commission has no power to compel people to attend for questioning…so some Tories decided they would decline the invitation to tell the Electoral Commission what had been going on.  It would appear, therefore, that the Electoral Commission cleared the Tories on incomplete evidence… how wonderfully BRITISH!… Yes Minister has nothing on what is going on in 2010!

The Independent notes…. “Today’s report said there was “no basis to conclude” that the donor was anyone other than Bearwood. And it said there was “insufficient evidence to conclude, on the balance of probabilities, that the party was uncertain as to the identity of the donor when accepting the donations”. But it revealed that a number of Conservative officers and staff declined to be interviewed on the issue. The Commission has no power to force people to attend interviews.”

And the report said: “The Commission asked various officers and staff within the party to attend interviews on a voluntary basis, but these requests were not agreed to.”

A Conservative spokesman said the party has “a clean bill of health”.

Next!  There is bound to be something surreal to report on tomorrow from those in power and those who seek power..over us.

Law Review: The ‘Slackoisie’, double dip, Bulger case, and mysterious goings on in connection with the appointment of the new President of the Family Division.

Harman calls for Tory heads to roll over Ashcroft tax row

The Times reports: “The Ashcroft non-dom tax saga exploded on the floor of the House of Commons today as Harriet Harman called for Tory heads to roll. The Leader of the House, deputising for Gordon Brown at Prime Minister’s Questions, said William Hague, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, had “not a shred of credibility” on the issue. During a stormy 30-minute session, Ms Harman said the country had been misled into believing that the Tory peer was paying full tax in Britain.”

I watched PMQs yesterday.  It was like watching Dr Who as a child…I would have been better hiding behind the sofa. Hague may well have a few questions to answer about the Ashcroft affair but he is a better orator.  Meanwhile, Unite boss Jack Dromey, Harman’s house husband  is taking time out from bringing British Airways to its knees and is being parachuted in to a safe seat.  Apparently he achieved this remarkable feat by winning on an all wimmin shortlist according to Hague….. but it may be that I was hallucinating and dreamed this up while taking some restorative Rioja. I have very little sympathy for the proposed British Airways strike but if Mr Dromey and his cabin crew cohorts want to wreck British Airways and bring British Airways down even further in these hard times they will… but BA supremo Willie Walsh is fighting back with some corporate Viagra to stiffen his resolve if Unite harden their position.

William Hague hid Lord Ashcroft’s tax status for months

The Guardian reports: Former leader’s disclosure reveals peer kept financial affairs secret from senior Conservatives for a decade.

Time to shoehorn a bit of law in… I shall do it gently with this wonderful piece from our American friends…

Are You a Member of the Gen-Y ‘Slackoisie’? Find Out Here

The Wall Street Journal blog reports: “A word’s inclusion in the Urban Dictionary isn’t exactly the same as it being added to the OED. Anyone, it seems, can add pretty much any word to the UD at any time. Exclusive it ain’t.

Still, the UD goes where others don’t dare go. And along the way picks up some funny, if not g-rated or politically correct, definitions.

But the one to which we’ll introduce you today has nothing to do with drugs, sex, or rock & roll. It’s funny, though, and will probably strike many out there as either spot-on or downright offensive. It goes like this:

Slackoisie

Prounounced “Slack-wah-zee”. This term was coined by J. Daniel Hull, Esq., author of the “What About Clients?” blawg (Pictured right …looking relaxed – CQC), and popularized by Scott H. Greenfield, Esq., author of the “Simple Justice” blawg. It refers to:

(1) a class of narcissistic young professionals, particularly attorneys (usually Gen Y/millennials), who believe that having a job is an entitlement, rather than a privilege. They often complain about the work they have (if working), opine the lack of “real lawyer” jobs available in the market, and are critical of the long hours and inadequate pay found at most small firms. They believe they are entitled to work/life balance, that their opinions on any subject are inherently important and that whatever benefits they enjoy are inadequate. The Slackoisie are more interested in having a place to go in the morning and some spending money than committing themselves to their clients and the profession; or

(2) a slacker with an exaggerated sense of self-importance and entitlement.

I like this word… I’ve come across a few of this breed in my time in the law over here…. gawd bless ‘em… some of them live in West London, the land of milk and honey where they know how to pronounce ‘grande latte’ and do so with imperious style at various coffee filling stations on Chiswick High Street while they try to make the best of house price values in a country heading towards a double dip recession.  It may be time for me to resurrect my ‘West London Man’ parody series.

On that issue… Guido Fawkes has an interesting observation this morning about Britain’s debt (less safe than Chile even after the Earthquake) and it would appear that our American friends (taking a break from sitting on the fence on the Falkland’s issue) now bracket our economy with that of Greece and are saying that we are the next basket case.

Guido notes: “Chile has just had an 8.8 on the richter scale earthquake, looting and rioting are commonplace.  Even so, U.S. investors still prefer Chilean government debt to UK government debt as measured by CDS rates. Do you get how bad things are?”

Jack Straw refuses to reveal why Bulger killer has returned to jail

The Times reports: “Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, was under pressure last night to lift the veil of secrecy over the decision to return one of James Bulger’s killers to custody for breaking the terms of his parole……..Mr Straw insisted that it was not in the public interest to disclose the reason for the recall, but he was contradicted by Mr Johnson, who said: “I believe the public do have a right to know and I believe they will know all the facts in due course but I must in no way prejudice the future criminal justice proceedings.”His comment was later clarified by the Ministry of Justice, which said that Mr Johnson had been referring to a review by the Parole Board of the decision to recall Venables. The ministry said: “The Home Secretary was talking in general terms about criminal justice proceedings. He is referring to forthcoming proceedings by the Parole Board.”

Jack Straw has been very busy recently.  It appears that he may not be too keen on the appointment of Lord Justice Wall as President of the Family Division…

Top family law post vacant after challenge to government critic

Jack Straw has challenged the appointment of a new head of the family justice system who castigated the Government over its policies, including opening family courts, The Times has learnt.

An appointments panel staffed by senior judges put forward Sir Nicholas Wall to fill the post of President of the Family Division, but only one month before the post is vacated no announcement has been made. Mr Straw, the Justice Secretary, is understood to have exercised his right under the new appointments system to ask the panel to reconsider.

One senior judge said: “It is an appalling state of affairs, not to know who is taking over.” Another said: “An appointment like this is usually announced several months ahead. There is no explanation as to what is going on.”

The Times noted…. wrly?….“but the belief in legal circles is that Lord Justice Wall’s comments in a lecture last November will not have helped his cause. He told the Association of Lawyers for Children that it was the duty of judges to speak out over changes that were damaging the service to children and families.”

I have little interest in Family Law, but John Bolch of Family Lore and Pink Tape will, no doubt, be commenting on this?

Prison service ‘cannot cope with indefinite sentences’

The Independent reports: “Controversial open-ended prison sentences introduced to protect the public may have to be scrapped after inspectors warned that their cost to the penal system outweighed any benefits.Just 75 of almost 6,000 convicts held under the indeterminate sentence for public protection (IPP) have won their liberty since the measure was brought in by Labour four years ago.The result, said Chief Inspector of Probation, Andrew Bridges, and the Chief Inspector of Prisons, Anne Owers, is that prisons have become swamped with inmates whom the probation service did not have the resources to deal with. They warned that the situation has become “unsustainable” and called on ministers to begin a major review of the policy.”

A quick look at what the law bloggers are up to….

Obiter J reviews the thorny issue of… Mobile phones and driving: just what is “using”

and begins his analysis with …”Regrettably, a lot of legislation is not always entirely straightforward to interpret (or “construe”).  The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 Rule 110 seems to give rise to such problems.  Reg. 110(1) states – “No person shall drive a motor vehicle on a road if he is using (a) a hand-held mobile telephone; or (b)…”

The Fat Bigot…says…Goodbye Michael Foot

So, Michael Foot is no more, gone at the age of 96. Proof that the old saying “the good die young” gives only half the story. Reports of his death contain gushing tributes to a “man of principle” who was “true to his beliefs” and a “magnificent orator”. I can’t read stuff like that without wanting to bring up my dinner. Nick Griffin is a man of principle, David Koresh was true to his beliefs and Mussolini was great at stirring up a crowd, yet they are or were despicable pieces of filth who deserve nothing but condemnation for the dire effects of their principles, beliefs and oratory on other people….”

The Stilettoed Socialist has a fulsome tribute…“The Labour Party, today, has lost a true hero. Michael Foot was a parliamentarian held in Gordon Brown, Tony Benn and a fitting tribute was made in the House of Commons by Jack Straw after a frankly embarrassing Prime Ministers Questions, the depressing nature of which was put into sharp focus by the news of Foot’s passing. But more on that in a moment. the highest regard. One of the most outstanding orators this country has ever known and a man who defined the notion of principled politics. Tributes have been pouring in today, from Foot was the mind of the Labour Party. A remarkably intelligent writer who went from Fleet Street to Westminster with the same principles and values underpinning all his endeavours, values which were unashamedly, unapologetically socialist. Without a doubt Foot was a visionary politician, to some extent an idealist, but was one who admired, if not idolised perhaps the greatest pragmatist British Politics has ever known.”

For my part – Michael Foot was a superb orator, an intelligent and thoughtful radical and probably the worst (in terms of effectiveness) leader of the Labour Party… but one of the best in terms of principle. His manifesto may have been described as the longest suicide note in history… but he did bring to politics a sense of fairness and critical thinking which is not always to the forefront of modern political agendas.

Finally…Bystander JP of the Magistrate’s blog asks…

How Would You Deal With This?

Two middle-aged men are side by side in the dock. Each has a care worker with him as both have learning difficulties. They have committed sexual offences against girls of 12 (I have to be careful here, but suffice it to say that no physical contact was involved, but rather crude and inapproriate sexual talk) that has obviously caused great fear and upset to the young victims. The defendants are quickly identified, and brought to court.

They are charged under Section 12(1)a and other sections of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.