While I appreciate that ballet and ballroom dancing requires a great deal of athleticism and skill (and I used to enjoy a bit of Tango in my yoof) I am enjoying the fact that the judges on “Strictly Come Dancing” are ‘spitting feathers’ at John Sergeant’s improbable continuing presence in the show and say the public is making a mockery of the whole competition. I confess that I haven’t seen the programme (but I’m not planning to complain to the BBC about anything tonight) – but I have read the comments in a Yahoo article. Sergeant, a former heavyweight political commentator, seems to be a bit heavy on his feet – scoring only 1 out of 10 from one judge and Arlene Phillips told him ‘you are outstanding at dancing badly’.
The public seem to love him and keep voting him back in. I have to say I find this rather pleasing. I like irony and it is good to have a bit of black humour in these difficult times. Jive John…. Jive! I’ll be voting for you… often and early.
Now to rather more grave matters…
It was reported earlier today that Tony Blair’s bodyguard discharged his gun accidentally while accompanying Tony Blair in Israel. Blair seems to have a bit of difficulty with bodyguards. Only recently a young woman firearms officer left her Glock 17 in the lavatory at a Starbucks, prompting yet another ‘security scare’. It seems also that the Israeli airforce was scrambled to intercept an incoming aircraft ‘believed hostile’ only to find out that Tony Blair was on board making a visit to Israel as part of his duties as a peacekeeping envoy for the Quartet.
“Four leading Queen’s Counsel have made an unprecedented defence of the judge accused by newspaper chiefs of singlehandedly creating a privacy law. In a letter to The Times, the four top defamation silks reject claims that Mr Justice Eady is on a one-man mission to introduce a privacy law by the backdoor. The attack, by Paul Dacre, Editor of the Daily Mail, and supported by The Sun, “cannot stand unanswered, not least because the judge is unable to respond publicly to such criticism”, they say.
This was covered ably by Carl Gardner, Head of Legal, and I referred to it yesterday. The Judiciary of England & Wales website has also waded in to give Daily Mail Editor Mr Dacre a basic lesson in the law of England & Wales. Statement from the Judicial Communications Office – Speech by Mr Paul Dacre
“Judges determine privacy cases in accordance with the law and the particular evidence presented by both parties. Any High Court judgment can be appealed to the Court of Appeal”.
Right… back in your box Dacre.... talk to those who read your paper – but don’t stray into areas where you don’t know your arse from your elbow seems to be the message from the Brothers in Law. Excellent nonsense!