Judges who blog

I just came across ‘Trevor‘, a blog written by a Magistrate. Reading through some of the entries, you could accuse him of being a human being which, considering my view on the Judiciary as a whole, means that I may have to vary my opinions in future. I found this blog through the UK Human Rights blog entry about the banning of blogging in any judicial capacity.

I want to explore a couple of comments from the HR blog because I feel that they are important issues; the first written by an anonymous writer on the Near Legal housing law blog argues that the ban is “short-sighted” and likely to have a “damaging effect on public understanding of the legal system and transparency“.

Royal 13 B.VIII, f.22In my experience, the public have very little understanding of the legal system and the profession as a whole do their utmost to ensure that the public never does. Like the Cistercian monks, they maintain domination over the law by clinging to Latin, an obscure language that, while at the root of English, does little to foster understanding in this modern age.

There may be value in this medieval language but when a member of the public is presented with terminology such as a mensa et thoro or absque hoc they do not immediately know what it might mean and most importantly, they will never know the nuances inherent in its use within the legal profession. The result is that they have to call in a professional, a solicitor and/or a barrister who will interpret the obscure meanings. The public are not part of the club, they will not have lunch with their opposition, discuss a deal over drinks or on the tennis court.

With the removal of most legal aid, the public are even more at the mercy of the legal system and the courts. Any forum that fosters understanding must be encouraged in order to redress the imbalance which has formed as a result of changes to legal aid and the ability to have a fair trial only if you are able to pay for it.

Another comment comes from the guidance issued to members of the judiciary which reads;

“They must also avoid expressing opinions which, were it to become known that they hold judicial office, could damage public confidence in their own impartiality or in the judiciary in general”.

'Hmmm...It is: innocent until proven guilty? Or is it: guilty until proven innocent?'The democratic process and purported transparency in public office demands that the truth always be made known. If a judge finds himself at odds with the laws as passed by Parliament, they must interpret them to the best of their ability but it is this self-interpretation that leads to such a bollixed system and gives an out to a judge who might make a decision that reeks of injustice – it’s simply not good enough.

I’m not saying that being a judge is an easy role but when anyone in public office decides to use their position inappropriately as in the Guardian’s ‘Who is judging the judges?‘, all decisions of that judge should immediately come under scrutiny to ensure that there was no bias, corruption or other hidden agenda or just plain incompetence.

 

Advertisements

ID database gets go-ahead; ID cards will surely follow

The Telegraph reports on the Condem’s latest initiative to remove our civil liberties – where did this little gem spring from?  A new database to be introduced next week that holds the details of 15 million people (a quarter of the population of Britain) must have taken some effort to fund, organise, purchase, develop, install and ‘test’ – so where’s the white paper on this?  Included are the details of around 6 million innocent people and victims of crime so it’s not a great leap of the imagination to see a database that contains details on everyone.

Apparently more than 12,000 ‘approved’ people will have access to this database and bollocks to anyone who says “if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear”.  With so many new laws introduced by Labour it is only a matter of time before everyone breaks one law or another which will warrant them being included in the ever growing database until every man, woman and child will be included as a matter of course and the abandoned ID register will suddenly be in place with ID cards being compulsory for those with a criminal record, perhaps a blue one for those who are not guilty of any crime but you will have to carry it to show to any uniform that has the power to stop you to prove that you have no criminal record – what a clever government.

We know of someone who works in Westminster who has been interviewed four times by her local council housing office because there is a “flag” against the address although they have no idea why – this is the result of the database mentality (it must be right cos the ‘puter sez so) which will have some jobs-worth going along every 3 months because the database says they should although they don’t know what they are looking to achieve and can’t possibly gain any results from this waste of time.

This is a real life example of that reliance on computers does to the brain and the size of this proposed database (a Condem initiative despite slamming a similar Labour idea) will mean that there will be considerable errors which will never be corrected and while will – over time – change the perspective of the data it supposedly represents.

The events of 9/11 and 7/7 gave both the US and UK governments exactly the excuse they needed to implement their ‘terror’ legislation and to slowly erode our civil liberties – a freedom lost is never regained; there are always unintended consequences to legislation but there appear to be no efforts to deal with those consequences but only compound them but never to the advantage of the individual and always to the advantage of the ‘state’.

This creeping abuse of powers has been going on for a lot longer than people realise and most fail to comprehend the extent to which their rights and safeguards under law are being systematically removed – this is nothing short of tyranny.

YOUR freedoms – yeah right!

Nick Clegg, the deputy PM created his website called “Your Freedoms” and called for the people to suggest which laws should be looked at or repealed.  When the website closed down, the suggestions made there were thrown away and despite writing to his office to find out what was happening to the suggestions, there was no definitive answer.

The ConDems made much of the thousands of new laws that Labour enacted while in power; the thousands of new ways that money could be generated through the courts to swell the coffers of the government.

No laws have been repealed, no action taken so there are thousands of people turning to legal aid assistance to fight frivolous cased in courts and so the bill goes up.

Repeal some laws, restore some balance and the legal aid bill will go down as a result; do we really need money spent by councils on bin inspectors and do we really need to burden the courts with frivolous litigation to fine old Mrs Jones for putting a baked bean tin in her waste bin?

The burdens are imposed by the government and local councils, they should be the ones to sort out the problem, reduce the number of laws that have painted the people of this country into an ever smaller corner to the point that you can’t take a breath without fracturing some law, statute or governance.

Government denies justice to those who can’t pay

No one likes ambulance chasing lawyers – in fact, it’s doubtful whether many people have a good word for an industry that benefits from other peoples misery but these plans make it even more difficult for those without money to have any equality under law which is, of course, contrary to the Human Rights Act.

Our maritime law justice system flaunts the common law system that was originally set up to protect the ‘people’ – those laws still exist but the courts pretend they don’t and call your sanity into question if you raise common law in their courts.  It is doubtful that judges confirm their oath on a daily basis as they are bound to do and abandon ship when challenged.

The so-called justice system depends on peoples ignorance to rail-road them into compliance; the previous Labour regime enacted thousands of new laws to further bury common law under an avalanche of statutes that even the Law Society could not keep pace with.

These new plans seek to further deny individuals access to justice and with the government seeking to do away with the human rights legislation (as controversial as it may be) the inevitable consequence is that the people of this country will find themselves falling foul of the law and having no way in which to protect themselves or to argue their case.

Kenneth Clarke, the so-called ‘justice’ minister has announced cuts that will further deny people of this country from ever proving their innocence in an effort to save money yet government departments such as the DWP have access to the entire public purse in pursuit of any allegations they make – so they can spend your money to criminalise you but you can’t defend yourself in the same way – clever.

Ambulance chasing lawyers may be an unsavoury breed but at least they provide a voice to those who can’t speak for themselves.

THIS is justice? THIS is democracy?

Brown and Balls, a conspiracy to defraud £90billion from the public purse

The Cabinet was presented with a document in January 2006 which asked the question: “We’ve spent all this money, but what have we got for it?”  This is the same question the public has been asking for many years.

Like children in a sweet shop both Gormless Clown and Ed Bolloxed ignored the warnings that “ineffective spending” must be “closed down” and rather than admit that his own incompetence Brown embarked on a £90billion spending spree that left the country with a record deficit.

So focused was he on his quest for self aggrandisement that he not only ignored prudent financial advice but flew in the face of common sense and increased spending when he became Prime Minister.  His ambitions and Marxist training obviously got the better of him and like the megalomaniac he is, he sought only to build his power base at the expense and suffering of the tax-payers of this country.

With Common Purpose and New World Order fixed firmly in his agenda, he set out to pass so many new laws through parliament to change the lives of the tax-payer, to criminalise them to distraction so they couldn’t see what was happening in front of their noses.

Let’s not forget the PFI ‘off the books’ spending too which amounted to hundreds of billions of pounds.  The inner city academies for example made the organiser rich at the tax payers expense; public money was used to increase private profitability and the expenditure was never properly reported – this is nothing short of fraud on a grand scale.

Politicians don’t amass substantial private fortunes from thin air – they rake their money together over time from the public purse; Blair is a good example, he entered public office with modest means yet left it a multi-millionaire – how?

We’re all well aware that nothing changes over time and that the fraudsters then are no different to the fraudsters now which leaves a couple of questions:

How long will the British people put up with this type of politics?
How long before Lawful Rebellion becomes a real option?
How long before Lawful Rebellion becomes the ONLY option?

The Proceeds of Crime Act is one of the tools available to government departments in their pursuit of allegations of fraud and even though it was designed for drug cartels and the like, it is being used against disabled and elderly people all the time – it’s about time this draconian legislation is used against politicians to recoup the money they steal from the public purse and return it to the tax-payer.

While our elderly, disabled and disadvantaged are being left to die or demonised at the hands of our government; these ‘public servants’ increase their own wealth but not their value.

You’ve got to admire government ‘spin’

Those clever buggers in the government have got to be admired for something and we’ve decided that it is ‘spin’ that gets the Admiration Award.  How else could the likes of this:

 champagne guzzlers and 8-figure bonus boys contributed to the loss of billions of pounds, yet the likes of:

 this old lady gets to pay for the bail-out; and the likes of:

 this lives a life of luxury on council tax while:

 he battles to access services in the community and the likes of:

 this decides the fate of millions of people, while the likes of:

 this man faces an uncertain future.

Spin puts a halo above the heads of the thieves and liars while putting a pitch-fork into the hands of the most vulnerable in our society – you’ve got to admit …. that’s clever!

European court of human rights or no human rights at all?

The UK criminal justice system is a sham; it provides justice only for those who have the money to pay for it and no one cares if Mr or Mrs Average are swept aside by a corrupt and unfair system.

There is widespread condemnation of the European Court of Human Rights but when that is all that stands between an individual and a corrupt government filled with corrupt and incompetent civil servants who have no interest in justice but only in procedure then we must embrace this with open arms.

Our government is proposing a new ‘Bill of Rights’ to replace human rights legislation because innocent people are turning to existing legislation as their only hope for some justice – do we really want corrupt politicians drafting new legislation for our protection … absolutely not.  If Nick Clegg can ensure that legislation drafted by parliament does not affect his off-shore interests then this government cannot be entrusted to create a system upon which people will have to depend for justice.

Democracy is again under attack from within – we have more to fear from our own government that we do from the likes of so-called terrorists.