Sunday, 6 November 2016

Is she not fragrant? British justice in the dock

British judges have a long history of being slated for making absurd and idiotic judgements and comments. From the judge gulled by his prick into commenting to the jury about a criminal defendant's wife "Is she not fragrant?" to our own much lamented Judge Bertrand Richards who sat at Ipswich for many years and who once let a rapist off with a fine after judging the victim contributed to her victimhood by hitchhiking from a USAF base late at night. He was subject at the time to vilification from womens' groups far exceeding that directed at the Three Stooges in the past few days.

British judges were rightly seen as establishment targets, remote and out of touch with reality, from my earliest youth. In the 1970s they were mercilessly pilloried by satirists from Python to John Mortimer; no TV comedy show was complete without a deaf, stupid or sexually perverted judge in (or out of) full robes. They have appeared regularly on the cover of Private Eye saying stupid things, a fair revenge from a publication much subject to asinine judgements. "Who, pray, are the Beatles?" was an entirely credible question attributed to a judge from a class of judges intellectually removed from the British people. 



So please, please, spare me this faux outrage at the comments directed at the Three Stooges in the past few days. Judges have quite rightly always been fair game for public comment; it comes from their unprecedented power to lawfully destroy lives, if no longer by hanging folk then by caging them like dogs. No barrister ever donned the black stockings, suspenders and little buckled court shoes without realising that they were from then on a subject of public comment. 

And if the eleven judges of the Supreme Court reverse the judgement of the Three Stooges I will expect nothing less than that every scribbler, politico and dag who has rushed to defend the Three Stooges does exactly the same for those pronouncing the final verdict.

18 comments:

Barnacle Bill said...

I fear that we will throw the baby out with the bath water with all this judge bashing that is going on. A lot of it suspiciously being aided by the very same MSM that were so against Brexit during the referendum campaign.

I had no other expectation that the judges would rule as they did.

There was no way with our constitution, the way it has evolved over the centuries, that they could have come to any other conclusion. Again I fully expect this ruling to be endorsed when it comes before our Supreme Court.

We must go back to the very statute that enacted the referendum, asking ourselves why there was no provision giving the result whichever way it went, any legal standing?

You accused the Cameroon of incompetency over this the other day.

I take the opposite view, like the slippery eel T B-Lair was, the Cameroon knew exactly what he was doing promoting the referendum bill in it's enacted form. Abandoning ship like he did only confirmed my view that the stitch up was beginning. It was the back-up plan incase Remain failed that we didn't know about.

Now the quisling May has taken up his mantle.

Our political elites didn't get the result they wanted to, now we have entered a war of attrition with time as their main weapon. They know we are not going to rise up. So they are going to just wear us down by dragging it all out until we just don't care.

Any talk of being able to keep Brexit on track with a snap general election is just deluding ourselves. We have allowed our MPs to become unaccountable/untouchable and they know it!

So instead of unfairly bashing our judges we should see if we can effectively call to heel the really undemocratic villians in this whole sad affair - our MPs!

Poisonedchalice said...

If anyone wants a quick and understandable précis of just what the hell is going on; then just read BB's comment.

Rush-is-Right said...

Judges in the past have not been subject merely to satire and verbal abuse.

When in 1689 Judge Jeffreys was recognised in a pub by a former victim he was seized, and had to be imprisoned in the Tower (for his own safety, you understand) where he died shortly afterwards. And serve him right.

Would that the Three Stooges would suffer similarly.

Anonymous said...

I have always known the joke as follows. Judge says "Who are the Beetles, and what are Diana doors?"

mongoose said...

Firstly, it was a Show Trial. The latest in a long inglorious history of such. The Establishment staged a pantomime for us.

Secondly, it doesn't matter about the not-legally-binding referendum. Even if it had been legally-biniing, Parliament could act now to make it not so - "until the terms of Brexit" are put before them or whatever. If Parliament is sovereign - and it is - it can change wbatever it has ever done at the drop of a hat.

The question is aslo complicated by boundary changes not quite being in place. If the Tories can be ousted before they are done, they may never come about. May needs to hold her nerve - get boundaries changed, make Brexit have a date, issue Article 50 and then destroy Labour at the subsequent GE.

The actualc terms of Brexit are bollocks anyway. If one is in the single market, one is in the EU. The single market IS the EU because of the contingent legal padlocks and chains that constrain everything else once inside.

Anonymous said...

"If one is in the single market, one is in the EU."

Outside the 'single market' countries trade with the EU and have no trade agreements other than WTO arrangements, this is what Britain requires = free trade but none of the bollox of a meddling ECHR-ECJ-Brussels Nomenklatura fucking us from pillar to arse.

I dunno what you are driving at, and "boundary changes" but so fucking what?

Evidently - what is wrongly termed UK democracy never was......the answer to any question cripes on a bike! FFS the Tories are not the answer.
Morem Parliament as it is - is no alter


The party system needs to be smashed and must be deconstructed, and the executive must be totally separated from the legislature, with the HoL pared down to a minimum amount of peers, some wise men if there are any men of sagacity - any longer available in this benighted kingdom.

mongoose said...

Because the only one who can deliver a meaningful Brexit now is May via the Tories. If she doesn't, nobody will, and then all of these conversations will be moot. We are currently seeing the EU decide on their choice: get them to vote again or call it something else. We must be gone by the time they choose.

But I sense that I intrude.

mikebravo said...

mongoose.

Intrude away. This is not an echo chamber. I suspect that May wants to be a somebody - not an arse like our previous 4 holders of office.

John Dub said...



Mongoose I think you're spot on mate.

I think Brexit is greatly imperiled. SM Membership is being in the EU.

Barnacle Bill said...

@ mikebravo

When you look at May think of one of those old theatrical masks, white one side with a welcoming smile, whilst the other side is a black, soulless, snarling visage.

Also anyone with her tenure at the Home Office is a dangerous one.

When NuLabor was in office of the three at the top the Strawman was the one I would have feared the most. T B-Lair was just a chancer, Gay Gordon a loony but the Strawman was the one who would have slid the stiletto in smiling as he shook your hand.

So yes she may want to make a name for herself but I think she answers to others rather than to you and I.

John Brown said...

The judiciary may be "independent" but that does not mean they are either impartial or right.

Parliament voted 6 to 1 to allow the people to decide via a referendum if we were to leave or remain in the EU.

So Parliament has made the people sovereign in this case and this is why no further vote is required in Parliament in order to leave the EU.

It is ironic that the Europhiles having spent decades giving away Parliament's sovereignty to the EU now want Parliament to be "sovereign" and make the final decision. Which I suppose is better than the EU making the decision, which is what they really want.

Woodsy42 said...

Can someone please explain: If May needs parliament to approve leaving the EU and rejecting its rules how could Gordon Brown sign the Lisbon treaty and accept many new EU rules and powers without such explicit approval?
If triggering Article 50 would be unconstitutional, and presumably illegal, then the Lisbon treaty is equally illegal and should be disregarded.

mongoose said...

It's a very good point, Woody. I suspect the Court decision about removal of rights without Parliamentary consent is a pantomime horse. An arse at the front and an idiot at the back. "How about adding rights without such Parliamentary approval, m'lud? And which is which? You twat!" But this panto is lost.

The only interesting and useful thought is whether this is the start of straightening the fuckers out. Like the mad and somewhat personally vile Trump - whether he wins or not, the old game is broken now.

Anonymous said...

Why not make it simple, and let them vote in the talking shop. That way the people will know, exactly where the MPs loyalties are.
Political suicide if they vote to leave.
political suicide if they vote to remain.
Its a win win situation.
They (the system) have thrown this spanner in the works, its the way it is. Throw the hot potato into another court (pun intended).
The blame game, it makes me want to spit.
Democracy died the day after it was born. The illusion is still there, it just never really existed. Power and force is the name of the game, always has been and always will be. If you want to win get yourself an army. Times never change it has always been thus.
Go to war (inevitable) bury your dead, accept the peace, and start the same fucking process over again.
Talk makes little, if any difference to these people.
Make your peace with whichever god you believe in. Your troubles have not even started.
Your minds are so far off the ball.
This is of little consequence.
In or out of the shit heap, the agenda has move on. The unrest being created around the world, including first world countries should give you all a clue. If you're not in the club....
A change is coming and it don't include anyone that kicks against their system.Their called expendables.
History tells many things, one of which is, it always repeats, because the same people are at the top.
The people fight wars because those at the top tell them to. Then they die. Useful idiots.
Get your heads out your arses, and focus on the real problems.
Ask yourself why a senior General is so concerned about killery getting into the pale house?
The four horsemen of the apocalypse is on its way.
This is just a side show for the masses to expend their anger, miners strike x 10. Civil unrest! curfew! military reserve on streets! lockdown! papers! remind you of anything?
Sleep well. I live in Mercia and will die here.Hopefully with the same bravery as those who gave their lives for the short time that we thought we were free of tyranny. I fuckin hate those politicians in Brushels. The irony is they still do the last post in Ypes.

Poppa Bear said...

Anonymous 4:48 Spot on ! The same conclusions that I have been forced to accept over the last few years.

Anonymous said...

Those last posts [above] are chilling, as they are honest reflections.

AS, the last post sounds for the west but particularly here in Britain, France and even for the Krauts.

.................. I nearly shat myself when 'The Times' exhorted us to praise that ugly Communist monster - product of the DDR though born in the west....The fucking Times indeed! The left wing tosserati, telling us that the ReichsKanzler she was the woman of the year/decade/millennium was the subtext.
Then Mutti, she opened the gates and how they fucking poured in, only Hungary stood firm and later the Austrians/Bavarians but the damage for Germany was done and as 'woman of the year' so designed it.

TPTB in the UK/Krautland/France demand; the critical theorists do, academia, education, Bundesrat-stag, Assemble Nationale, Westminster give the veneer of people power but are only archaic political talking shoppes, across the whole administration all geared to facilitate their masters bidding.

And yeah the judges - if they ever did now they do not bat for Britons, they care not for the law unless it suits their ends and those ends are defined by via Brussels but guided by the Internationalist Elite and George Soros et al.

Last post sounding on our sunset.

Anonymous said...

I do salute Oborne for some pragmatic reportage and some very sarcastic polemic but nevertheless very true astutely observed comparisons on the west's - media and political duplicitous and quite mind boggling lies its calumny:

"For the past few weeks, British news-papers have been informing their readers about two contrasting battles in the killing grounds of the Middle East. One is Mosul, in northern Iraq, where western reporters are accompanying an army of liberation as it frees a joyful population from terrorist control. The other concerns Aleppo, just a few hundred miles to the west. This, apparently, is the exact opposite. Here, a murderous dictator, hellbent on destruction, is waging war on his own people."

We also observe Radders that your post: "A guide to Syria speak"

you were there first!! and thus we must, should be aware - there are people who read this site and that the reach is widening - not before time.

Raedwald said...

Uhm, thanks anon but the partisan war reporting is hardly an unusual observation - the thought will already have occurred to many readers independently, as I'm sure it did to Mr Oborne.

Oh, and the fact that I'm up with coffee made and reading the papers by 6am with an hour's lead on GMT often allows me to get an early post in... but thanks again!