The gaoling yesterday of the Naked Rambler, Stephen Gough, for 11 months for breaching an ASBO forbidding him from appearing naked in public raises many questions. One of those questions is whether the trial judge was right to refuse him permission to conduct his defence in the nude.
One sympathises with judges who have to try whoever is prosecuted in their courts. They do not have much official guidance or training on how to try naked men. Continue reading “Let the Naked Rambler go naked into court”
Whatever sentence Stuart Hall had received it would never have been long enough to satisfy the Twitter tricoteurs. It was always inevitable that these high minded guardians of morality would denounce the sentence and the judge who passed it as a disgrace to his profession. Continue reading “Stuart Hall’s complete ruin is punishment enough”
It was fell just short of an admission of official involvement, but the recent announcement by the Foreign Secretary William Hague acknowledges that there is at least strong evidence that British officials, police officers and possibly soldiers were complicit in a system in Kenya in the 1950s in which torture, sexual abuse and murder were pursued as Government policy. Continue reading “Enoch Powell was right”
Mr Grayling has announced that he is to introduce pre-trial cross-examination for complainants in sexual cases. Instead of having to attend court on the day of the trial, complainants will be able to record their cross-examination in advance.
The power to introduce the procedure has been on the statute book for many years but Mr Grayling, a Minister of Justice who likes making sweeping changes by secondary legislation (which he can do without engaging in parliamentary debate), has now decided to activate it. Wisely, the plans are to be piloted in just three areas, Leeds, Liverpool and Kingston upon Thames, before they are introduced across the country. Continue reading “Pre-trial cross-examination: why can’t Mr Grayling get his facts right?”
This week, exclusively for barristerblogger I am delighted to bring you the controversial philosopher, composer, novelist, samizdat distributor, oenophile, polemicist and barrister of the Inner Temple.Professor Roger Scruton. The famous polymath is best known for his philosophical and political writing but he is also a weighty legal thinker.
A tireless champion of the English Common Law Scruton explains exclusively here for barristerblogger how English judges should develop the law by finding remedies to real disputes rather than by the application of abstract legal theories. Continue reading “Roger Scruton: With Common Law the Remedy Comes Before The Principle”
It’s not really to do with law in the usual sense, but Turkey is a country whose legal system has had a great deal of criticism over the years. I make no comment as to whether all of it was fair or unfair but I would like to invite readers of Barristerblogger to visit Istanbul in these stirring, and rather worrying, days. Have a look at this blog (alright the writer is my daughter) and you can feel the tear gas at the back of your throat. Continue reading “A letter from Istanbul – Mr Erdogan the world is watching you”
Anyone listening to Lord Justice Hooper debating the Government’s legal aid proposals with Bob Neill MP on the Today programme this morning will have wondered two things: who is Bob Neill, and where is Chris Grayling?
As far as the first question is concerned, Bob Neill is an ex-criminal barrister who briefly held a minor ministerial post until he was sacked last September. Known to his admirers as “Little Bob” he is apparently naturally charming and shrewd but on the radio this morning he displayed a rather off-putting combination of rudeness and insincere chumminess. Continue reading “Debating Legal Aid Proposals. Why are ministers frit?”
It is not often that Inside Time, the newspaper run by and for prisoners, gets a scoop but it has cleverly managed to publicise information that the Ministry of Justice would probably rather have kept quiet about. The crafty cons at Inside Time somehow managed to obtain details of the Ministry’s 2012 expenditure figures. They make for fascinating reading. Continue reading “Ministry of Justice to treat dogs better than lawyers”
The Ministry of Justice consultation on plans to cut the cost of criminal legal aid ends on June 4th. Some may believe that it is not really a consultation at all, but a sham in which the responses will be swiftly binned because its outcome has already been decided. Their fears were heightened yesterday when the Justice Minister, Chris Grayling, declared that “unless someone’s got a stunning alternative it’s going ahead in some form.” Continue reading “Is Mr Grayling’s legal aid consultation genuine or a sham? Ask an interpreter.”
Theresa May proposes a mandatory whole life tariff for anyone who murders a police officer.
It made a good headline, and enabled her to get through her annual speech to the Police Federation without the ritual debagging normally given to Home Secretaries at these rather boisterous occasions. One does wonder why, if her idea is actually going to be introduced, the proposal was announced at the Federation conference instead of being included in a notably thin Queen’s speech last week. Continue reading “Whole life tariffs for police murderers – a serious suggestion or political posturing?”