tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post8689077772806672540..comments2023-07-10T10:57:18.522+01:00Comments on The Magistrates' Blog: Further and Better Particulars RequiredBystander http://www.blogger.com/profile/10211688955428527960noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-1064689681555690622012-08-17T19:01:19.543+01:002012-08-17T19:01:19.543+01:00I am a member of the Judiciary.
Not too sure that...I am a member of the Judiciary.<br /><br />Not too sure that makes me an apologist for any one social class though.<br /><br />Bikernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-82460125497628568482012-08-17T18:24:50.258+01:002012-08-17T18:24:50.258+01:00I have no connection with the judiciary, except wh...I have no connection with the judiciary, except when summonsed as a witness, mostly at Coroners' courts. How about you Biker ?Tony Frostnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-3180225215896181282012-08-17T17:09:52.353+01:002012-08-17T17:09:52.353+01:00No.No.Bystander https://www.blogger.com/profile/10211688955428527960noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-28501689700982003422012-08-17T15:26:26.189+01:002012-08-17T15:26:26.189+01:00will you be asking your clerk to explain it to you...will you be asking your clerk to explain it to you and then basing your conclusions EXCLUSIVELY on what he or she tells you?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-89590115878690898732012-08-16T23:20:21.258+01:002012-08-16T23:20:21.258+01:00Note "be a man my son"............Note "be a man my son"............Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-33803256179477503842012-08-16T21:48:14.883+01:002012-08-16T21:48:14.883+01:00Re anon (21.24)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6...Re anon (21.24)<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6MtmkqPbpsBystander https://www.blogger.com/profile/10211688955428527960noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-55898542032899665832012-08-16T21:41:11.624+01:002012-08-16T21:41:11.624+01:00Not too sure I understand the point being made. B...Not too sure I understand the point being made. But I do appreciate the irony of being asked to declare my background by 'Anonymous'. Bikernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-63256866051589381262012-08-16T21:24:52.422+01:002012-08-16T21:24:52.422+01:00No worries MoTV. The awaited guidance is likely t...No worries MoTV. The awaited guidance is likely to be technical and operational, about secure messaging and the like.<br /><br />We've had this blog, I am afraid. Thanks BS for all the good times.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-85727584275873045272012-08-16T21:21:53.245+01:002012-08-16T21:21:53.245+01:00In this case, Biker, please try to understand that...In this case, Biker, please try to understand that it is Goldring's 'act itself which damages..public confidence in general in the judiciary'. Or at least reading the comments above, some fraction of this unscientificic sample of the public.<br /><br />If Biker has a background that biases him towards being an apologist for whatever the upper classes might dictate, then I think he should declare it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-15096057162242939972012-08-16T21:15:23.039+01:002012-08-16T21:15:23.039+01:00Lord Neuberger won't give a toss.Lord Neuberger won't give a toss.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-74342909349588479222012-08-16T20:10:59.778+01:002012-08-16T20:10:59.778+01:00My case is that the SPJ's issue concerns (righ...My case is that the SPJ's issue concerns (rightly) are that judiciary office holders should not "damage public confidence in their own impartiality or in the judiciary in general".<br /><br />That is applicable, and to be avoided, whether you are talking to 5 people or to 500 (and exponentially on and on).<br /><br />It is the act itself which damages; the number of people who are witness to it is largely a matter of detail. As is the medium which is used.<br /><br />Otherwise you might legitimately argue that it is only blogs with large numbers of visitors which might present a problem. <br /><br />I trust the repetition assists.Bikernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-51632881115784993542012-08-16T20:04:53.535+01:002012-08-16T20:04:53.535+01:00So your case is that one person is "the publi...So your case is that one person is "the public"?Ed (not Bystander)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-51636483777849487052012-08-16T20:01:37.704+01:002012-08-16T20:01:37.704+01:00...and nobody hears it, then fine.
But neither I ......and nobody hears it, then fine.<br /><br />But neither I nor Anonymous were talking about conversations (or trees) that go unheard. Necessarily to damage public confidence in the judiciary one must first engage with the public. Whether one person or one thousand.<br /><br />Gnomic utterances don't advance your case.<br /><br />Bikernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-25684949622065078652012-08-16T19:57:51.592+01:002012-08-16T19:57:51.592+01:00If a tree falls in a forest...If a tree falls in a forest...Ed (not Bystander)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-27187306238890021842012-08-16T19:41:01.874+01:002012-08-16T19:41:01.874+01:00In a sense there is not. The SPJ's issue conce...In a sense there is not. The SPJ's issue concerns (rightly) are that judiciary office holders should not "damage public confidence in their own impartiality or in the judiciary in general".<br /><br />That is applicable, and to be avoided, whether you are talking to 5 people or to 500 (and exponentially on and on). <br /><br />It is the act itself which damages; the number of people who are witness to it is largely a matter of detail. As is the medium which is used.<br /><br />Otherwise you might legitimately argue that it is only blogs with large numbers of visitors which might present a problem. Bikernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-23618433125687961312012-08-16T19:29:32.305+01:002012-08-16T19:29:32.305+01:00Are you saying you believe there is no difference ...Are you saying you believe there is no difference between 1) words spoken in private; and 2) written on a globally-visible, possibly permanent web page?Ed (not Bystander)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-40123858061496094382012-08-16T16:17:18.529+01:002012-08-16T16:17:18.529+01:00And so it shall, Anon, so it shall.And so it shall, Anon, so it shall.Bystander https://www.blogger.com/profile/10211688955428527960noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-67017069957742345832012-08-16T16:16:13.667+01:002012-08-16T16:16:13.667+01:00Good clean , if sometimes funny comment should con...Good clean , if sometimes funny comment should continueAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-64724748428978799312012-08-16T16:02:11.219+01:002012-08-16T16:02:11.219+01:00i) There is no censorship. I sometimes bin tiresom...i) There is no censorship. I sometimes bin tiresome troll-type posts that seek merely to sneer at people in the system. E(NB) has had numerous warnings, and I will delete any abusive juvenile crap from now on. Constructive and adult comments remain welcome from anyone. <br />ii) I have always been open to criticism, but infantile sneers about my or others' motives may go too far. This blog is not a democracy, it is mine, and I retain editorial control of it. <br />iii) Anyone who doesn't like that is free to start their own blog, and see how long it takes them to get over three million page views. Bystander https://www.blogger.com/profile/10211688955428527960noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-43077539896603580662012-08-16T12:51:40.080+01:002012-08-16T12:51:40.080+01:00Exactly, well said. Judge Nic Madge regularly writ...Exactly, well said. Judge Nic Madge regularly writes for Legal Action magazine and identifies himself in the articles. I cannot see why it should make a difference whether the article is on paper or on a screen. (In fact, his articles are on his website as well: does that make it a blog? If not, how do you define blog?)Tom (iow)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-69118373199014954642012-08-16T11:15:22.944+01:002012-08-16T11:15:22.944+01:00Can someone please clarify if the guidance really ...Can someone please clarify if the guidance really means that it's alright for judges etc to dine with friends and acquaintances (including new acquaintances) and express their views, as they have done since time immemorial, but that they must not express exactly same views in the same terms in a blog? If so that leaves a very clear impression that the presiding judiciary think it is OK for the sort of people who dine with judges etc to hear the views but not for the "hoi polloi" to read them on blogs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-11939584890315898532012-08-16T10:49:56.662+01:002012-08-16T10:49:56.662+01:00Bystander seems to have been spurred into action o...Bystander seems to have been spurred into action on the "redaction" front at least, perhaps with an eye to greater scrutiny of his blog. I note, for example, that a rather regrettably snide post by Ed(notBS) in response to payasoru's highly germane reminder abut the threshold criteria for Convention rights has mysteriously disappeared. Since the street warfare that sometimes erupts on these comments pages between police officers on the one hand and magistrates, lawyers and it sometimes seems the rest of the world has been one of the more common causes of complaint about this otherwise valuable resource, this is probably no bad thing. But censorship is a tool that itself needs to be wielded with care. Bystander has demonstrated that he is himself particularly sensitive to anything that smacks of criticism. It will be interesting to see whether this comment too is excised. Man on the Village Greenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02420025319687905046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-43563223368546118322012-08-16T09:44:18.424+01:002012-08-16T09:44:18.424+01:00Not Bystander?Not Bystander?mcmrjpnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-31306267339936171202012-08-16T08:40:00.611+01:002012-08-16T08:40:00.611+01:00Several of my Twitter 'friends' who are la...Several of my Twitter 'friends' who are lawyers and/or hold some sort of judicial office are seriously annoyed at this diktat. I just hope that those who may have the ear of the higher judiciary get the message across that this is reactionary, counterproductive and unduly constraining. I understand at least one JP has already resigned over the issue.SouthLondonJPnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2727871367480602637.post-51024989620276788932012-08-16T00:17:52.417+01:002012-08-16T00:17:52.417+01:00Seconded.Seconded.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com