Disclaimer

This blog represents my views and opinions. They are not necessarily those of any other member of my Chambers, none of whom contribute to the blog, or assist me with it.

Editorial

Now moved to http://pupillageandhowtogetit.wordpress.com/ for reasons of convenience and ease. Come and see.

Tuesday, 12 February 2008

Pathetic

Geeklawyer wrote a post about Tony Blair. I think it was a little overstated and I don't agree with it, but that's the house style and it's a free country.

Unfortunately, some moronic Blair supporters disagree with that last proposition and have organised a denial of access to his site.

Vigilantism always makes me nauseous, largely because in my experience the self-righteousness that prompts it is about 1/2 micron thick. There are few things more unpleasant than a house burglar feeling all good about pouring his chamber pot over the head of a sex offender on the basis that 'he deserves it'. The burglar will, of course, be full of remorse for the distress that his actions have caused his victims. Or not.

Anyway can I urge you all to pay Geeklawyer a visit in his squat? Even those of you who don't read him. That way, it should be possible to convey to those who purport to promote free speech by denying it that hypocrisy doesn't work. They won't feel ashamed of themselves because self-righteousness inhibits that as well. But they will be angry which is lots of fun.

10 comments:

Usefully Employed said...

As a conveniently placed criminal QC, what's your opinion (note the lower case o) on the Blair-blog's charge that GL might be open to prosecution under s2 of the Terrorism Act 2006? Obviously the context of what he says is key, but a problem with the legislation would seem to be that it doesn't temper its provisions with any reference to whether or not a statement could reasonably lead to others committing acts of terrorism. The scope of the statements that could be included is huge - even stand up comics and their ilk would have to watch their step.

Charon QC said...

Bravo Simon.... extraordinary....

Simon Myerson said...

My opinion? I think they should take out a private prosecution. That way the rather wide phrasing of the Act could be sensibly clarified, Geeklawyer would become a pin-up and it would cost them a fortune. It's all good.

Mr Pineapples said...

Blair-ites? Do they really exist now?

I like GreekLawyer and will be visiting his squat - I need a kebab and a bit of stuffed vine leaf.

Charon QC said...

I concur... as they used to say....

***

(As an aside: Interesting plan for the new Supreme Court - 9 law lords / supreme court justices sitting together as a routine - rather than, as at present, for more complex cases. Pannick QC article in The Times)

Mr Pineapples said...

a.pierson

You are the most boring individual EVER to grace this Blog.

Can you now BUGGER OFF.

Ta

Oh - and get a life - whilst you're at it.

Oh - and Norman Wisdom - killed Kennedy.

Simon Myerson said...

A Pierson's comment has been deleted. I don't do this to proper comments. But a load of twaddle about how 9/11 was an inside job doesn't deserve space and is an insult to the people who died.

Consequently A Pierson doesn't have what it takes to make an sense here - so his comment is history.

This is a democracy per Terry Pratchet: one man one vate and I'm the man.

simply wondered said...

is 'it's all good' the kind of thing you silks get to say in court? take it a junior wouldn't be allowed.
and is a vate a big vat you put the people you don't like into (with their votes)?
i had no idea the norman wisdom plot had finally been revealed - that's why they had four shooters: the first three fell hilariously off the grassy knoll. mr grimsdale was the brains behind the operation.

Simon Myerson said...

SW - I'm laughing. 'It's all good' is the sort of thing my daughters say to me. Haven't tried it in Court yet but promise to report back when I have.
A Vate is the higher rate VAT Silks have to pay - an extra 2.5% per ego point.
I trust this helps.

simply wondered said...

glad i can make you laugh - must try it when i am finally a junior and you are a judge (still have no real idea how they happen - yes i know the legislation governing it but that's not the same - do silks make a nice cosy cocoon, take a couple of cases of 1990 claret and emerge in a bigger wig?)
they pass this vate on then? no wonder law is so expensive.
my son (a bit younger than your girls from the picture) tends to say 'dum' whenever i say anything he finds particularly stupid - ie whenever i have my mouth open and sometimes not. he is five - oh lordy lordy... court will be easy!

thank you for all your help; it's very err helpful (oh that career in advocacy beckons, probably being led by mr wisdom) - i am, of course, bound to say as much just in case i need something from you... still.