Morning round-up

Morning round-up: Friday 22 July

By on

The morning’s top legal affairs news stories


Britain needs Brexit debate, says woman behind legal challenge [Reuters]

Jeremy Corbyn’s plan to combat workplace discrimination could be unlawful, claims leading law firm [Independent]

Barrister faces jail for defying judge in battle with his illegitimate half-sister for their horse breeder father’s £18million fortune [Mail Online]

Documents reveal that Harry Potter lawyer Alan Blacker had been misleading the public for years [Wales Online]

‘I’ll affirm thanks’ [Twitter]

Ibori lawyer awarded £20,000 by Crown Prosecution Service [BBC News]

Same-sex marriage to become legal from Friday in Isle of Man [The Guardian]

Judge and barristers whip off wigs and gowns in overheating courtroom [Grimsby Telegraph]

The shocking case of David Bryant reveals the fallacy that we can always spot a liar [Barrister Blogger]

Decision over blanket Rio ban on Russia delayed as International Olympic Committee opt to seek legal advice [City A.M.]

Deadline fast approaching: Training contracts at RPC [Legal Cheek Hub]

“If I was texting on my phone and got injured walking in to a lamppost or crashed my car, that’s my fault. If I am playing Pokemon Go, why is it the developers fault? Lost on this one.” [Legal Cheek comments]


Not Amused

“A Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) report shows the body had learned of “misleading/inaccurate publicity” on a web page run by Blacker as early as August 2012”

Please keep hounding the SRA on this.

They did nothing. Regulators like to go silent and hope difficult issues go away. But this is a shocking failure. Moreover, Mr Blacker’s wrong was not a subtle or sophisticated fraud. It was perfectly obvious what he was doing to anyone who looked.

The SRA has a case to answer and only the press can make them do so.



The role of both the SRA and Ilex in Blacker qualifying needs to be answered.

There are cogent grounds for suspecting that he blagged his way past both regulators.



“Reporter bemused as nun called as witness doesn’t swear oath on the Bible for some reason”

James 5:12 says “But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest you fall under judgment.”

And at Matthew 5:37 “But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these comes from evil.”

So there are many devout Christians who reject oaths as being contrary to biblical teaching.

The Quakers used to refuse to swear oaths in court for this reason, and so affirmations were introduced to allow Quakers to exercise their freedom of conscience. Bradlaugh then had it extended for non-theists.


Lord Lyle of Rape Trial Destruction

Is rape the only criminal offence that no longer requires corroboratory evidence? (circa 1996)
And requires the defendant to prove his innocence? (Circa 2004)

These are plainly political show trials.
It was in my mind to have the UK before the European court under the right to a fair trial etc ..but that never materialised because clients.

But I found other means and ways to destroy these show trials. One of them was to do a bit of detective work, just as the article on the Bryant case illustrates, but my classic cruise missile was a conflicting S.9 police statement from the complainant.

Btw when I previously stated that VB sometimes the victims are the perpetrators and the perpetrators are the victims, I got loads of dislikes

Learn and discern boys and girls.


Comments are closed.