Gotta be honest, I’m incredibly uncomfortable with Micah having a leadership role at RHED. I’ll obv default to Black leadership on this, but I’m not gonna hold back on vocalizing how incredibly violating this feels to me as a survivor of sexual assault...
More from Court
Some initial observations about this case, and in particular what the Court of Appeal made of the Attorney General’s application to refer these sentences as “unduly lenient”.
Spoiler: it makes uncomfortable reading for the Attorney General.
First, by way of background. I was one of several commentators astonished that the Attorney General, who has no known experience of practising criminal law, decided to personally present this serious case at the Court of Appeal.
It appeared an overtly political decision.
Comments leaked to the press confirmed this was a political decision, to capitalise on a tragic case in the headlines.
A “friend” of the Attorney General told the Express that she was pursuing the case *against* legal advice. She also took a preemptive pop at the judges.
On the day of the hearing, it appeared from selected reports that the AG was out of her depth. She appeared to be making political submissions to the Court of Appeal that have no place in a case of this type.
The Court of Appeal judgment helps understand what happened.
The AG played a limited role. She “rehearsed some of the facts and said that the sentences had caused widespread public concern”
Her contribution was seemingly not considered by the Court to be legal submissions. Oof.
Spoiler: it makes uncomfortable reading for the Attorney General.
There will be no substantive change to the sentences passed on the killers of Pc Andrew Harper.
— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) December 16, 2020
The Attorney General\u2019s application to refer the sentences as unduly lenient and the defence applications for leave to appeal against sentence have been refused by the Court of Appeal. https://t.co/qxTzuj7jR3
First, by way of background. I was one of several commentators astonished that the Attorney General, who has no known experience of practising criminal law, decided to personally present this serious case at the Court of Appeal.
It appeared an overtly political decision.
Grimly cynical.
— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) November 12, 2020
The Attorney General - who has absolutely no experience of criminal law - is so desperate to exploit this tragic case that she is inserting herself into proceedings that she is not competent to conduct.https://t.co/QWdINvUwwf
Comments leaked to the press confirmed this was a political decision, to capitalise on a tragic case in the headlines.
A “friend” of the Attorney General told the Express that she was pursuing the case *against* legal advice. She also took a preemptive pop at the judges.
Before the hearing, the Attorney General leaked to the Daily Express, via an alleged \u201cfriend\u201d, her views that, should the judges find against her, it will be because they are \u201cwet liberal judges\u201d who are \u201csoft on criminals\u201d. https://t.co/5uGggN8tTT
— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) November 30, 2020
On the day of the hearing, it appeared from selected reports that the AG was out of her depth. She appeared to be making political submissions to the Court of Appeal that have no place in a case of this type.
The Attorney General had to be embarrassingly corrected during the hearing by an actual criminal silk after making irrelevant and politicised submissions to the Court of Appeal.
— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) November 30, 2020
What a farce. pic.twitter.com/wy81xoFIDI
The Court of Appeal judgment helps understand what happened.
The AG played a limited role. She “rehearsed some of the facts and said that the sentences had caused widespread public concern”
Her contribution was seemingly not considered by the Court to be legal submissions. Oof.
I've decided that I will not be spouting off an uninformed, kneejerk opinion on a topic I don't have enough information about. Instead I shall cast shame on the idiots who do, and bring further confusion to everyone.
We as a people have been defanged not only by being fed wheelbarrows full of raw unmitigated horseshit, but even the knowledge of where to go to find this information has been buried beneath obscuring layers of horseshit thicker than the planet's crust.
We do not live in a democracy, whose vital functions require a freeflow of information much like pure capitalism requires a completely informed consumer populace. We instead live in an oligopoly of knowledge, where important facts we need to know are denied to us and hoarded away
Much like how we do not live under true capitalism as knowledge we need to make informed decisions as consumers is locked away and hidden behind thicc layers of legal documents, denying us knowledge of our rights under the rules of commerce we allegedly agreed to.
This is how we are denied our rights. By denying us knowledge of our rights, and then by denying us pathways to seek said knowledge, and if not removing them then hiding them within websites hosted on fucking geocities servers and javascript written by lowest bidder.
What\u2019s your level of optimism on this election going to the Supreme Court
— Dr. Gulag inmate president elect 69420 (@ViewnComs) December 17, 2020
We as a people have been defanged not only by being fed wheelbarrows full of raw unmitigated horseshit, but even the knowledge of where to go to find this information has been buried beneath obscuring layers of horseshit thicker than the planet's crust.
We do not live in a democracy, whose vital functions require a freeflow of information much like pure capitalism requires a completely informed consumer populace. We instead live in an oligopoly of knowledge, where important facts we need to know are denied to us and hoarded away
Much like how we do not live under true capitalism as knowledge we need to make informed decisions as consumers is locked away and hidden behind thicc layers of legal documents, denying us knowledge of our rights under the rules of commerce we allegedly agreed to.
This is how we are denied our rights. By denying us knowledge of our rights, and then by denying us pathways to seek said knowledge, and if not removing them then hiding them within websites hosted on fucking geocities servers and javascript written by lowest bidder.
