Scandalising a Judge

[Magrew]

Right in my next venture into the world it is likely that I may be upsetting some influential people. These are the people that believe they are the law, some people know them as Judges but I want to know if the umbrella is wider.

Scandalising a Judge is an offence that most of us will never be in danger of being guilty of. I suspect that I may be dancing around the edges of this one in the very near future. Can anyone tell me who would be considered a judge in this context, does it include Tribunal Conveners or must it be a genuine sworn in Judge?

I have not found any recent caselaw on this offence. Is anyone aware of any.

Bear in mind as usual I am in Scotland. I am not expecting any expert advice here since this is such an unusual offence but I was thinking it may make some interesting collective research.

[bluebottle]

Re: Scandalising a Judge

I have never heard of the offence of Scandalising A Judge, Magrew. However, there is a Judicial Ombudsman whom people can complain to if a judge behaves like an a***hole or makes a mockery of the law or judicial system.

[Magrew]

Re: Scandalising a Judge

This is more associated with making public statements around their behaviour in and out of the court. Basically bringing their reputation into question. It is designed to stop the public being too public about our exalted judiciary.

It may just be a Scottish thing, I am only in the early stages of exploring/researching it. I am trying to see how far I can expose something without getting "thrown in the Tower".

The normal channels are too slow moving in my current circumstances so I am planning something that may be more political than legal.

This is following the Marxist model of change coming from conflict rather than the gentile consensus model that our "civilised" culture promotes.

Just found this which is encouraging http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/a...eech-peterhain

[Magrew]

Re: Scandalising a Judge

Just found this as well http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19204860

Looks like we have open season on Judges.

Is this consistent with my recent comments on Solomon.

[Bill-K]

Re: Scandalising a Judge

Well, at least there seems to be a Scottish equivalent of this, Mr M. From the examples in your link, it appears so far that the offence amounts to libellous - or scandalous - remarks which are based on personal opinion and not supported by fact. Sure, the law must be respected by us all if we are to rely upon it and expect to benefit from it - and its obstinate - or asinine - nature gives it that reliability.

But that respect must therefore be afforded to the Judiciary, with whom we charge the task of fairly dispensing that justice, and ensuring that the law is upheld. Equally (and reciprocally), IMHO, the members of the Judiciary must be expected to behave respectably toward us - whom they serve. The respect must be mutual, I believe.

My personal opinion of HHJ Halbert - or HHJ Jeffreys for that matter - is no more than that, and if I express it openly, then I put myself in danger of a libel or slander suit. To me, the 'Scandalising' or 'Murmuring' of a judge is simply taking the same principles, but giving them extra gravity because it is the Judiciary that is being insulted - and thus the very Law of the Land.

But - if a judge can be shown to have insulted the Judiciary by their own behaviour, then the word 'Scandal' seems to make better sense. Our opinions of a judge are perhaps best kept to ourselves - or at least only expressed privately. But if a judge condemns theirself by their own words or actions, then it is they who are guilty of contempt for their fellow judges and their fellow man. He who discreetly brings this to the attention of the Judiciary must surely NOT be guilty of 'Scandalising.'

That's my take - thanks for humouring me !!!

[Magrew]

Re: Scandalising a Judge

Bill, your words are well considered as usual.

My critique will be carefully constructed and reviewed before it goes out. I hope it will be part of a wider campaign which will offer it a high degree of credibility. I also hope it will be presented in a way that challenges the system in a very public way. It may well become part of your daily news since you live fairly local to me. I expect our story will be in with that of similarly alienated members of our society.

This week I think I have stirred a tiger, they have the muscle, we have the story. If it all goes to plan it will be the ignition for a challenging political campaign that is highly likely to politically embarrass the Executive and the Judiciary (to go all sociologist on you). For full impact I think it therefore has to be pointed towards individuals rather than the big machine. That I believe will focus the reaction, people tend to focus more if it is their personal ass on the line.

For this to work though our heads need to be over the parapit just to show that it is a real family and not just an anonymous, possibly hypothetical issue. It has to be a people issue which is tangible to the general public. Therefore the acussations will be from me personally hence the question above.