Comments are usually moderated. However, I do not accept any legal responsibility for the content of any comment. If any comment seems submitted just to advertise a website it will not be published.

Thursday, 8 October 2015

18 YEAR OLD MAGISTRATE

I have looked at some of the many definitions of wisdom.  Qualities variously required to achieve this noble state are knowledge, good judgement, intelligence, understanding, insight but that which seems to figure most is experience.   Therefore it is completely unsurprising that in most societies past and present age and wisdom complete a perfect couplet.  At the other end of the chronological spectrum youth is associated with exuberance, enthusiasm, impetuosity, idealism, impulsiveness, generosity and similar attributes.  These fine human qualities were on show at the Scottish referendum last year and the cult like fascination Jeremy Corbyn appears to have for his often young supporters. The lampooning directed at young right wing supporters of the Tory Party whether in comedy fiction or real life seems to support the view that Tory voters are more mature and emphasises the incongruity of a youthful Tory in stark contrast to the respected and seemingly natural position of being a young left wing socialist.   What all this has to do with a retired magistrate`s blog is the recent appointment of one Alex Hyne as England`s youngest Justice of the Peace at the tender age of 18.  This young man I am sure must have many fine qualities which impressed the appointments committee; and after all he has now reached voting age, can be sent to fight for his country and can be married without parental consent but do those arguments and comparisons compensate for his lack of that indispensable requirement of experience?  I would posit that at 18 lack of life knowledge is a major handicap in being able to exercise judgement over fellow citizens. Indeed even at 21 the human brain has not been completely formulated.  

The lowering of age related requirements is paying lip service to a philosophy originated in the 1960s of equality for almost anything or anybody per se without any regard to any other qualification. The fact that the last census equated being a Jedi Knight to being a Catholic, or Jew or Sikh or Hindu or Moslem insofar as it was considered a religion shows how far we have travelled down this particular road to perdition. I wish this young person nothing but good fortune but I fear his mentor and other bench colleagues will have their good natures put under some unnecessary strain to force feed him that wisdom which his youth must sorely lack. 
Posted by at

3 comments:

  1. Anonymous8 October 2015 at 17:03

    I had to wait until I was 21 before I could vote and looked back, on achieving my majority, with a degree of horror at some of the things that I had done at age 18. I accept that many of "the few" were aged under 21 and have to wonder whether youthful exuberance is a plus feature for fighting men - who knows?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous9 October 2015 at 08:49

    Too young indeed. The bench age profile is rightfully a matter of some concern but I don't believe that a teenager on the bench is the right way to go. We need more people in their twenties and thirties. If you use the argument that you can vote at 18 then why not drop the minimum age to be a magistrate to 16? After all, that was the age you could vote in the Scottish referendum. To take this a stage further, if you become a magistrate at 18 then you could become a chairman by 23. I don't believe that anyone would be ready to take the chair at that age. We should not pander to the siren voices that demand equality in all things. There are some things that should be protected from the craven demands of the politically correct. A minimum age of 21 was OK and there was never a rational argument made to lower it.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous9 October 2015 at 11:44

      When I commented above I hadn't read the Mail's article. Having done so my fears are confirmed. He needs to be told robustly and quickly that his future role has absolutely nothing to do with "Advocacy for young people" or for any other individual or group for that matter. He goes on "I can bring a completely new perspective on crime" Really? I wonder how exactly he thinks he can do that. Nothing but idealistic & empty rhetoric from someone who is not mature or experienced enough to assume the role and exactly why we don't need to be appointing teenagers. I suspect that this kid is going to prove to be an embarrassment to an office that is already held in generally low regard by both the legal profession and other court professionals. I hope that the Justices' Clerk takes him to one side and reminds him that he should not be making statements to the press,

      Delete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)