Now that I am retired having been many years a magistrate with a long awareness of the declining freedoms enjoyed by the ordinary citizen and a corresponding fear of the big brother state`s ever increasing encroachment on civil liberties I hope that my personal observations within these general parameters will be of interest to those with an open mind. Having been blogging with this title for many years against the rules of the Ministry of Justice my new found freedom should allow me to be less inhibited in these observations.

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 If any comment seems submitted just to advertise a website it will not be published.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, 6 April 2017


It`s not every day that a magistrate`s bench is accused in open court by a lawyer for the defence that irregularities had occurred in the conviction of a client: namely that information (evidence) not produced at the hearing had been instrumental in the conviction of that client.  The reasonably detailed newspaper report is available here.  No doubt this will be one to watch.


  1. I am struggling to get my head around the imbecility of the alleged statement. A magistrate - a chair at that - actually stating out loud that they had sought out or heard evidence without the defence being given the opportunity to see or challenge it?

    It would be positively Kafkaesque, and I fervently hope that there is some misinterpretation at play. If genuine (and I truly hope it was not), then I am inclined to agree with the defence brief that it would cross the line into contempt for the very process which they are there to uphold.

  2. The only thing I think it could be is that a JP has come into contact with the defendant before, and has mentioned this in the retiring room.