Wednesday, August 06, 2014

COURT SECRETS: Scotland’s anti-transparency top judge Lord Brian Gill threatens media censorship in row over reporting access to court papers

Top judge Brian Gill warns media will be blocked from access to courts. SCOTLAND’S top judge, Lord President & Lord Justice General Brian Gill has issued an UNPRECEDENTED Judicial ‘notice’ warning the media they will be blocked from access to reporting on court cases because of “significant concerns” relating to public disclosures of cases going through Scotland’s hugely expensive yet slow moving courts system.

The move by Lord Gill to censor media access to court documents and public reporting of criminal or civil cases often stuck in courts for years at huge expense to taxpayers and litigants, comes after increasing questions from the media and the Scottish Parliament on the inadequate state of Scotland’s justice system, and the secret undeclared interests of top judges on huge salaries who head our publicly funded courts.

What is little short of a judicial proclamation from Lord Gill, originally marked ‘not for publication’ but now available HERE on the Scottish Court Service website, states “For some time the Court has been reviewing the practice of allowing journalists an opportunity to see complaints and indictments for note-taking purposes before cases call in court.” 

The judge goes on to claim court staff have disclosed “excessive” amounts of information to journalists on cases citing unspecified “recent breaches” of the current understanding between courts and the media on how cases are reported in the press. The judge then makes reference to the Data Protection Act 1998 as an excuse for blocking transparency in court activities.

Lord Gill concludes his edict on press freedoms by stating “the media are reminded of their responsibilities in the matter.”

This latest anti-transparency move by Lord Gill, who signed the media order as Lord Justice General, has drawn criticism from legal insiders who accuse the top judge of creating a de facto media law which may considerably affect or even alter the outcome of cases in court.

It is also clear Lord Gill’s sweeping judicial notice - widely being interpreted as a major policy statement from Scotland’s top judge, has come about with little open debate, discussion or consultation with Parliament.

A solicitor speaking to Diary of Injustice criticised the secrecy move by Scotland’s top judge, claiming Lord Gill’s threatened ban on the press may alter the course of justice where media attention and public interest in how the courts handle cases is both desirable and a necessity in a democratic society.

He said: “If the Lord President is minded to ban the media from court access to cases, does this also have implications for litigants and legal teams who may also be prevented in the future from securing necessary access to information and evidence crucial to a person’s right to a fair hearing?”

Lord Gill’s media policy statement:

NOTICE: ADVANCE ACCESS OF THE MEDIA TO COURT DOCUMENTS

1. For some time the Court has been reviewing the practice of allowing journalists an opportunity to see complaints and indictments for note-taking purposes before cases  call in court.The review was necessary because of significant concerns arising from the  Data  Protection Act 1998 (“DPA”) in relation to the disclosure of personal data and sensitive personal data in these documents.

2.  The current  practice  gives  journalists  an  opportunity to attend and report  on noteworthy cases; but  it is now clear that the information being disclosed is excessive for this purpose.

3.  In due course the courts will  move to an electronic  portal-based system  that will enable the media  to access  securely  information about  forthcoming  cases and,  in  time,  other  information  such  as  reporting  restrictions.  This  will provide sufficient information for reporting  purposes  but will ensure that  the court will comply with the requirements of the DPA.

4.  In  the  interim  the  current  practice  will  continue,  but  on  the  strict understanding that no information obtained from a complaint or indictment is to be published before a case calls in court.  In the light of recent breaches of that  understanding,  the  media  are  reminded  of  their  responsibilities  in  the matter.

Brian Gill Lord Justice General Edinburgh 30 July 2014

SCOTLAND’S ANTI TRANSPARENCY TOP JUDGE :

Scotland’s top judge Lord President Lord Brian Gill fiercely opposes calls for any form of transparency & public accountability of the judiciary and Scotland’s Courts.

Over the course of nearly two years, Scotland’s top judge Lord Gill has focussed his anger on a Scottish Parliament investigation into calls for a register of judicial interests. The register proposal would reveal the judiciary's vast personal, undeclared wealth, extensive family and business connections throughout the legal profession, links to big business, offshore trusts & investments, ownership of numerous and high value properties through a variety of ‘creative’ arrangements, directorships, shareholdings, and even unpublished criminal records of members of the judiciary.

Lord Gill refused at least two invitations to appear before the Scottish Parliament to give evidence and face questions on his opposition to the proposal to create a register of judicial interests. The top judge has also used the Scotland Act as a loophole to avoid further scrutiny on the matter.

Lord Gill’s challenge to MSPs declared judicial opposition to transparency. In Lord Gill’s opening letter to MSPs on the call for a register of judicial interests, the judge claimed “In practical terms it would be impossible for all judicial office holders to identify all the interests that could conceivably arise in any future case. The terms of the Judicial Oath and the Statement of Principles of Judicial Ethics ensure that such a difficulty does not arise and that the onus is on the judicial office holder to declare any interest at the outset.”

In what was a hint of the sheer hostility felt by the judiciary against a call to bring transparency to judges interests, Lord Gill went onto accuse the media, press, litigants, court users and just about everyone else with an interest in transparency of being potentially hostile and aggressive, simply because someone may wish to raise questions of judges interests similar to the same kinds of questions which are raised of interests in other public officials and those in public life, politics & government.

And, if MSPs were unsure of the depth of Lord Gill’s attitude towards transparency, the top judge went on to refuse to appear before the Scottish Parliament, and used a loophole in the Scotland Act to justify his sweeping declaration he did not require to answer questions from Scotland’s democratically elected politicians.

Lord Gill’s use of Scotland Act against MSPs was reported in the media. Writing in a letter to msps, Lord Gill implied cooperation with Parliament would be withdrawn over calls to make judges more transparent in register : “Section 23(7) of the Scotland Act provides inter alia that the Parliament may not require a judge to attend its proceedings for the purposes of giving evidence. This is not a loophole. It is a necessary part of the constitutional settlement by which the Parliament is established. Its purpose is to protect the independence of the judiciary, a vital constitutional principle that is declared in section 1 of the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Act 2008”

The judge continued: “When a committee invites a judge to give evidence before it, I have to decide whether the subject matter might infringe the principle of judicial independence; and whether the evidence required could be satisfactorily given in writing.”

At a time when questions are being asked as to why Scotland’s antiquated, slow moving and expensive justice system has not kept pace with reforms to other public services, Lord Gill’s attempt to cover over the failures of Scots justice by closing down media access to the courts raises questions over the honesty of proposed changes contained in legislation currently going through the Scottish Parliament, changes which are derived from many recommendations Lord Gill once made in his Civil Courts Review.

Lord Gill’s latest Victorian venture has no place in a modern society in 2014, where courts funded by the public purse to the tune of enormous sums of money must be transparent, accountable and open to all, instead of being run by an ageing judiciary as a symbol of personal power, secretive wealth & undeclared interests and ultimately, nothing short of a business venture for the legal profession.

Previous articles on the lack of transparency within Scotland’s judiciary, investigations by Diary of Injustice including reports from the media, and video footage of debates at the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee deliberations on Petition PE1458: Register of Interests for members of Scotland's judiciary can be found here : A Register of Interests for Scotland's Judiciary

48 comments:

Anonymous said...

This top judge of yours is acting bit heavy handed against your petition.Shutting down the press just because someone recognised the judges are at it is not the way things work.I hope the msps see it the same way.

Anonymous said...

Gill is determined to drag the rest of the judiciary down with him or more probably he has their consent to make such a written statement.

Tells you a lot about the judges doesnt it Peter and confirms you have been right all along to ask Holyrood to register the judges interests.

Carry on!

Anonymous said...

Old Gill must be losing the plot.

If there are breaches of the DPA because journalists were given access to sensitive information then it must follow the information came from SCS staff who breached DPA.

How many SCS staff have been disciplined for breaching DPA and how many reported to the Information Commissioner or Scottish Information Commissioner who must be told of DPA breaches and rule if a breach has taken place - if any have occurred.

Further investigation of Lord Gill's claims may turn up some surprising truths.

Anonymous said...

" In the light of recent breaches of that understanding, the media are reminded of their responsibilities in the matter."

Sinister or what

Who the hell pays for Gill and the courts anyway?Yes,that's right Brian its us who pay your whopping salary etc

Incredible really this is going on and a judge feels powerful enough to write up a shut your face statement to the press and to be able to get away with it.

Anonymous said...

So much for "not for publication" crap haha

Good one mate keep these judges on their toes.You are giving them sleepless nights by the sounds of it

Anonymous said...

It's all me me me...

When are they going to smell the haggis and learn that this system that they have created to serve themselves is out of order and out of time and that they should begin serving the people for a change?

Is it not about time that manager Civil Servants were brought-in to manage the Scottish Judicial System in a professional, modern, business orientated way and then out-source the judges to do the judging?

After all just because they hire from within their pals and their like does not mean that they are good managers?

In one stroke this would weed out all of the unnecessary idle waste and self serving attitudes and conventions and save Scotland an absolute fortune and provide Scotland with a more reliable and believable Judicial System?

Anonymous said...

Lord Loony attempts to control the press because we now know the courts are rotten to the core!

MORE PRESS COVERAGE PLEASE!!

Anonymous said...

Is this out of control judge Lord Gill now planning secret courts in Scotland with no media present just as in the rest of the UK. Time the press took him to task and the rest of the judges who are acting like dictators over the rest of us.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/12/secret-courts-rule-of-law

The Guardian view on secret courts: they undermine the rule of law
When it comes to open justice, security should not trump transparency so easily

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2540919/At-Victory-secret-courts-Rulings-family-cases-public-Mail-campaign.html

At last! Victory on secret courts: Rulings in family cases to be made public after Mail campaign

Family Court and Court of Protection judgements will now be made public
Expert witnesses, including social workers, are to be named
Councils applying to take children into care can no longer claim anonymity
New rules laid down by President of the Family Division Sir James Munby
Daily Mail has exposed a series of major scandals over the past year
These have resulted from justice being conducted behind closed doors

http://www.nuj.org.uk/news/journalism-at-its-best-uncovers-the-truth-secret-courts-hide/

Journalism at its best uncovers the truth, secret courts hide the evidence

3 January 2014

Simon Crowther, Open Justice Project

In June last year the highly controversial Justice and Security Act came into force - allowing the government to hear national security cases behind closed doors, in secret courts - insulated from the press, the public and even the person bringing the case. This legislation will cover up evidence in public interest cases and where only proper media coverage will ensure justice is done and seen to be done.

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2014/02/03/mps-vote-on-plans-to-allow-secret-courts-to-confiscate-journ

MPs vote on plans to allow secret courts to confiscate journalists' files
By Ian Dunt Monday, 3 February 2014 9:09 AM 0
Justice? Demands for journalists' materials could come in secret courts Justice? Demands for journalists' materials could come in secret courts

Ministers have conceded they will carry out further consultation over plans to
allow authorities to demand journalists hand over their notebooks, digital files and photographs in secret courts.

Clause 47 of the deregulation bill, which is being debated in the Commons, would remove rules forcing state requests for journalistic material to be made in open court with media representatives.

Instead, the so-called 'production orders' would scrap existing safeguards and conduct the discussions in hearings closed to the public and without media lawyers present.

Anonymous said...

"Lord Gill’s threatened ban on the press may alter the course of justice where media attention and public interest in how the courts handle cases is both desirable and a necessity in a democratic society."

Yes,exactly, and Lord Gill's attitude is outrageous.

You cannot have closed courts and the media kicked out just because some old judge wants to conceal judges interests and stop people raising questions about the judiciary.

Diary of Injustice said...

@ 6 August 2014 18:33

Good points worth looking into ...

@ 6 August 2014 19:24

There are plenty of civil servants already in the courts system, however not many will go on the record to speak up against the Scottish Court Service and the judiciary .. for fear of losing their jobs etc ...

@ 6 August 2014 20:22

The way in which numerous court opinions are anonymised to protect the identities of dodgy lawyers,law firms, accountants and others who have vested interests with the judiciary already amount to a kind of secret court system in Scotland ... and with nothing to declare the judiciary will carry on the cover ups at their leisure until a fully detailed and published register of judicial interests is created.

Anonymous said...

Obviously you know what you are talking about but be careful because this judge is a very dangerous man and is willing to risk reputation the courts and everything to get his way against you and anyone who dare question the judges.This is a very threatening letter and is clearly aimed at you and probably the Scottish Parliament.Someone in his position who writes like this and acts the way he does in the newspaper reports is not fit to be a judge and is really threatening.

Anonymous said...

A very disturbing development and just to show up Scotland once again - if a judge wrote out a media order like this in an English court it would have been all over BBC news.As another comment says this is getting very sinister along with the judges who are now trying to blackmail the media.

I hope Gill ends up in every newspaper and if there is any justice or respect for press freedoms in Scotland he will.

Anonymous said...

Yes totally unacceptable this cannot be allowed to stand in court and anyway when is this guy going to resign.He has brought the courts judiciary and everyone into disrepute by the way he dodges parliament and then threatens everyone in letters.Oh yes Gill is very good at threatening people in letters and now threatening the media in letters but he wont show up at the parliament to face the music will he.

Anonymous said...

What are the chances of a proper access to justice and a fair, transparent trial in Scotland NIL.

Has ever been thus for the general population, any chance of some BBC coverage now it also applies to the Press?

Anonymous said...

Interesting post and very good comments.I see people raising some really pertinent things here about the judge and his tantrum because of this register idea of yours.

As far as I am concerned I feel all judges should be required to register their interests and to be honest I always thought this was the case until now.You have opened my eyes about this lack of openness in the court.

Keep up the good work.

Anonymous said...

The way in which numerous court opinions are anonymised to protect the identities of dodgy lawyers,law firms, accountants and others who have vested interests with the judiciary already amount to a kind of secret court system in Scotland ... and with nothing to declare the judiciary will carry on the cover ups at their leisure until a fully detailed and published register of judicial interests is created.

6 August 2014 21:12

This has become almost standard practise.

In court rolls you will see AH ltd v Smith Ltd or HMRC v P, J and F.....

I am not sure if this is arranged by way of a bung or just a nod and a wink but it is highly fraudulent and is done to protect the reputation of persons who have much to gain by not being seen on court rolls?

This is not a Public Court. This has descended into a protection racket for their pals?

God forbid you ask a court clerk for the full names of the abbreviated names on the rolls for fear you will be escorted from the building or threatened with a visit from the boys in black & blue?

Anonymous said...

Is this the thin end of the wedge?

Anonymous said...

Not much of an advertisement for Scottish justice is it and your solicitor is spot on about the media being a necessity in cases going through the courts.

Anonymous said...

After Gill told the msps to shut up this was just a matter of time.He is running scared because of you and the headlines.There is a lot to lose for the judges on this one and he knows it.Keep up the pressure you are doing a lot of good and we know this because of the way Gill keeps reacting to you!

Anonymous said...

Lord Censorship has no place in 2014 Scotland and any other judge doing the same should be sacked or forced to resign.It is the public right to know what goes on in the courts and not just because we pay for it - because we need to know what these judges are up to and what is happening to cases in the court otherwise injustice keeps on happening and no one gets to find out with people like Gill in charge.

Anonymous said...

2. The current practice gives journalists an opportunity to attend and report on noteworthy cases; but it is now clear that the information being disclosed is excessive for this purpose.

Really?

I dont think so Lord Gill.If anything the Scottish courts are some of the most secret in the world!

Anonymous said...

This must be about Gill having to declare because of his son showed up in court (very murky the whole affair really as you pointed out in your story about it)

If anything the press should be in on all cases and there should be cameras in the courts so we can see live what this bunch of pensioners are doing to the justice system for their own pockets.

Anonymous said...

Top judge Brian Gill warns media will be blocked from access to courts. SCOTLAND’S top judge, Lord President & Lord Justice General Brian Gill has issued an UNPRECEDENTED Judicial ‘notice’ warning the media they will be blocked from access to reporting on court cases because of “significant concerns” relating to public disclosures of cases going through Scotland’s hugely expensive yet slow moving courts system.
=================================
Why can this man get away with this? They are paranoid these legal people and I am convinced many of them have serious mental health problems in terms of their power freak attitudes and entrenched secrecy. They are unaccountable to the public, draconian with power from a bygone age. Utterly corrupt setup they made and enforce. Who judges the Judges?

Anonymous said...

Top judge Brian Gill warns media will be blocked from access to courts. SCOTLAND’S top judge, Lord President & Lord Justice General Brian Gill has issued an UNPRECEDENTED Judicial ‘notice’ warning the media they will be blocked from access to reporting on court cases because of “significant concerns” relating to public disclosures of cases going through Scotland’s hugely expensive yet slow moving courts system.
=================================
Why can this man get away with this? They are paranoid these legal people and I am convinced many of them have serious mental health problems in terms of their power freak attitudes and entrenched secrecy. They are unaccountable to the public, draconian with power from a bygone age. Utterly corrupt setup they made and enforce. Who judges the Judges?

Anonymous said...

Lawyers are the enemies of their clients, it is just many of the latter don't realize that fact.

Anonymous said...

Does Lord Gill want to slap his Scottish D notice on the press for every story about the justice system or

Anonymous said...

If the top judge in America did this he would be finished after the headlines and senate hearings into him threatening censorship.

You guys have a judiciary turned dictatorship.

Anonymous said...

Easy to understand why most stories about bent lawyers crooked courts and corrupt judges never make it to the press - there's old Gill and his cronies sitting there with that f* off attitude to anyone who takes a stand against their little corrupt court empire

Anonymous said...

Who put Gill in charge of media censorship in Scotland??

As you say we pay for the courts and pay for him to swan around at his leisure.So if anything is happening in the courts we have a right to know what it is and what to look out for.

Perhaps Mr Gill is upset people are now beginning to ask the right questions in court instead of being flumoxed by legal jargon and lawyers who stick together with the judges.

Whatever is going on Gill is obviously upset people are finally getting it about lawyers and courts and it is a result of the press headlines your blog and petition.

Anonymous said...

"Judicial ethics"? That's a joke.

Anonymous said...

This has all the hallmarks of a soft threat to the nations Press and as such has to be viewed with much scepticism and mistrust.

When the Press were silenced before we got Jimmy Savile and all of his creepy friends getting off with it. The last thing we need is a neutered Press in Scotland to stay silent about known criminality.

Anonymous said...

What is the point of having a Judiciary in Scotland if all they want to do is sweep things under the carpet?

Anonymous said...

Get the cameras into courts now instead of waiting on these dinosaurs telling us we cannot see hear or read what is going on in the courts and justice system.

About time we had a new judiciary in tune with this century not 400 years ago.

Anonymous said...

Where a Scottish Judge presides on a case, where he has Shares in one of these company's is a clear Conflict of Interest?

It cannot be anything other than a Conflict of Interest?

So, what do the Scottish Court Service do about it, when this is discovered under a FOI request?

They change the goal posts to suit themselves and miraculously decide that a Scottish Judge CAN hear a case whilst having Shares in one of the company's before him?

This reminds me of that old Scottish Joke....

The Scottish Judge is bribed with £100,000.00 from one of the sides in a court case and the other side bribes the Scottish Judge with £75,000.00 to swing the case their way?

On the day of the court hearing the Scottish Judge stands up before the assembled court and the public gallery and announces, 'Attention please lady's and gentlemen, as you know The Scottish Court is, as always, transparent in it's dealings, at all times and in accordance with this I am informing you all that Party A have tried to bribe me with a gift of £100,000.00 (gasps from the assembled room) and Party B has also tried to bribe me with £75,000.00 (more gasps). So, in the interests of justice, watch as I hand back to Party A £25,000.00 in this brown paper bag. There now, shall we begin......?

Anonymous said...

Is it not about time Scotland changes to Professional Judges?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Obviously you know what you are talking about but be careful because this judge is a very dangerous man and is willing to risk reputation the courts and everything to get his way against you and anyone who dare question the judges.This is a very threatening letter and is clearly aimed at you and probably the Scottish Parliament.Someone in his position who writes like this and acts the way he does in the newspaper reports is not fit to be a judge and is really threatening.

6 August 2014 21:33
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

This threatening posturing causes me genuine fear and alarm!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Yes totally unacceptable this cannot be allowed to stand in court and anyway when is this guy going to resign.He has brought the courts judiciary and everyone into disrepute by the way he dodges parliament and then threatens everyone in letters.Oh yes Gill is very good at threatening people in letters and now threatening the media in letters but he wont show up at the parliament to face the music will he.

6 August 2014 22:01
-------------------------------

Resign!

Why do you think they continue to work into their late 70's long after they should be retired?

Because they are a law-unto-themselves and there is no one to sack them?

Why would they retire when they are supposed to when they can work (some part-time-hours-for-full-time-salary) for as long as they choose to, in order to stuff £50 pound notes down their boots?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
What are the chances of a proper access to justice and a fair, transparent trial in Scotland NIL.

Has ever been thus for the general population, any chance of some BBC coverage now it also applies to the Press?

6 August 2014 22:34
/////////////////////////////////////

Not likely! Considering the BBC were attacked with 'D' Notices threatening to sue them for the BBC's excellent exposure of corruption by the Law Society of Scotland and their SSDT in their programme 'Lawyers Behaving Badly' screened at the beginning of the year?

Try to find this online now?

They have taken action all around the World to remove the BBC's documentary from existence so that it cannot keep coming into the consciousness of the Public just how crooked and insidious the Law Society of Scotland are?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
This must be about Gill having to declare because of his son showed up in court (very murky the whole affair really as you pointed out in your story about it)

If anything the press should be in on all cases and there should be cameras in the courts so we can see live what this bunch of pensioners are doing to the justice system for their own pockets.

7 August 2014 22:46
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Crazy.

When you think that when you go into any Scottish Court room and sit in the Public Gallery, you are not allowed to take down any notes?

This is so that anything which is said in a Scottish Court can be later disputed as hearsay (because there was no written recording of what was said)?

This is to protect the professional liars in the Court; Scottish lawyers and is nothing at all to do with Justice?

Ah, but what about the Court Audio Visual Recording System installed in all Scottish Courts since around 2001, I hear you ask?

Well, that is simple. Scottish Courts do not use them or if they do they simply tell lies about what was said to protect themselves all to the detriment of Justice?

This is exemplified in the recent Robert Green Case, where the Crown refused to give his legal team the Official Court Recording or Transcript and instead they invented their own version, which had the offensive remarks altered and removed?

Mr Green quite rightly made a complaint about this and it was heard by another Scottish Judge and the whole thing was swept under the carpet quicker than you could say court corruption?

This is a typical example of the sham that they call Scottish Courts?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Top judge Brian Gill warns media will be blocked from access to courts. SCOTLAND’S top judge, Lord President & Lord Justice General Brian Gill has issued an UNPRECEDENTED Judicial ‘notice’ warning the media they will be blocked from access to reporting on court cases because of “significant concerns” relating to public disclosures of cases going through Scotland’s hugely expensive yet slow moving courts system.
=================================
Why can this man get away with this? They are paranoid these legal people and I am convinced many of them have serious mental health problems in terms of their power freak attitudes and entrenched secrecy. They are unaccountable to the public, draconian with power from a bygone age. Utterly corrupt setup they made and enforce. Who judges the Judges?

8 August 2014 00:11
sssssssssssshhhhhhhhhh

In Scotland, Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.

Anonymous said...

Exactly what are these "recent breaches" Gill is talking about?

What about when judges and the Crown Office shuffle about the court rolls so we turn up at non existent hearings conveniently shifted to another day or another venue.

Anonymous said...

Gill is on 1/4 million a year etc and gets to dictate to the media about secret courts - as someone else already wrote this is a fine example of cameras needed in courts now and finally we get to see the bunch of dinosaurs in charge of the justice system!

Anonymous said...

So, does this mean that some people can pick their own choice of Scottish Judge?

Anonymous said...

I do not understand how Scottish Judges and Sheriffs are now allowed to have Shares in companies?

This practise is supposed to be outlawed for the simple reason is that it is inviting Conflicts of Interests to occur, where otherwise there would not be any problem?

The reason Scottish Judges and Sheriffs are paid such extraordinary high salaries is precisely because they are forbidden from having any Shares?

It is ludicrous and just a plain lie that a Scottish Judge or Sheriff can hold Shares in a company appearing before them without there being a Conflict of Interest?

Whoever, reached this absurd decision is just protecting the self-protection racket and keeping their wallets bulging and it is symptomatic that they have long since abandoned Principals of Law in favour of their own selfish enrichment to the detriment of Scotland's Injustice System?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
Top judge Brian Gill warns media will be blocked from access to courts. SCOTLAND’S top judge, Lord President & Lord Justice General Brian Gill has issued an UNPRECEDENTED Judicial ‘notice’ warning the media they will be blocked from access to reporting on court cases because of “significant concerns” relating to public disclosures of cases going through Scotland’s hugely expensive yet slow moving courts system.
=================================
Why can this man get away with this? They are paranoid these legal people and I am convinced many of them have serious mental health problems in terms of their power freak attitudes and entrenched secrecy. They are unaccountable to the public, draconian with power from a bygone age. Utterly corrupt setup they made and enforce. Who judges the Judges?

8 August 2014 00:11
sssssssssssshhhhhhhhhh

In Scotland, Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.

12 August 2014 13:07
-------------------------------

There is a widely held belief in Scotland that the Scottish Judiciary and Scottish lawyers in general hate ordinary members of the public and see them as useless eaters and treat them with utter contempt?

The reason for this attitude is the responsibility of the Law Society of Scotland and their SSDT & SLCC, where they seek to let crooked Scottish lawyers off with as light a sanction that they think they can get away with, whilst at the same time causing unnecessary cruelty and suffering of the crooked Scottish lawyer's client victim?

Thereby, the Law Society of Scotland have created the commonly held belief amongst their member lawyers that Clients are there to be fed from like a cash-tree, whereby the Scottish lawyer is encouraged to prune the tree over and over again so that it keeps producing more and more £50 pound notes for the Scottish lawyers self-enrichment and to the detriment of the Scottish Public?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Exactly what are these "recent breaches" Gill is talking about?

What about when judges and the Crown Office shuffle about the court rolls so we turn up at non existent hearings conveniently shifted to another day or another venue.


12 August 2014 13:40
0000000000000000000

Or the other often used tactic of informing the Parties to the proceedings in court the date for the next hearing and then before that future date arrives, they only notify one of the Party's to come into court prior to the agreed date and lo-and-behold the Sheriff or Judge awards the case to the Party who is in court because the other Party was not there?

Any complaints about this sharp practice, falls on deaf ears because they say, well how on earth did the other Party come to court on the correct day and you did not. You must have got the date wrong?

This is why they do not allow any notes to be taken down in court, it has all to be from a recollection of memory, which as everybody knows is not reliable and is certainly not proof?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Gill is on 1/4 million a year etc and gets to dictate to the media about secret courts - as someone else already wrote this is a fine example of cameras needed in courts now and finally we get to see the bunch of dinosaurs in charge of the justice system!

13 August 2014 11:46
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

They will fight to the death to keep video camera's and digital sound recording out of the Scottish Court because this would stop the criminality over fixed hearings, improper conduct and non-recusals in one foul-swoop and would lead to the instant drying-up of very many income streams for them?

Anonymous said...

Wonder if Gill wore his santa claus suit in Qatar?Surely must be too hot there for the flappy wig and cloak!