tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post8182060020185774166..comments2024-03-24T23:01:57.640+00:00Comments on The Justice Diaries: Creating a register of judicial interests ‘is the right thing to do’ - David Torrance MSP on Scottish Parliament judicial interests debateUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-13682009825656675982016-02-22T21:09:30.236+00:002016-02-22T21:09:30.236+00:00Fat too many judges sitting on cases they ought no...Fat too many judges sitting on cases they ought not to be doing.<br />Far too many related judges with different names in Scotland.<br />Big Wullie Beckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14622020677322097844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-23620841368218001632014-10-23T03:05:47.082+01:002014-10-23T03:05:47.082+01:00I've lost track of who is saying what anyway g...I've lost track of who is saying what anyway good on you for getting the debate in the end and publishing everything.Scotland needs the judges to be accountable not in the backroom department!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-91879146147047563832014-10-22T23:08:46.518+01:002014-10-22T23:08:46.518+01:00When the Register of Interests comes in, I hope it...When the Register of Interests comes in, I hope it is backdated to prior to Mr Cherbi's Petition, so a record can be taken of all of the Sheriffs and Judges who are now trying to avoid the repercussions of their actions by trying to amend their interests in secret?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-77990654782077664222014-10-22T23:04:56.246+01:002014-10-22T23:04:56.246+01:00Anonymous said...
You saw this?Looks like your pet...Anonymous said...<br />You saw this?Looks like your petition is having an effect at last!<br />http://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/news/local/aberdeen-sheriff-stands-down-over-rspb-link-1.641674<br /><br />Aberdeen sheriff stands down over RSPB link<br />22 Oct 2014 3.35pm<br /><br />Sheriff Annella Cowan <br /><br />A SHERIFF today stood down from a court case involving a man accused of killing birds of prey - because she is a member of the RSPB charity.<br /><br />George Mutch, of Kildrummy, was due to stand trial at Aberdeen Sheriff Court today accused of recklessly killing or injuring two goshawks and a buzzard by using traps.<br /><br />The 48-year-old faces four charges and is claimed to have carried out the offences at Kildrummy Estate, near Alford in Aberdeenshire, between August 6 and September 13 in 2012.<br /><br />He denies the charges. The trial was scheduled to go ahead today but was further adjourned until later this year.<br /><br />Defence counsel Mark Moir argued that the Sheriff Annella Cowan should recuse herself from the case because she had mentioned during a pre-trial hearing that she was a member of the RSPB bird charity.<br /><br />Mr Moir argued that the sheriff should stand down from presiding over the trial because the bird charity had been involved in the criminal investigation against his client.<br /><br />He said: "Your Ladyship in this specific trial will require to determine whether or not investigators who are members of the RSPB are credible or reliable and you will also have to decide whether Mr Mutch is credible or reliable."<br /><br />He added that if it was the case that the sheriff had paid membership fees to the charity the money could have been used to fund criminal investigations of this type.<br /><br />Mr Moir stressed that he was not suggesting that the sheriff would be biased but said there could be an appearance of bias now that her RSPB membership had been mentioned and the fact was in the public domain.<br /><br />Sheriff Cowan considered the lawyer's arguments for her to recuse herself from the case and decided she would stand down.<br /><br />The sheriff said she had taken no offence insisting that it was more important that justice was seen to be done.<br /><br />22 October 2014 21:49<br />XxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxX<br /><br />I think I am correct to say that the Sheriff did not volunteer her membership of the RSPB in recusing herself, rather that the court case was already proceeding, when during a hearing the Sheriff inadvertently disclosed that she was an RSPB member and that on learning this extra curricular Interest, the defendant's lawyer asked the Sheriff to recuse herself?<br /><br />This is precisely the Precedent that will be utilised by opportunist lawyers who are trying to delay process indefinitely to get their client off, by simply availing himself with all of the Conflicts of Interests caused by Scottish Judges and Sheriff's getting themselves involved in Other Interests which clash with them being able to carry out their job as a Judge?<br /><br />If Scottish Judges and Sheriffs are forced to Recuse and so interfere with the administration of justice because of clashing outside Interests, then they should be sacked on the spot?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-39644429939494155792014-10-22T22:51:50.120+01:002014-10-22T22:51:50.120+01:00Anonymous said...
Not sure about all this protecti... Anonymous said...<br />Not sure about all this protecting the privacy of judges stuff.<br /><br />Judges are often involved in judgements which result in someone's whole life being exposed in some snotty press release from whoever AND birth date and everything else of an accused even when not found guilty is published so WHY is everyone so concerned with a judges privacy.<br /><br />If they have the power they have to take the transparency test too otherwise unfit to be there.<br /><br />22 October 2014 19:44<br />()()()()()()()()()(()()()()()()()()(<br /><br />Apparently Scottish lawyers and their mates are very sensitive and self serving when it comes to their own perception about status and reputation?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-53632699362383989452014-10-22T22:25:17.294+01:002014-10-22T22:25:17.294+01:00@ 22 October 2014 19:44
Good point ... COPFS ofte...@ 22 October 2014 19:44<br /><br />Good point ... COPFS often put out press releases where individuals are identified to date of birth, address etc. If such a case ends up as a successful miscarriage of justice appeal the damage has already been done.<br /><br />There are also elements of information contained in court judgements which permit identification of litigants even when names are removed.<br /><br />The entire court process must be open to all scrutiny. <br /><br />Privacy can be protected but those in the judiciary who get cases and judgements wrong cannot be permitted to use arguments of privacy to protect themselves from exposure over criminal convictions, offshore tax evasion, undeclared earnings and links to both prosecutors and defence counsel in cases called before them in court.<br /><br />No one else has such a sweeping immunity from everything so why should judges.Diary of Injusticehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00697476580161690118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-39759189836243092112014-10-22T22:18:47.387+01:002014-10-22T22:18:47.387+01:00@ 22 October 2014 21:49
From the article it appea...@ 22 October 2014 21:49<br /><br />From the article it appears the solicitor and accused only found out about the Sheriff's RSPB membership when she mentioned it at a pre-trial hearing herself.<br /><br />It is good for the judiciary to declare and this example should remind the Lord President the current list of recusals published by the Judicial Office does not contain enough detail or references to cases where recusals have already taken place.<br /><br />Only a full register of interests containing such memberships of organisations and other interests, links, relationships & assets will address the issue in the long run.Diary of Injusticehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00697476580161690118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-42310851581178597252014-10-22T21:49:08.005+01:002014-10-22T21:49:08.005+01:00You saw this?Looks like your petition is having an...You saw this?Looks like your petition is having an effect at last!<br />http://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/news/local/aberdeen-sheriff-stands-down-over-rspb-link-1.641674<br /><br />Aberdeen sheriff stands down over RSPB link<br />22 Oct 2014 3.35pm<br /><br />Sheriff Annella Cowan <br /><br />A SHERIFF today stood down from a court case involving a man accused of killing birds of prey - because she is a member of the RSPB charity.<br /><br />George Mutch, of Kildrummy, was due to stand trial at Aberdeen Sheriff Court today accused of recklessly killing or injuring two goshawks and a buzzard by using traps.<br /><br />The 48-year-old faces four charges and is claimed to have carried out the offences at Kildrummy Estate, near Alford in Aberdeenshire, between August 6 and September 13 in 2012.<br /><br />He denies the charges. The trial was scheduled to go ahead today but was further adjourned until later this year.<br /><br />Defence counsel Mark Moir argued that the Sheriff Annella Cowan should recuse herself from the case because she had mentioned during a pre-trial hearing that she was a member of the RSPB bird charity.<br /><br />Mr Moir argued that the sheriff should stand down from presiding over the trial because the bird charity had been involved in the criminal investigation against his client.<br /><br />He said: "Your Ladyship in this specific trial will require to determine whether or not investigators who are members of the RSPB are credible or reliable and you will also have to decide whether Mr Mutch is credible or reliable."<br /><br />He added that if it was the case that the sheriff had paid membership fees to the charity the money could have been used to fund criminal investigations of this type.<br /><br />Mr Moir stressed that he was not suggesting that the sheriff would be biased but said there could be an appearance of bias now that her RSPB membership had been mentioned and the fact was in the public domain.<br /><br />Sheriff Cowan considered the lawyer's arguments for her to recuse herself from the case and decided she would stand down.<br /><br />The sheriff said she had taken no offence insisting that it was more important that justice was seen to be done.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-60290880571603401632014-10-22T20:55:09.581+01:002014-10-22T20:55:09.581+01:00What actually does The Lord President do?
Apart f...What actually does The Lord President do?<br /><br />Apart from trying to keep things secret from the public?<br /><br />Why have a Lord President, when the only reason for having one is that we have always had one?<br /><br />Seems to me Scotland would be far better off without a Lord President and with an additional doctor, 2 teachers and 5 nurses?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-65429926089269173282014-10-22T20:33:37.893+01:002014-10-22T20:33:37.893+01:00agree with everything said so when do we get this ...agree with everything said so when do we get this registerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-13482632444047683592014-10-22T19:44:55.338+01:002014-10-22T19:44:55.338+01:00Not sure about all this protecting the privacy of ...Not sure about all this protecting the privacy of judges stuff.<br /><br />Judges are often involved in judgements which result in someone's whole life being exposed in some snotty press release from whoever AND birth date and everything else of an accused even when not found guilty is published so WHY is everyone so concerned with a judges privacy.<br /><br />If they have the power they have to take the transparency test too otherwise unfit to be there.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com