The government and certain media have claimed for years that the UK is, variously, “the whiplash capital of Europe” or “the whiplash capital of the world”.
The truth?
The figures used for these claims don’t stack up.
Insurers have also made the same claim in other countries.
When the House of Commons Select Committee published its 2018 report into the government’s “reforms”, it criticised the “absence of reliable data” behind ministers’ - and the insurance industry’s - repeated claims about whiplash fraud.
So this claim today by Justice Secretary @RobertBuckland is not supported by any reliable evidence.
Mr Buckland is a bright man. He knows this.
Yet he parrots the government line without blinking.
So why the determination to tackle something that the government can’t prove even exists?
It’s because “whiplash reform” is a Trojan horse. The government is making widespread changes to personal injury law to make it more difficult for genuinely injured people to seek redress.
These changes will mean that fewer people will be able to obtain legal representation when injured, and so will deter people pursuing personal injury claims against negligent employers or bad drivers.
Or, more specifically, their insurance companies.
The beneficiaries are not us. They are certainly not injured people. They are not even motorists.
That £35 bonus on your premium? The government refused to legislate to force insurers to pass on that saving. So motorists may never get it.
The winners of the “whiplash fraud” narrative and the huge reforms to personal injury law that are being smuggled in, are the insurance industry.
The losers are genuinely injured people.
Yet we are being encouraged to cheer.
This is only a brief summary - Chapter 3 of #FakeLaw gives you the whole sorry tale, and many more.
We are lied to about the law so that those in power can persuade us to vote against our own interests.
This isn’t legal nitpicking. These are important news stories and public confusion over this area of the law is already widespread after years of misinformation by politicians and campaigners.
If you don’t understand what you are reporting, please ask somebody who does.
Would also add that the most significant change the government could make to increasing confidence in criminal justice and tackling “rock-bottom prosecution rates” is to fund the police, CPS and courts so that people don’t have to wait 3-4 years for trials.
I regret to announce that, despite trying for what has been angrily described as “an ungodly amount of our limited family time”, I have been unable to find a way to rewrite the lyrics to Underneath Your Clothes by Shakira to plug the paperback release of #FakeLaw.
I’m sorry.
Partly I’ve diagnosed the problem as the shameless egotism (even for me) of opening with
🎵You're a book written by the hands of God🎵
I don’t feel that even my talent for false modesty can row back from a start like this.
Partly it’s the character limit stopping me hitting the chorus in a single tweet:
🎵You're a book written by the hands of God
Don't get me wrong, this might sound to you a bit odd
But you own the place where all my thoughts go hiding
Right inside this book is where I find them🎵
As Saint Dom offers his unique brand of self-exculpatory truth to the country today, a reminder that his self-interest and wholesale ignorance of the rule of law posed a very real threat to our justice system during his fifteen minutes of power. [THREAD]
👇
After the Supreme Court ruled that the government acted unlawfully in proroguing Parliament without offering a single reason (let alone a good reason) for doing so, Dom started briefing that he was going to “get the judges sorted”. ft.com/content/6ac426…
When Priti Patel’s Home Office acted unlawfully, and the courts ruled that her Home Office had acted unlawfully, Dom waded in with his size sevens again, briefing (or allowing it to be briefed without correction) that he was plotting “revenge”. mirror.co.uk/news/politics/…
In what is looking spookily like a tandem publicity campaign for the paperback release of #FakeLaw, the Mail on Sunday offers a classic from Chapter 7.
The Burden and Standard of Proof in criminal cases.
Or Why A Not Guilty Verdict Does Not Mean A Complainant Has Lied
[THREAD]
Lavinia Nourse was acquitted by a jury last week of serious criminal charges relating to child sexual abuse.
Amanda Platell’s thesis is that this acquittal proves that the Crown Prosecution Service were wrong to prosecute.
Let’s start with the basics.
When deciding whether to charge a criminal allegation, the CPS apply a two-stage test.
1) Is there a realistic prospect of conviction based on the evidence?
2) If so, is it in the public interest to prosecute?
Oh boy. It’s been a while since we’ve had one of these.
Presumably this is in honour of the paperback publication of #FakeLaw next week, 27 May 2021.
Let’s look at why this trash from the Mail is as misleading as it is dangerous.
[THREAD]
1. Readers are invited to conclude that £66,000 (not £70k) is too much to spend on this very serious case, in which a child was killed. A “vast sum of taxpayers’ money”, we’re told.
And there’s a quote from this chap.
(We’ll come back to his searing legal analysis, don’t worry)
2. But the journalist has not bothered to tell you any of the context that you would need to even *begin* to assess whether that cost is too high, too low, or about right for a criminal trial like this. Such as...
Get your own box of delicious paperback legal nutrition at all good bookstores from 27 May 2021.
Ideal for friends and relatives currently disposed towards a #FakeLaw-rich diet.
Publicity/rampant egotism requires that the paperback cover includes all those rave reviews from across the political and media spectrum (you guys! Sooo embarrassing).
But in the interests of balance, I should disclose the negatives too.
Like, don’t eat this book.
I also apologise in advance for the postal service damaging your copy in transit.