I appreciate people honestly differ on this, but my own view is that at the root of opposition to cab rank is the idea that the world would be better if certain people couldn’t get advice and representation and were left to their fate. Those people deserve what’s coming to them and a system that offers them any assistance in pursuit of an abstract concept of fairness is, at best, a naive and extravagantly wasteful way to delay the inevitable. At worst, a way of ensuring the deserved fate is escaped.

I’m at @chelseafc buying a kit for a 10 yo girl. When I get to printing, I’m asked if I want a Premier League patch. I say she’d rather have the Women’s super league. They say I’m not allowed that. I ask why and the rabbit hole opens /1 They explain that they only have the men’s numbers and lettering available and that the patch gender has to match the lettering number. I blink. Don’t worry, I say, she won’t know the difference. /2

One criticism I am seeing of the Privileges Committee is that it permitted evidence from anonymous witnesses. It is said no fair procedure could allow that. /1 It’s well established in Employment Law that a fair dismissal may result from a disciplinary investigation in which evidence was obtained from anonymous witnesses (see e.g Linfood Cash and Carry v Thompson [1989] ICR 518) /2

There has been a great deal of people saying sagely that holding populist leaders to account only encourages their tribalist base. But what, realistically, is the alternative? /1 Is it suggested that if we indulge the leaders’ narcissistic presumption that rules don’t apply to them, their followers have a change of heart? Why would they when their leaders’ willingness to ignore convention and rule has so exhilarated them? /2

With Prince Harry giving evidence, there is something of a focus on cross-examination ("XX"). After 30+ years of XXing witnesses I'm still struck by how incredibly powerful it is. /1 Although XX scenes are common in TV and film dramas and most people recognise that it is something they would rather avoid, I don't think the power of it is properly appreciated. /2

Many colleagues see social media as having caused possibly irreparable harm to the reputation of the legal profession, the Bar and Silk in particular. /1 The argument runs as follows: lawyers were once respected by the public, increasingly they are not and recent barrister behaviour online (especially engaging in spats) is the clear cause. A couple of thoughts ... /2

My 15 y.o. was confronted by a group of schoolboys yesterday on her way to school. They had shouted slurs at her on a previous occasion. They followed her and her friend as they tried to walk away. The experience scared her /1 The school has a police liaison officer and I was asked if I wanted to my daughter to speak to him or, in effect, let it go. To which my response is: don't let harassment go. The expectation that victims have a responsibility to find a way of dealing with harassment is absurd. /2

Very sad to hear that he has passed away. Back when I was a baby junior I was led by Eldred Tabachnik QC on a case about a union election and Sir David was our expert /1

https://twitter.com/michaellcrick/status/1590114801547587584

I was given the job of performing some *very* basic statistical analysis to show that an alleged breach of rules could have made no difference to the outcome. DB was giving evidence and making reference to the analysis. /2

I’m on the tube wondering what a single political issue movement needs to do to succeed. /1 So assume success is the adoption and implementation of the policy. One needs be or more political parties to adopt it. That requires parties to see it as a vote winner. /2

"Aunty" has always seemed a fitting name for the BBC. It has felt like a much-loved family member. It is one of the great achievements of human culture and I'm incredibly proud of it. /1 When I was 9, I had a bedside radio and would listen to the @bbcworldservice until the early hours. Whilst it was, I suppose, exporting news to the world, it felt like it was bringing the world to me in my little bed at a volume I had to strain to hear to avoid alerting parents.

"we are addressing the serious challenges we [created] in ... economic conditions [we worsened]"
"We have taken action to chart a new course for growth [by reversing all the action we said only hours ago was essential for growth and now doing the things we said would prevent it]"

https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1581966535836725250

This is comfortably beyond shameless isn't it?

Oh no it’s the IEA #newsnight The wholly unspecified “reforms” that will unleash growth have had another trot around the media paddock. #newsnight

Quite a day in #Torridon. First that typical mix of cloud and sunshine filled the Loch with stars even as the horizon gloamed. Bit the walk back from the estate was a bowl of sunshine. #Torridon

The favourite attack line on the #barristerstrike is to wave a finger at average earnings at the Bar and then suggest that Criminal barristers are being greedy. Here’s how that would go down in court /1 Judge: It is said against you that Criminal barristers earn only £12,200 on average in their first 3 years

QC: My Lord, that is *technically* true.

Judge: So it is true.

QC: Yes, but misleading.

Judge: Misleadingly true?

QC: Precisely.

Judge: What? /2

It may surprise you to learn that race discrimination law very rarely focuses on whether someone has been ‘racist’. What amounts to racism seems to be growing ever more contentious. I commonly now see people arguing that pointing out racist attitudes is itself racist. /1 The law doesn’t ask whether someone hates members of another race. It looks at whether, say, an employee’s race was a factor (even sub-consciously) in why they were treated less favourably than colleagues (this is called “direct discrimination”) /2

As the candidates for PM burnish their “anti-woke” credentials, the reaction on Twitter has been a sort of haughty bemusement: Don’t they know the dictionary definition of “woke”? What’s wrong with being “woke” anyway? The woke need to wake up /1 It doesn’t matter what we think woke should mean. It doesn’t really even matter what the candidates think it means. Only two things matter:
1. Out there on the far right and the weird right they are clear what it means; and
2. The candidates and others are taking it mainstream /2

Last night's Starmer #Brexit thread threw up hundreds of variations of the same theme:
1. Starmer is really a Rejoiner
2. He has a cunning plan
3. Cleave to Hard Brexit to get elected
4. Mend fences with the EU
5. Switch to Rejoin-friendly strategies once he has a grip on power. This is supposedly a politically clever strategy. I don't think it is. I'm going to say why in this thread so that I don't have to set it out endlessly in individual responses. /2

I have just listened to Keir Starmer on @campbellclaret and @RoryStewartUK's podcast and have been reflecting further on his Brexit position. /1 There are two things which stand out for me. The first is that like all Conservative politicians, he invokes the need to heal the divisions Brexit has caused but wants to do so by leaning into the Hard Brexit project. /2

Part of the problem communicating how bad things are at the criminal bar is that the truth sounds crazy. Talking to @Joanna__Hardy she tells me that if the fee for a first appearance in the Mags was increased by 100% it would still only be £100. /1 It costs me more than that to have a guy come to my house, stare at my boiler and say “it’ll cost yer”. I don’t begrudge him his callout fee because I know he has hard-won expertise and I’m a buffoon. But think about the expertise barristers have /2

The British love to boast about “British Justice”. I grew up hearing that our courts were the best in the world and our criminal courts were a source of particular pride. At some point governments decided that as long as you kept boasting, reality need not keep up. /1 If you have not read @barristersecret’s latest book, may I recommend it? Right now people are being convicted or escaping conviction at hearings where advocates may have had only minutes with the case file. /2

#BArCouncil I've managed to oversleep through the one bit of the meeting that most of you would be interested in (thanks COVID). I joined as MFQC said that his remarks quoted in the Times had made it clear to the PM that bullying lawyers for political purposes is unacceptable. Baroness Blackstone: BSB will hold round table meetings with Chambers later in the years to identify best practices with a view to promoting them. She is standing down. She appreciates vital role of #barcouncil and pressures on Bar including PM's attacks.