Convicted barrister wins gagging order
"A barrister found guilty of a criminal offence has been granted anonymity by a court gagging order.
The eminent barrister, who was convicted of harassing a former partner, cannot be named by the media because children are involved in the case, the court ruled"...
"Naming the barrister would lead to some embarrassment but not physical harm to his children".
So, why the gagging order? Is this more evidence of the funny handshake brigade in action?
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
I seem to recall that there was a child, or children, involved in the recent case of Andy Kershaw v. ex-partner.
ReplyDelete