Left eye update
I went to the eye hospital this morning.
There is a swelling which is causing some discomfort. The doctor doubled the dose of Tobradex.
Also there is some membrane behind the silicone lens which needs laser surgery to remove to allow me to see better.
It's so bad now I cannot see well enough to take Willy for his evening walk.
The doctor would not register me as partially sighted for DLA because she said the blindness is only temporary.
In prison once temporary (2 weeks) lasted 12 years...
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.
Site Meter
Monday, February 25, 2013
Monday, February 18, 2013
Theresa May's Mail on Sunday article fisked
Theresa May's Mail on Sunday article fisked
Article 8 – Right to respect for private and family life
1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
I am almost blind now so if I am missing something here, let me know in the comments.
Unless there are very exceptional circumstances, foreigners who have committed serious crimes in this country, or who have attempted to cheat the immigration system, should be deported from Britain.
Foreigners are human beings, and there are no exceptions to this hard and fast rule. This is expressly stated by the inclusion of "Everyone" in Article 8(1).
It is arguable that Theresa May is not showing respect. Moreover it is arguable that her racist and xenophobic policy is an unjustified intrference under Article 8(2),
First they came for the foreigners.,,
William Hague has publicly stated that human rights are at the forefront of FCO policy.
It appears as though Home and Foreign Office are giving mixed messages,,,
Theresa May continues writing her nonsense article: "Parliament wants that to happen, the public wants that to happen, and I want that to happen. But, too often, it is not happening. Time and time again we are treated to the spectacle of people who have been found guilty of rape or serious assault being given the right to stay in this country".
I don't recall Parliament passing a statute overriding the HRA 1998,,,
Nor the public voting for a policy which attacks Johnny Foreigner.
Just because she wats it to happen is no reason to force it upon anyone else in this country including judges.
The reason why it is not happening dear is because what you want is unlawful!
Judges decide each case on its individual merits therefore are right to disregard populist posturing by the likes of Theresa May. Even foreign criminals have the human right to rely upon Article 8.
Theresa May continues her rabid rant: "It is not in the national interest that this situation continues. What is going on? The short answer is that some of our judges appear to have got it into their heads that Article Eight of the European Convention on Human Rights, the ‘right to family life’, is an absolute, unqualified right".
Of course it is in the national interests that judges decide like cases alike. It's called certainty, consistency and adheres to the legal principle of precedent.
Indeed what is going on when Chris Grayling is the Justice Secretary and May has no public power to interfere with his remit and the Judiciary. There is no evidence that it is the judges who are misunderstanding the law. This article is evidence that the non lawyer has misunderstood the law. Is she ignoring the inhouse lawyers advice?
The ignoramus continues: "This means that if a foreign criminal can show that he has a family in this country, they take the view he has a right to remain here, regardless of the gravity of the offences"
The judges reasonably ignore irrelevant considerations such as criminal records. Article 8 makes no provision to discriminate on character.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse Theresa May: "That interpretation is wrong. The Convention is quite plain: the right to family life is not an absolute right, like the right not to be tortured. It is a qualified right, and it can be restricted when that is required, for example, to protect public safety, or for the prevention of crime".
It is for the judges and courts to interpret the law and not the Home Secretary. They are aware of the qualified right. And better placed to decide when a public authority is trying to overstep the mark.
May is the problem: "I thought that possibly the problem for the judges was that our Parliament had not explicitly stated how the right to family life could be restricted".
Parliament has passed no law restrcting the ECHR and Article 8 and the HRA.
"So in June last year I ensured that the House of Commons was able to debate my amendments to the immigration rules".
So? HoC is not Parliament. And the IR take second place to the HRA and ECHR.
Regardless of the HRA and ECHR May tries to demand she get ger own way: "Those amendments stated that in the usual case, any foreign national who was convicted of a serious crime should be deported, regardless of whether or not the criminal had a family in the UK"
She may have scant regard for the law and the human rights of others, thankfully these judges have the courage to stand up to her bullying tactics.
Tyranny by the majority in the HoC May rambles: "After a vigorous debate, the Commons adopted the changes unanimously. There was no division because there was no one in the Commons who opposed them".
Erm? May is arging one thing with the IR, and seeking changes in the ECHR and HRA which is a separate matter. The woman is obviously too confused to stay in post.
Do as I say May: "I made it clear that I would introduce primary legislation should the Commons’ acceptance of my amendments not be sufficient to persuade judges to change the way they interpreted Article Eight. But I hoped that the outcome of the debate would be enough"
The HoC cannot tell judges how to interpret the law. It's called separation of powers to provide a check and balance against abuse by the Executive.
Parlament is both Houses and not simply HoC Theresa May: "Unfortunately, some judges evidently do not regard a debate in Parliament on new immigration rules, followed by the unanimous adoption of those rules, as evidence that Parliament actually wants to see those new rules implemented".
Guidance and rules are not statute law therefore can and in this case should be ignored.
Up yours May: "As a justification for ignoring the new rules, one immigration judge recently stated that ‘the procedure adopted in relation to the introduction of the new rules provided a weak form of Parliamentary scrutiny. Parliament has not altered the legal duty of the judge determining appeals to decide on proportionality for him or herself’".
Quite right, in a nutshell the judge has explained the law for the nutcase in the HO..
I thought but May is unthinking: "Just think for a moment what this judge is claiming. He is asserting that he can ignore the unanimous adoption by the Commons of new immigration rules on the grounds that he thinks this is a ‘weak form of parliamentary scrutiny’".
She can draft a law but Parliament will reject it. It is the foreibner;s human right in the balance against an abusive public authority.
it's depressing wading through May's bowel movements: "It is depressing that the steps we have already taken should have been insufficient to produce that result. The inevitable delays inherent in passing primary legislation will mean that there will be many more foreign criminals who successfully avoid deportation on the basis that they have a family here.
There will also be more victims of violent crimes committed by foreigners in this country – foreigners who should have been, and could have been, deported"
Article 8 – Right to respect for private and family life
1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
I am almost blind now so if I am missing something here, let me know in the comments.
Unless there are very exceptional circumstances, foreigners who have committed serious crimes in this country, or who have attempted to cheat the immigration system, should be deported from Britain.
Foreigners are human beings, and there are no exceptions to this hard and fast rule. This is expressly stated by the inclusion of "Everyone" in Article 8(1).
It is arguable that Theresa May is not showing respect. Moreover it is arguable that her racist and xenophobic policy is an unjustified intrference under Article 8(2),
First they came for the foreigners.,,
William Hague has publicly stated that human rights are at the forefront of FCO policy.
It appears as though Home and Foreign Office are giving mixed messages,,,
Theresa May continues writing her nonsense article: "Parliament wants that to happen, the public wants that to happen, and I want that to happen. But, too often, it is not happening. Time and time again we are treated to the spectacle of people who have been found guilty of rape or serious assault being given the right to stay in this country".
I don't recall Parliament passing a statute overriding the HRA 1998,,,
Nor the public voting for a policy which attacks Johnny Foreigner.
Just because she wats it to happen is no reason to force it upon anyone else in this country including judges.
The reason why it is not happening dear is because what you want is unlawful!
Judges decide each case on its individual merits therefore are right to disregard populist posturing by the likes of Theresa May. Even foreign criminals have the human right to rely upon Article 8.
Theresa May continues her rabid rant: "It is not in the national interest that this situation continues. What is going on? The short answer is that some of our judges appear to have got it into their heads that Article Eight of the European Convention on Human Rights, the ‘right to family life’, is an absolute, unqualified right".
Of course it is in the national interests that judges decide like cases alike. It's called certainty, consistency and adheres to the legal principle of precedent.
Indeed what is going on when Chris Grayling is the Justice Secretary and May has no public power to interfere with his remit and the Judiciary. There is no evidence that it is the judges who are misunderstanding the law. This article is evidence that the non lawyer has misunderstood the law. Is she ignoring the inhouse lawyers advice?
The ignoramus continues: "This means that if a foreign criminal can show that he has a family in this country, they take the view he has a right to remain here, regardless of the gravity of the offences"
The judges reasonably ignore irrelevant considerations such as criminal records. Article 8 makes no provision to discriminate on character.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse Theresa May: "That interpretation is wrong. The Convention is quite plain: the right to family life is not an absolute right, like the right not to be tortured. It is a qualified right, and it can be restricted when that is required, for example, to protect public safety, or for the prevention of crime".
It is for the judges and courts to interpret the law and not the Home Secretary. They are aware of the qualified right. And better placed to decide when a public authority is trying to overstep the mark.
May is the problem: "I thought that possibly the problem for the judges was that our Parliament had not explicitly stated how the right to family life could be restricted".
Parliament has passed no law restrcting the ECHR and Article 8 and the HRA.
"So in June last year I ensured that the House of Commons was able to debate my amendments to the immigration rules".
So? HoC is not Parliament. And the IR take second place to the HRA and ECHR.
Regardless of the HRA and ECHR May tries to demand she get ger own way: "Those amendments stated that in the usual case, any foreign national who was convicted of a serious crime should be deported, regardless of whether or not the criminal had a family in the UK"
She may have scant regard for the law and the human rights of others, thankfully these judges have the courage to stand up to her bullying tactics.
Tyranny by the majority in the HoC May rambles: "After a vigorous debate, the Commons adopted the changes unanimously. There was no division because there was no one in the Commons who opposed them".
Erm? May is arging one thing with the IR, and seeking changes in the ECHR and HRA which is a separate matter. The woman is obviously too confused to stay in post.
Do as I say May: "I made it clear that I would introduce primary legislation should the Commons’ acceptance of my amendments not be sufficient to persuade judges to change the way they interpreted Article Eight. But I hoped that the outcome of the debate would be enough"
The HoC cannot tell judges how to interpret the law. It's called separation of powers to provide a check and balance against abuse by the Executive.
Parlament is both Houses and not simply HoC Theresa May: "Unfortunately, some judges evidently do not regard a debate in Parliament on new immigration rules, followed by the unanimous adoption of those rules, as evidence that Parliament actually wants to see those new rules implemented".
Guidance and rules are not statute law therefore can and in this case should be ignored.
Up yours May: "As a justification for ignoring the new rules, one immigration judge recently stated that ‘the procedure adopted in relation to the introduction of the new rules provided a weak form of Parliamentary scrutiny. Parliament has not altered the legal duty of the judge determining appeals to decide on proportionality for him or herself’".
Quite right, in a nutshell the judge has explained the law for the nutcase in the HO..
I thought but May is unthinking: "Just think for a moment what this judge is claiming. He is asserting that he can ignore the unanimous adoption by the Commons of new immigration rules on the grounds that he thinks this is a ‘weak form of parliamentary scrutiny’".
She can draft a law but Parliament will reject it. It is the foreibner;s human right in the balance against an abusive public authority.
it's depressing wading through May's bowel movements: "It is depressing that the steps we have already taken should have been insufficient to produce that result. The inevitable delays inherent in passing primary legislation will mean that there will be many more foreign criminals who successfully avoid deportation on the basis that they have a family here.
There will also be more victims of violent crimes committed by foreigners in this country – foreigners who should have been, and could have been, deported"
Friday, February 15, 2013
Am I going senile too?
Am I going senile too?
Well, I turned up at the eye hospital today only to find out my appointment was Wednesday just gone! Now I have another appointment not next Wednesday but the one after.
That's a dental appointment and probation one missed as well!
I can no longer rely upon my memory.
Well, I turned up at the eye hospital today only to find out my appointment was Wednesday just gone! Now I have another appointment not next Wednesday but the one after.
That's a dental appointment and probation one missed as well!
I can no longer rely upon my memory.
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Screen resolution now at maximum
Screen resolution now at maximum
Yesterday my Probation Officer ajusted things so I can see better
Pancake Day one of my Polish "grand children" had to read out the instructions of the pancake mix for me.
And yesterday another had to read out for a quiche and set the knob as I can no longer see the heat setting for the oven.
I am thinking of calling my blog Braillehouselawyer's Blog...
Yesterday my Probation Officer ajusted things so I can see better
Pancake Day one of my Polish "grand children" had to read out the instructions of the pancake mix for me.
And yesterday another had to read out for a quiche and set the knob as I can no longer see the heat setting for the oven.
I am thinking of calling my blog Braillehouselawyer's Blog...
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
The Ballard of Ray Rose
The
Ballard of Ray Rose
Magic
1161AM's Ray Rose
Keeps
listeners on their toes
with
his music quiz Who am I?
It's
better than any sports on Sky.
Moreover
it's entertainment that's free
with
no costly TV Licence Fee.
Listen
to Ray Rose on the wireless
when
he's not drunk in The Spool and Stylus!
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Eye surery update
I had hoped to say I can see clearly now the fog has gone but it remains in both eyes.
The operation lasted 4 or 5 times longer than the others having cataract surgery. 1 hour and15 minutes compared to 15-20 minutes. The glaucoma has badly damaged my eyes. The lens was glued to the retina. This caused problems during surgery.
Others could see better straight away or within a couple of days. I was told to give it a week to see the results.
A week in opticals is a long time as Harold Wilson almost said.
My left eye is now almost as good as my right eye which still has to be operated upon.
Th fog tells me it wasn't simply the cataracts. The glaucoma went down hill sharply around Xmas time.
I have to see the consultant/surgeon on Friday.
Reading emais and online newspapers and blogs isalmot impossible and very frustrating.
The operation lasted 4 or 5 times longer than the others having cataract surgery. 1 hour and15 minutes compared to 15-20 minutes. The glaucoma has badly damaged my eyes. The lens was glued to the retina. This caused problems during surgery.
Others could see better straight away or within a couple of days. I was told to give it a week to see the results.
A week in opticals is a long time as Harold Wilson almost said.
My left eye is now almost as good as my right eye which still has to be operated upon.
Th fog tells me it wasn't simply the cataracts. The glaucoma went down hill sharply around Xmas time.
I have to see the consultant/surgeon on Friday.
Reading emais and online newspapers and blogs isalmot impossible and very frustrating.
Sunday, February 03, 2013
Homophobic Justice Secretary sends message to children it's ok to use violence!
Homophobic Justice Secretary sends message to children it's ok to use violence!
It's rude to point!
Source
Source
Saturday, February 02, 2013
Traces of pork' found in prison Halal pies and pasties
Traces of pork' found in prison Halal pies and pasties
Friday, February 01, 2013
Chris Grayling's tough Justice Secretary plans stubbed out
Chris Grayling's tough Justice Secretary plans stubbed out
I quite like the idea of ashtrays bearing a photo of Cris Grayling in the middle being sold in prison shops. 80% of male prisoners smoke. They have cause for celebration because the planned smoking ban in all prisons due to begin in March has been shelved over fears it would lead to costly riots.
I quite like the idea of ashtrays bearing a photo of Cris Grayling in the middle being sold in prison shops. 80% of male prisoners smoke. They have cause for celebration because the planned smoking ban in all prisons due to begin in March has been shelved over fears it would lead to costly riots.
Wednesday, January 30, 2013
Eye eye
Eye eye
This morning the landlord's workers arrived to examine the damp kitchen ceiling and water running down the walls (it tripped the electric). They discovered a leak in the pipe behind the bath panel upstairs. They fixed that but electrician required for the rest, and the cause of the trip needs to dry out. Meanwhile the boiler is off so no heating save for the coal fire in the lounge.
I went to have a pre-op examination at the eye hospital in the afternoon. It now transpires that I have a cataract in both eyes. And because the left is the worst this will be first on Tuesday the 5th Feb to be operated upon, and the right 4-6 weeks later.
This morning the landlord's workers arrived to examine the damp kitchen ceiling and water running down the walls (it tripped the electric). They discovered a leak in the pipe behind the bath panel upstairs. They fixed that but electrician required for the rest, and the cause of the trip needs to dry out. Meanwhile the boiler is off so no heating save for the coal fire in the lounge.
I went to have a pre-op examination at the eye hospital in the afternoon. It now transpires that I have a cataract in both eyes. And because the left is the worst this will be first on Tuesday the 5th Feb to be operated upon, and the right 4-6 weeks later.
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Rapist awarded damages for 'frustration' caused by delays
Rapist awarded damages for 'frustration' caused by delays
A convicted rapist jailed indefinitely for the protection of the public has been awarded damages by Europe’s human rights judges for the “frustration” caused by delays in assessing his case.
It beggars belief that loss of the vote is worth nothing but a rapist's feeings are worth more!
Friday, January 25, 2013
Monday, January 21, 2013
Normal service will resume shortly
Normal service will resume shortly
Once I have cataract removal surgery on 4 Feb.
Once I have cataract removal surgery on 4 Feb.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
Seven prison closures in England announced
Seven prison closures in England announced
It says it also plans to build a new super prison with 2,000 places.
Comment: In my view, 2,000 places is too large and smaller more manageable 200 places prisons would be better.
Saturday, January 05, 2013
Tough talk no action
Chris Grayling states people don't understand sentencing. And neither does he. Automatic release is dependent upon good behaviour and good reports and upon prisoners completing offending behaviour courses.
The Parole Board only releases 20% of case.
Not only is Grayling a non lawyer, he's a dangerous liar.
The Parole Board only releases 20% of case.
Not only is Grayling a non lawyer, he's a dangerous liar.
Thursday, December 27, 2012
Free Willy
Free Willy
My friend Humph took me to collect Willy from the Animal Rescue Centre @ approx 11am.
He's on 48 hours home trial.
When 15 year old Maniek called Willy slipped past me and ran off in the direction of the small park out back. He was swiftly recaptured.
Later anotheof my Polish "grand children" sniggeringly called out "Willy" and the dog responded. So he's now called Willy.
A couple of problems, Willy sicked up his breakfast. And he's had flatulence all day. Phew!
My friend Humph took me to collect Willy from the Animal Rescue Centre @ approx 11am.
He's on 48 hours home trial.
When 15 year old Maniek called Willy slipped past me and ran off in the direction of the small park out back. He was swiftly recaptured.
Later anotheof my Polish "grand children" sniggeringly called out "Willy" and the dog responded. So he's now called Willy.
A couple of problems, Willy sicked up his breakfast. And he's had flatulence all day. Phew!
Tuesday, December 25, 2012
Rocky II
 |
| Add caption |
Comment: I found him on the website of the rescue centre where I got Rocky. Phoned up today and went to see him and take him for a walk. Like Rocky he is keen on scents and drags on the lead. Rocky was crossed with a greyhound. William probably a terrier. He's a bit smaller and not as strong as Rocky was in the shoulders for dragging me where he wanted to go.
Due to pick him up on Thursday morning.
My friend said "You're not keeping the name William are you? Everyone will still call him Rocky II". My Polish friends already refer to him as that. I hope Wiliam does not mind the name change...
Saturday, December 22, 2012
Taxi for Rocky to doggy heaven
This morning the house feels empty and quiet.
Yesterday morning I came down wondering if I would find Rocky lying dead on the fireside carpet. He had not jumped up on to the bed beside me. Something was wrong. He lay there not giving me any attention. I thought I had better get him down to the PDSA. I went to look for the phone number. When I came back Rocky was stood by the front door. I thought he was going out to be sick. He took a few wobbly steps and then collapsed. My heart sank.
I phoned friend to take us down to the PDSA but he said he was in the middle of a field in Lincolnshire tending the horses and would not be back until lunchtime. He suggsted getting Rocky a blanket. I wrapped a duvet around him.
I phoned the PDSA and said I needed an ambulance. I was told they no longer provided this service. It was suggested I get a taxi. I thought 'where am I going to get the money for a taxi from?'. I did hope that my pension had been paid in early for Christmas. I was told to bring a letter from the Council Tax or Housing Benefit with me. I got irrate with them worrying about a piece of paper when Rocky was in such a state. I did not know where I would find a recent letter after the workmen had moved everything around to get the double glazing installed in my study/bedroom.
I kept popping out to check on Rocky.
A neighbour called with a Christmas card for Rocky and me. He offered to pay for a taxi. I said I would check if my money had come first.
Lunchtime came and I phoned my friend again only to be told he was now at work and that his partner had got the car.
I left Rocky to go to the cash point, and luckily my pension money was available.
Then I had a brain wave where I might find the necessary letter for the PDSA, I found it and got a 3.15pm emergency appointment. I ordered a taxi for 2.45-3pm.
I was not fit enough to pick up Rocky so the Taxi driver suggested we each pick up two corners of the duvet and stretchered Rocky into the taxi.
At the PDSA the surgeon said that Rocky's gums showed that he was anemic and that she suspected internal bleeding and feared it would be cancer. She said they would need to do blood tests and X-Rays. If I did not hear anything by 4.30 to phone back.
Approximately 4.30pm I received the phone call I was dreading. The surgeon said Rocky had lost a lot of blood, and she had difficulty finding the veins. He had a ruptured spleen. She could operate but Rocky may not survive the anasthetc. I said Rocky deserved the chance
During the operation it was discovered that the cancer had spread to Rocky's liver and that removing the spleen would make no difference.
I said to put him to sleep.
Rocky is now in doggy heaven.
Friday, December 21, 2012
Friday, December 14, 2012
Xmas cartoon
Eight Scots seceding,
seven spads-a-spinning, six MPs letting...
Five omnishambles!
Four royal letters, three safe seats, two posh boys... and patronage from the party!
Five omnishambles!
Four royal letters, three safe seats, two posh boys... and patronage from the party!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)