This is not Jenrick’s only offence of this type. Through “Lawyers for Borders” he has been involved in encouraging local authorities to apply for planning injunctions against asylum hotels as in the Epping case at first instance. There is a post on his Twitter/X account this week which significantly misrepresents the Court of Appeal decision reversing it, mistakenly including a screenshot from the High Court and not the Court of Appeal judgment. This is not a mere innocent blunder as it has been pointed out in replies and even community noted but not deleted or corrected. It has had over 1M views.
Nor has he done anything to distance himself from the complaint made to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office that Lord Justice Bean should have recused himself from the appeal on the ground of apparent bias. The complaint was made by Steven Barrett, who is a barrister and who is also involved with “Lawyers for Borders”. Neither he nor Jenrick are fair-minded observers here. He should and must by now know that such a complaint is not within the JCIO remit, yet he has posted to his Twitter/X account about it, accompanied by a considerable amount of puerile jeering abuse of the judge. As shadow Lord Chancellor and minister for justice and prospective Lord Chancellor if in government, Jenrick should be a lot better than this.
Many thanks for the link to the Bonavero report, which looks excellent. At first sight, by far the worst offender when it comes to inaccurate reporting seems to be the Telegraph, which has already established an unenviable record of being the most inaccurate national title when it comes to reporting the climate. And at the rate things are going, its reporting of the Online Safety Act could soon be added to the list. This is surely not a healthy state of journalistic affairs by any standards.
It’s maybe just as well that Mr Jenrick no longer appears to be a practising solicitor.
This is not Jenrick’s only offence of this type. Through “Lawyers for Borders” he has been involved in encouraging local authorities to apply for planning injunctions against asylum hotels as in the Epping case at first instance. There is a post on his Twitter/X account this week which significantly misrepresents the Court of Appeal decision reversing it, mistakenly including a screenshot from the High Court and not the Court of Appeal judgment. This is not a mere innocent blunder as it has been pointed out in replies and even community noted but not deleted or corrected. It has had over 1M views.
Nor has he done anything to distance himself from the complaint made to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office that Lord Justice Bean should have recused himself from the appeal on the ground of apparent bias. The complaint was made by Steven Barrett, who is a barrister and who is also involved with “Lawyers for Borders”. Neither he nor Jenrick are fair-minded observers here. He should and must by now know that such a complaint is not within the JCIO remit, yet he has posted to his Twitter/X account about it, accompanied by a considerable amount of puerile jeering abuse of the judge. As shadow Lord Chancellor and minister for justice and prospective Lord Chancellor if in government, Jenrick should be a lot better than this.
Many thanks for the link to the Bonavero report, which looks excellent. At first sight, by far the worst offender when it comes to inaccurate reporting seems to be the Telegraph, which has already established an unenviable record of being the most inaccurate national title when it comes to reporting the climate. And at the rate things are going, its reporting of the Online Safety Act could soon be added to the list. This is surely not a healthy state of journalistic affairs by any standards.
If someone prejudices a criminal trial, an application for contempt of court can have a remarkable effect