I don't think you'll agree with this, but I think she spends too much time on this without reflecting publicly on the other side of the coin. 3 and 4 above apply to politicians and civil servants across the board (2 politicians have been murdered and other seriously attacked this century). Here, her special pleading looks crass. In respect of 1 and 2, it's obviously bad form to routinely criticise judges but you could argue that too low a bar for criticism of other professional groups, including politicians, reduces public confidence in democracy: Judges are known to criticise politicians. Her implication that politician's pronouncements on the ECHR might be based on misunderstandings of law seems to segue into patronisation. Finally, judges' personal values are in theory invisible to the public but they will sometimes impact on their judgement; where that happens their judgements are fair game. I don't doubt she has a serous and valid point to make, but I don't think she does it with nearly enough finesse.
So let .e get this straight.... woth regard to immigration there will be no court because we can't get the staff. We can't get the staff because judges are abused by the current immigration system.
So no court =immigrants legal or not being welcomed in with no inspection as to the validity (or otherwise) of their claim
No one ever reports on the judicial lack of accountability. That bias and making legal mistakes are seen as acceptable is in my opinion beyond comprehension. Being accountable doesn’t interfere with independence. Having a robust complaints procedure would ensure that errors would not be perpetuated and retraining would be viewed as a positive.
Let us not forget Alison Raeside’s words after the Sara Sharif case
‘I’ve never had an appraisal. Imagine that. You don’t get any feedback. No one tells you if you are any good’. I rest my case..
I’m very sorry to read this and you have my utmost sympathy. I’m guessing that this was an acquittal when of course the complainant has no right of appeal. Harsh though it undoubtedly is that is a product of our criminal standard of proof with which few would want to interfere, though of course it can serve up outcomes that seem very unfair.
Your case aside the other complaints were about the personal behaviour of a judge so they would seem to qualify, and should be taken seriously given the high number about the same judge. Perhaps this is something you/they could take up with your local MP?
Perhaps I’m not explaining myself very well. It’s not about whether there was an acquittal or not ( actually the perpetrator was found guilty of coercive control ) It’s about the fact that the judge made a legal error ( in other words he broke the law) and there is no way of complaining about this. It’s a matter of principle. Because of this error the witness felt suicidal after the trial.
Judge Lancaster is being protected by the JCIO so the ten women are taking that organisation to court with support from The Good Law Project.
Judges need to be accountable for their mistakes like all other professionals.
That isn’t strictly correct. Firstly the appeals process provides accountability for judges who go badly wrong and over the years there have been swingeing judgments against those who have displayed overt bias, bad temper and/or lack of legal knowledge.
Secondly people can and do complain about judges. There is a formal process for complaining about judges and magistrates readily available on line. Per AI “The Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) received 2,394 complaints against judicial office holders during the 2023–2024 reporting year (which largely covers the 2024 calendar year).”
And it’s not just the public but lawyers who frequently appear in front of certain judges talk amongst themselves and word gets round - I can think of at least one judge whose reputation as a bully stymied the preferment they desired. Though of course that rebounded on those same lawyers who still had to appear in front of them.
The good news is that in 40 years of practice those judges who made my heart sink at the thought of appearing in front of them gradually diminished in number and by the time I retired those I generally appeared before were on the whole well informed about the law and courteous.
I do wish you were correct but in a criminal rape trial there is no way of complaining about the judge when he made legal errors. The JCIO makes it very clear in their published guidance that only personal behaviour is reportable. This was confirmed in their reply to me.
Ten women have submitted complaints about Judge Lancaster raising concerns about alleged abusive language and behaviour. The JCIO determined that these complaints did not warrant further action. This is the reality of trying to hold judges accountable.
I don't think you'll agree with this, but I think she spends too much time on this without reflecting publicly on the other side of the coin. 3 and 4 above apply to politicians and civil servants across the board (2 politicians have been murdered and other seriously attacked this century). Here, her special pleading looks crass. In respect of 1 and 2, it's obviously bad form to routinely criticise judges but you could argue that too low a bar for criticism of other professional groups, including politicians, reduces public confidence in democracy: Judges are known to criticise politicians. Her implication that politician's pronouncements on the ECHR might be based on misunderstandings of law seems to segue into patronisation. Finally, judges' personal values are in theory invisible to the public but they will sometimes impact on their judgement; where that happens their judgements are fair game. I don't doubt she has a serous and valid point to make, but I don't think she does it with nearly enough finesse.
So let .e get this straight.... woth regard to immigration there will be no court because we can't get the staff. We can't get the staff because judges are abused by the current immigration system.
So no court =immigrants legal or not being welcomed in with no inspection as to the validity (or otherwise) of their claim
Am I the only person who sees a problem in this?
No one ever reports on the judicial lack of accountability. That bias and making legal mistakes are seen as acceptable is in my opinion beyond comprehension. Being accountable doesn’t interfere with independence. Having a robust complaints procedure would ensure that errors would not be perpetuated and retraining would be viewed as a positive.
Let us not forget Alison Raeside’s words after the Sara Sharif case
‘I’ve never had an appraisal. Imagine that. You don’t get any feedback. No one tells you if you are any good’. I rest my case..
I’m very sorry to read this and you have my utmost sympathy. I’m guessing that this was an acquittal when of course the complainant has no right of appeal. Harsh though it undoubtedly is that is a product of our criminal standard of proof with which few would want to interfere, though of course it can serve up outcomes that seem very unfair.
Your case aside the other complaints were about the personal behaviour of a judge so they would seem to qualify, and should be taken seriously given the high number about the same judge. Perhaps this is something you/they could take up with your local MP?
Perhaps I’m not explaining myself very well. It’s not about whether there was an acquittal or not ( actually the perpetrator was found guilty of coercive control ) It’s about the fact that the judge made a legal error ( in other words he broke the law) and there is no way of complaining about this. It’s a matter of principle. Because of this error the witness felt suicidal after the trial.
Judge Lancaster is being protected by the JCIO so the ten women are taking that organisation to court with support from The Good Law Project.
Judges need to be accountable for their mistakes like all other professionals.
That isn’t strictly correct. Firstly the appeals process provides accountability for judges who go badly wrong and over the years there have been swingeing judgments against those who have displayed overt bias, bad temper and/or lack of legal knowledge.
Secondly people can and do complain about judges. There is a formal process for complaining about judges and magistrates readily available on line. Per AI “The Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) received 2,394 complaints against judicial office holders during the 2023–2024 reporting year (which largely covers the 2024 calendar year).”
And it’s not just the public but lawyers who frequently appear in front of certain judges talk amongst themselves and word gets round - I can think of at least one judge whose reputation as a bully stymied the preferment they desired. Though of course that rebounded on those same lawyers who still had to appear in front of them.
The good news is that in 40 years of practice those judges who made my heart sink at the thought of appearing in front of them gradually diminished in number and by the time I retired those I generally appeared before were on the whole well informed about the law and courteous.
I do wish you were correct but in a criminal rape trial there is no way of complaining about the judge when he made legal errors. The JCIO makes it very clear in their published guidance that only personal behaviour is reportable. This was confirmed in their reply to me.
Ten women have submitted complaints about Judge Lancaster raising concerns about alleged abusive language and behaviour. The JCIO determined that these complaints did not warrant further action. This is the reality of trying to hold judges accountable.