Best Of

This leads us to Hungary. Last night
@PM_ViktorOrban
symbolically stood against the EU26 on Ukraine. Yet he could prove *a lot* more disruptive - blocking more aid to Ukraine, complicating the EU's ability to seize Russia's frozen assets or maintain EU sanctions against Russia

Senior officials are clear this can't go on indefinitely. After all, are all of the EU's other leaders really going to let Orban jeopardise the Union's ability to fundamentally protect itself and its citizens when the stakes are this high? The answer is: surely not

So a whole host of ideas are being talked about... including, wait for it, kicking the Hungarians out! Sceptics will argue there is currently no legal mechanism to do this. That's true. But in times of existential crisis, treaty considerations have a history of melting away

The EU's no bailout clause didn't prevent it from funnelling €100's of billions to Greece to keep it afloat between 2009-2013. The EU's lack of competence in health did not prevent
@EU_Commission
from developing, manufacturing & deploying billions of COVID-19 vaccine doses

The only thing that matters is the will of the majority. That will is now focussed on deterring Russian aggression. That starts in Ukraine. The appetite to over-engineer solutions to constantly get around Orban's vetoes is rapidly diminishing. He'd be wise to tread carefully

https://x.com/Mij_Europe/status/1897915788385742886

FPT

...

...

In fact, I cannot remember the last time I met an actual right wing lawyer. As in: a full-on Brexity Tory gin-swilling hang-em-high justice of the peace

I wonder if they even exist any more

On the other hand, I have met many many many left wing lawyers and judges, some very left, nearly always Remainery

There are a whole host of reasons why the poor black man ends up in prison and the rich white women doesn’t.

Poor people are much more likely to go to prison, whatever their colour. Their propensity to steal, for example, is driven by their situation and lack of options.

They are less likely to be in employment so less able to pay compensation.

They are more likely to live in criminal environs making recidivism more likely.

They are less likely to have a secure address or a stable family relationship.

They are likely to be less well represented.

They are more likely to have a problematic relationship with drugs and alcohol, not least because their life is shit.

I could go on but if the courts are going to find ways of not sending a disproportionate number of poor black men to prison they need to think outside the box a bit more and a pre-sentencing report can help with that.

These guidelines are based on real evidence and real experiences of those at the sharp end. Having given it some thought I back them and regret that Labour ran away because they thought it looked “woke”.

And a bleeding heart liberal I ain’t.

I am appalled by this.

We don't see eye to eye on many issues these days, but I tend to regard your capacity to reason as sound, if you often reach conclusions that I think are erroneous.

This is not that - this is a perversion of logic. It is not for the courts to maladminister justice to try to redress some societal imbalance that they have cod-analysed. If more poor black men have committed crimes severe enough to warrant a custodial sentence, then they must be given a custodial sentence - if for public protection alone.

'Having given some thought' is a good one. Perhaps giving such 'thought' is what it takes to be promoted these days.

But wait, racist anti-white sentencing laws make him a bit "twitchy", so that's OK

It's just integrity leaving the body.

That's a brilliant analogy

I believe these pre-death rhapsodies often occur in lawyers entering late middle age, pre-retirement, when it just seems so much easier to - you know - go with the flow, don't make a fuss....

DavidL is one of the finest posters on this site.

Was

I hope he returns to his senses. His posts today have been shameful

@DavidL is always very sensible.

Boringly so. I am genuinely surprised my comments have been thought controversial. I have explained that there are many reasons why people from ethnic backgrounds may be more prone to being sentenced to jail than the stereotype of racist judges ( in which respect I agree with @Leon’s observations).

The question is whether the court should respond to these factors or simply say that is the way it is. I think exploring other options than jail makes sense. It reduces the likelihood of further offending. It improves the chances of the offender becoming a useful citizen. That is in all our interests, not just the accused.

For the record I have no intention ever of applying to become a judge. I much prefer prosecution and probably wouldn’t be considered anyway. The guidelines we have been discussing do not apply in Scotland. If they did I would inevitably have been more circumspect in expressing any view about them.

Please don't row back from your excellent and informative posts regarding sentencing reporting from yesterday.

Your points concur with those of high profile
legal experts including Joshua Rosenberg.

I value your opinion far more than I do that of Lucky, or dog whistlers like Leon and Jenrick.

It’s a view.

Trump Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent today in NYC: “Access to cheap goods is not the essence of the American Dream”
https://x.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1897697918456332478

How's that eggy pricey thing doing for y'all?

Funny that , it was all the rage last November. You’ll find the Maga cult aren’t bothered about the price of eggs now. The latest coping strategy is to say any pain will be worth it in the end .

That's the Russian line too.

In which case, both will fail.

If Putin sent ethnic Russians from Moscow or St. Petersburg in any numbers to Ukraine, as opposed to Buryats, Chechens, Dagestanis etc, then he'd be dead in a week. The North Korean cannon fodder is already dead. The pain for Russians is limited to the gradual economic crack up- and even this carries high risks for the Kremlin.

That's kind of the point of Fascism- the herrenvolk should inflict suffering and not suffer themselves. Sooner or later, however, reality intervenes.

...

In fact, I cannot remember the last time I met an actual right wing lawyer. As in: a full-on Brexity Tory gin-swilling hang-em-high justice of the peace

I wonder if they even exist any more

On the other hand, I have met many many many left wing lawyers and judges, some very left, nearly always Remainery

There are a whole host of reasons why the poor black man ends up in prison and the rich white women doesn’t.

Poor people are much more likely to go to prison, whatever their colour. Their propensity to steal, for example, is driven by their situation and lack of options.

They are less likely to be in employment so less able to pay compensation.

They are more likely to live in criminal environs making recidivism more likely.

They are less likely to have a secure address or a stable family relationship.

They are likely to be less well represented.

They are more likely to have a problematic relationship with drugs and alcohol, not least because their life is shit.

I could go on but if the courts are going to find ways of not sending a disproportionate number of poor black men to prison they need to think outside the box a bit more and a pre-sentencing report can help with that.

These guidelines are based on real evidence and real experiences of those at the sharp end. Having given it some thought I back them and regret that Labour ran away because they thought it looked “woke”.

And a bleeding heart liberal I ain’t.

I am appalled by this.

We don't see eye to eye on many issues these days, but I tend to regard your capacity to reason as sound, if you often reach conclusions that I think are erroneous.

This is not that - this is a perversion of logic. It is not for the courts to maladminister justice to try to redress some societal imbalance that they have cod-analysed. If more poor black men have committed crimes severe enough to warrant a custodial sentence, then they must be given a custodial sentence - if for public protection alone.

'Having given some thought' is a good one. Perhaps giving such 'thought' is what it takes to be promoted these days.

But wait, racist anti-white sentencing laws make him a bit "twitchy", so that's OK

It's just integrity leaving the body.

That's a brilliant analogy

I believe these pre-death rhapsodies often occur in lawyers entering late middle age, pre-retirement, when it just seems so much easier to - you know - go with the flow, don't make a fuss....

DavidL is one of the finest posters on this site.

Was

I hope he returns to his senses. His posts today have been shameful

@DavidL is always very sensible.

Boringly so. I am genuinely surprised my comments have been thought controversial. I have explained that there are many reasons why people from ethnic backgrounds may be more prone to being sentenced to jail than the stereotype of racist judges ( in which respect I agree with @Leon’s observations).

The question is whether the court should respond to these factors or simply say that is the way it is. I think exploring other options than jail makes sense. It reduces the likelihood of further offending. It improves the chances of the offender becoming a useful citizen. That is in all our interests, not just the accused.

For the record I have no intention ever of applying to become a judge. I much prefer prosecution and probably wouldn’t be considered anyway. The guidelines we have been discussing do not apply in Scotland. If they did I would inevitably have been more circumspect in expressing any view about them.