Pinky;624586 wrote: Plus, if you're going to do it, at least in your own time, I mean who would be idiot enough to search on work computers? Duh!
Yes. It was the "at work" aspect that surprised me. And a half hour of a Judge's time costs the state about what I earn in a week! He could spend the time judging instead of jacking, and post me the difference: Since for the same cost I could jack all week!
And given that I would say that so it seems fair to assume the names of these judges and magistrates have cropped up on lists of people using their credit cards to access hardcore material is probably wrong. I would guess that the IT department noticed and initiated the disciplinary measures.
magenta flame;624608 wrote: Unfortunetly unless they have broken a specific law it's none of anyones business what they are looking at in their lunch breaks.
Over here it is a specific offence to download images of the nature suggested. That, as well as questions of propriety and impartiallity, make it a matter of public interest.
hopki65;624532 wrote: how far has this canker spread? and how many judges & jps are viewing images
of schoolboys and schoolgirls for their own sexual pleasure?
magenta flame;624621 wrote: hardcore is illegal?
Judges are citizens too and have the same rights .
The downloading of child porn is illegal and when someone is set up as protector of society and arbitor of right and wrong then (s)he must be above suspicion.
Any possible doubt as to the propriety of the Judge it must be brought out into the open. After all, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
magenta flame;624621 wrote: Judges are citizens too and have the same rights .
They have the same rights as a citizen, but they also have extra responsibilities in order to be Judge.
Lawyers have been disbarred for acting legally but unethically. (I recall a case here in Oz where three had an evil but legal scheme to dodge a tax bill by moving their assets off shore and declaring bankruptcy. (Although a cocaine problem has been found to be a legal but not disbarring offence).) Judges also must be very ethical in order to be Judges. In order to be citizens they can do what they like.
What this has to do with Victor Meldrew has me baffled and annoyed. It's a shocking abuse of ForumGarden.
Can I turn the issue around with a few facts first? The story centres around a report in the Independent on 28th March of The Judicial Studies Board Annual Lecture given by Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, at the Inner Temple on Thursday, 22 March 2007. The Independent summarised this under the headline "RACISM AND DRINK-DRIVING: THAT'S JUST THE JUDGES" with:The Office for Judicial Complaints (OJC) said it looked into 1,434 cases in the first 10 months since its creation, including allegations of racism, drink-driving and other improper conduct. Eight judges and magistrates were removed from the Bench and a further 10 reprimanded. Nearly 400 of the original complaints are still being investigated or are yet to be considered. The overall figure is surprisingly high. In 2005, the Department for Constitutional Affairs revealed it had investigated 250 complaints of misconduct against judges and tribunal chairmen during the previous year. The new figures cover the period between 1 April last year to 1 January 2007 and include all complaints, not just those concerning judicial misconduct. Only allegations of misconduct or behaviour that may bring the judiciary into disrepute are taken up by OJC.
Rupert Murdoch's gutter press - by which I mean the Times and the Sun acting in concert - asked how many of those 1,434 complaints related to "misuse of their computers" and were refused a breakdown. On review by Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, the Department for Constitutional Affairs was told that it must announce that a list is kept of judges and magistrates disciplined (regardless of reason, not just computer-related) but need not divulge the numbers involved. That's what the articles in the Times and the Sun were solely based on - that a confidential list of those disciplined, and the reason for each case, does exist. The weasel-wording of their articles made it appear that the full list of initial complaints of misconduct against judges and tribunal chairmen, the 1,434 mentioned in the Annual Lecture, was the same list of disciplined judges and magistrates. Fergus Shanahan then went one step further in his op-ed Sun article by saying "The Lord Chancellor's office admits that 1,434 judges, JPs and other legal figures have been investigated for misuse of their computers in just ten months, but refuses to say what they did", which is a plain out-and-out deliberate lie designed to sell copies of tabloid cess.
What has been done with these facts here on ForumGarden is a disgrace, titling the thread "judges viewing hardcore porn at work". It isn't funny, it isn't decent, it isn't truthful and it's led to an entirely uninformed discussion. I am, quite frankly, sick to the back teeth with this malignant fool who keeps coming here and firing his twisted lies onto the board with deliberate malice aforethought.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Spot i should imagine its also against forum garden rules to call him a twisted fool.
As for calling it the Victor Meldrew column well i suppose you could change the title head & just have 'judges viewing porn' if you think Victor Meldrew would be offended at the use of his name, bearing in mind Victor Meldrew is just a character so that probably wouldent work either If this guy upsets you so much just block him.
Anyway i think its a fair enough topic to put up for discussion & it does not surprise me at all that 'judges look at porn' or some 'priests' 'police' 'teachers' others in authority are doing it either.
We had an art teacher at my high school who continually hovered & looked down the girls tops. This was well known, was anything done, not to my knowledge, he worked in that art dept until he retired.
buttercup;661789 wrote: As for calling it the Victor Meldrew column well i suppose you could change the title head & just have 'judges viewing porn'
Perhaps my point failed to get across. There is absolutely nothing whatever in the facts to suggest that so much as a single person was investigated for computer misuse. Fergus Shanahan quite simply lied, and I think I've demonstrated that he lied. Have I not demonstrated that Fergus Shanahan lied?
What hopki then did with the lie from the Sun was equally shoddy, but changing the headline the way you suggest isn't the answer.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Can I turn the issue around with a few facts first? The story centres around a report in the Independent on 28th March of The Judicial Studies Board
Anal Lecture given by Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, at the Inner Temple on Thursday, 22 March 2007. The Independent summarised this under the headline "RACISM AND DRINK-DRIVING: THAT'S JUST THE JUDGES" with:
hopki65;662032 wrote: it appears that spot just dislikes my column although this piece was written some time ago.
It was bumped recently, that's why I read it.
Would you like to comment on the content of my post rather than what you perceive to be its nature? There is absolutely nothing whatever in the facts to suggest that so much as a single person was investigated for computer misuse.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
I am still totally confused about who Victor Meldrew is and why he has a "column?" Is Victor the actual person who writes this stuff? If so what is this reference to his being a 'character" that I've seen? I don'tread it that much but I read it enough to know I don't understand the point behind it. Please someone enlighten me.
Victor Meldrew was a fictional character in a sitcom:Many fans of the series saw him as a mouthpiece for the very things that always got on their nerves, whether it was children, cars, animals, powercuts, ads in a magazine, stiff doors, cowboy builders, loud music at night, flirtatious women, incorrect delivery, bizarre gifts at Christmas time, waiting in the queue of a shop, the guest from hell at one's house, the infuriating best friend of one's spouse, or the neighbour next door. Whatever it was from Victor's point of view, very little was left untouched by the character's cynical mind and sharp tongue. Victor usually found himself constantly battling against all that life threw at him. Renwick once pointed out in an interview that the name "Victor" is ironic, since he almost always ends up as the loser. The series was so successful that in the UK the term a Victor Meldrew has become shorthand for a constantly bitter and complaining elderly man, in much the same way as the name Ebeneezer Scrooge. This is a little unfair to the character, as the bizarre misfortunes that befell Meldrew would be enough to exasperate anyone. Wilson [who played the character] himself once said in an interview that he was a "normal man in a world full of idiots".
The pensioner is most famous for his catch phrase, "I don't believe it!"So, as you can see, there are various levels of ownership as far as the name goes. David Renwick created him (and killed him in the final episode). Richard Wilson played him. Hopki has appropriated him and twisted the character into someone who despises Muslim immigrants and, bizarrely, now comments on news articles, something the original never did.
In the case of the news story behind this thread, Fergus Shanahan is the Sun newspaper columnist who claimed that "The Lord Chancellor's office admits that 1,434 judges, JPs and other legal figures have been investigated for misuse of their computers in just ten months". When I showed him this thread he maintained stoutly, in a private response, that his column was accurate. It wasn't. There is absolutely nothing whatever in the facts he wrote of to suggest that so much as a single person was investigated for computer misuse among those "1,434 judges, JPs and other legal figures" mentioned in the lecture he referred to. It's a pity he didn't add to the thread in his own defence. Someone, somewhere in a Sun office, screwed up in allowing the words to appear as they did.
I hope that clarifies matters.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
hopki65;662032 wrote: it is sky news and the sun paper where i get my little snippits of news from how do i know what is lies and what isnt.Regardless of the accuracy of the Sun article - and it was woefully inaccurate in every respect - even that has nothing in it to justify "judges viewing hardcore porn at work" much less the speculation you work through in your commentary. The original post is a disgrace.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
it is sky news and the sun paper where i get my little snippits of news from how do i know what is lies and what isnt.
as others have said if my column offends you do not reply to my posts but i do not lie or post false news in my column and you are also wrong to accuse me of that.
i did the right thing and polled F.G members about the column and the majority want victor to stay.
as it says on the chubby brown concert posters if easily offended please stay away.
victor
Both are owned by Rupert Murdoch. Take everything with a pinch of salt especially what is in his newspapers. Sky news isn't too bad as the competition is greater but he actively uses them to pursue his own political agenda. Cross reference what you read and make up your own mind but . salacious tales if the wrongdoings of judges make good headlines but if the allegation was true it would be serious indeed. Not least because who wants judges that are so thick as to use their own credit cards to download porn on a work computer and think they would get away with it.
Read the sun because you like the artistic content on page three not because it is a good unbiased truthful paper.
It never said children. The title only mentioned hardcore pornography. Besides, no matter what it is, no one can be punished for simply viewing it. Only when the porn is actually paid for does it constitute a punishable crime.
Irmin;662878 wrote: It never said children. The title only mentioned hardcore pornography. Besides, no matter what it is, no one can be punished for simply viewing it. Only when the porn is actually paid for does it constitute a punishable crime.
There's more to a post than it's title!
The OP quite clearly implies child porn and that the Judges are Paedophiles - that is what the complaints are about.
If you read the thread then you'll find it's mostly objections to the progression from 1400 Judges on a disciplinary list in the original lecture to 1400 judges misusing their computes in the paper to 1400 Judges viewing hardcore porn at work (with the conclusion of "Lord falconer needs to expose these perverts and bring them before justice whoever they are. there should be no hiding place for paedophiles and no old boys masonic handshake or gentlemans clubs or even teaching union that should hide these monsters.") based on nothing more than the posters bias and predudice.
Bryn Mawr;662886 wrote: If you read the thread then you'll find it's mostly objections to the progression from 1400 Judges on a disciplinary list in the original lecture to 1400 judges misusing their computes in the paperPLEASE! Don't say it as if that's what the list was! The 1400 list was the list of all complaints on all subjects, not disciplined judges! People who get sent down put in vexatious complaints, it's well known and getting more popular than ever.
Good lord.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
of schoolboys and schoolgirls for their own sexual pleasure?"
"how many teachers are there in our schools looking at a 14 or 15 year old girls in a sexual way?"
So now you're telling us that it's a crime for someone to even 'look' at another person in the wrong way? Fair enough, we'll arrest this judge because he's 'looking at images' of schoolchildren. We'll also arrest that teacher because he's suspected of 'thinking bad things.' Until the person has acted on these thoughts, there has been no offence committed.
Irmin;663032 wrote: "and how many judges & jps are viewing images
of schoolboys and schoolgirls for their own sexual pleasure?"
"how many teachers are there in our schools looking at a 14 or 15 year old girls in a sexual way?"
So now you're telling us that it's a crime for someone to even 'look' at another person in the wrong way? Fair enough, we'll arrest this judge because he's 'looking at images' of schoolchildren. We'll also arrest that teacher because he's suspected of 'thinking bad things.' Until the person has acted on these thoughts, there has been no offence committed.
No - the crime was inventing the accusations and putting them our as demonstrated truth.
No-one gives a toss about a bot of porn here and there.
Acc, it's only amusing to the point of suddenly realising that the guy was serious and then reading what he wrote, thinking that he be taken seriously as a columnist. At that point, it becomes fairly good comedy.
If this guy upsets you so much just block him.
