Why Do Judges Get Off When Bosses Don’t?
The case for judicial (and bureaucratic) manslaughter laws.
The case for judicial (and bureaucratic) manslaughter laws.
The legislation faced opposition from Sinn Féin and others. It was ultimately passed with 78 votes in favour and 52 against.
The various addresses they’ve had for me over the years – and where bailiffs have indeed turned up – have been of Labour and Green MPs.
Section 605 cannot stand. It must be challenged, overturned, and consigned to the legislative ash heap.
Lawyers and doctors going off the rails in one way or another is so commonplace I’m surprised the media bother reporting it.
On one hand the state says they can impregnate at will and bear no responsibility. On the other, an Appeal Court judge, mopping up after the too-common horrible aftermath, claims there is responsibility. But it’s not one enforceable by law.
The Gene Technology Bill seeks to institute a revolution and it spits in the face of the public who suffered during the pandemic and who voted in a new government with the thought that things might change.
Court intellectuals construct a deterministic history in which only facts that help the case count as relevant facts.
A drunk dud judge attacks Winston Peters at a private function, and she’s in charge of the Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment Court!
The rules will apply to more than 100,000 companies from around the world, from the largest social media platforms to ‘very small’ providers of entertainment, dating, gambling and other online services.
The manslaughter trial of Daniel Penny and the cold-blooded assassination of a healthcare CEO both deserved the saturation coverage and commentary they received.
We need more lawyers like Anna de Buisseret fighting for the future of humanity.
The ACT is a redoubt of the Long March left – and it shows.