Some of the press coverage of yesterday’s Supreme Court decision has restricted itself to the merely abusive, such as the Daily Mail’s chief nonentity Andrew Pierce, who has described Lady Hale - starred first in Law from Cambridge, top of the class of 110 men and 6 women, Professor of Law at Manchester, first woman appointed to the Law Commission in 1984, second woman to be appointed to Court of Appeal, first woman President of the Supreme Court - as an “ex-barmaid”. Others have gone further.
Harry Potter and the Gobshite of Arslikhan
The Murdoch Sun, in addition to the customarily abusive editorial, has ominously titled its attack “Political judges must face scrutiny after doing the bidding of braying Remainers”. False premise, and now the prospect of doxxing being approved by the Murdoch goons.
In fact, it was no mere prospect: the mafiosi had “loaned” the odious Quentin Letts (let’s not) from the Times to pen a slice of clear, calculated incitement which will have left Sun readers in no doubt at all that publishing the personal details of Judges who incur the displeasure of Dom Rupioni, and attacks on them, are alright by him. That is a step too far.
Under the headline “Judges blew their hallowed status with the Supreme Court ruling and will now be fair game for public scrutiny”, Quent tells that yesterday’s judgment “could make life immeasurably hotter for judges and senior lawyers in Britain. From now on, their political leanings, their family and professional backgrounds, their social media records and all those juicy perks they enjoy at their Inns of Court are going to be fair game for public scrutiny”. As opposed to the juicy perks he enjoys being at the Murdoch press.
But do go on. “Where do these top lawyers live, which clubs do they belong to and what are the political views of their spouses? All these - and more - will in future be legitimate fare”. This is direct incitement to doxx. Then comes clear incitement to actual violence: “Your honours, welcome to the boxing ring. Don’t forget to insert your gum shields”. And that is bang out of order.
Leave aside for a moment that Quent’s arguments go in a series of circles - you have to take as read that there is some exceeding of authority in yesterday’s decision, although for some reason he is unable to articulate just why that might be, and talks of a conflict of interest - he manages not to tell readers why that should be in this case,
Instead, we get the sneering and sanctimonious “But let’s consider other questions. Who did you sit next to at your last posh dinner? What charities do you support? Who gave your children their work experience internships? Do you have any overseas investments? Did you pay tax on them?”. So speaks an immaculately well-connected member of the Pundit Establishment who has never let his lack of actual ability stand in his way.
Those who scrabble around the dunghill that is Grubstreet have, as Stanley Baldwin observed many years ago, power without responsibility. It does not seem to occur to the likes of Quentin Letts that this helped bring about the radicalisation of Thomas Mair and the death of Labour MP Jo Cox. Worse, it does not occur to him that he has just green-lighted the doxxing, consequent harassment and worse, of the Judges who did nothing more than rule on the case that was brought before them - they were doing their job.
Quentin Letts is an absolute and complete shit. But you knew that already.
Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by adding to its Just Giving page at