secret courts,secret arrests.welcome to a place that rants about lack of justice in other countries

 

1. Wow - just wow - shows how damn dangerous a moronic judge - I’m sorry, if both social services and a psychiatrist found the father and the care in order - the judge should have stopped her cold. Instead imposed, in secret, a lifelong order - and now this arrest.
   Meanwhile they let dole layabouts do what they damn well please to their children, the travelers and muslims - do whatever they want to their children and their neighbors without so much as a second look.

   Scary stuff and a lot like what is going on here - undermine freedom and parents - and in secret (or in the case of the US, just lie about it).

   God Help Us All.

   Posted by wardmama4       06/01/2013  at  09:51 AM  



2. AFAIK there are no secret courts in the US, although some may not be open to the public for reasons of national security. But divorce cases? Hell no.

   I hope Mr. Johnson sues the crap out of the UK’s “midnight justice” system, because the gag order was overreaching to begin with and it ought to have gone away when the sons reached maturity.

   Posted by Drew458       06/01/2013  at  10:33 AM  



3. Is there an reason (not stated by the article) why this gag order did not have a expiry clause by which conditions it would be satisfied, and thus automatically vacated?  Ie, the passing of each boy’s 18th birthday releasing the father from his gag order with respect to that child?

   If no, why did Judge Lochrane not simply interpret the lack of expiry clause as a legal mistake that he could (and should) correct by both vacating the order retroactive to the boys’ 18 birthdays, and declaring that since the publication took place with respect to a son who was now 21, no infraction of the gag order occurred, and Mr. Johnson was free to go about his lawful business?

   If no good answers exist to the above questions, then is anyone looking into Judge Lochrane’s conduct with respect to this case, and quite possibly others for the past three to five years to see if there’s a trend?  This case raises a question of judgement on behalf of the Judge.  If a pattern exists, it would not be remiss to raise the question of fitness to remain as a sitting judge.

   Suppression orders make me generally uneasy as they are prone to abuse.  For example:  Gagging recipients of National Security Letters found unconstitutional

   I understand their need in certain situations, but scope of persons affected, duration of order, and information or actions limited should always be as restricted as possible (where the fully informed and voluntary consent of the individuals restricted is not given.)

   Posted by Argentium G. Tiger       06/01/2013  at  10:34 AM  



4. Drew, this may be of interest for you to look up in a search engine:  “Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court” (FISC).

   Not quite “secret” but also worthy of mention due to an apparent, glaring conflict of interest:

   The Internal Revenue Service has its own courts with the power to try and convict with criminal charges, while the giving of significant amounts of personal funds to them is mandated by law.  This definitely has the feel of the fox guarding the hen-house.

   Posted by Argentium G. Tiger       06/01/2013  at  10:51 AM  



5. wardmama4:  “Low hanging fruit” comes to mind.  The powers that be go after the easy-pickings (otherwise law abiding citizens with minor infractions of law, rules, or regulations) so they can claim to the public at large that they’re “tough on crime”.  Meanwhile, the same powers that be are downplaying the penalties on actual criminals or outright not chasing them, because they’re either being paid off by said criminals (corruption) or they’re just suffering from a whole lot of cowardice, or both.

   This doesn’t end well if allowed to continue and fester…

   Posted by Argentium G. Tiger       06/01/2013  at  10:57 AM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.