This blog posting represents the views of the author, David Fosberry. Those opinions may change over time. They do not constitute an expert legal or financial opinion.
If you have comments on this blog posting, please email me .
The Opinion Blog is organised by threads, so each post is identified by a thread number ("Major" index) and a post number ("Minor" index). If you want to view the index of blogs, click here to download it as an Excel spreadsheet.
Click here to see the whole Opinion Blog.
To view, save, share or refer to a particular blog post, use the link in that post (below/right, where it says "Show only this post").
Posted on 5th December 2021
|Show only this post|
Show all posts in this thread (Legal).
This article on the BBC reports on the acquittal of a coach accused of domestic violence against French Olympic judo champion Margaux Pinot.
She was badly assaulted (see the photos) and is probably lucky to have escaped with her life. Nevertheless, the man was acquitted. One of the case's three judges said there was not "enough proof of guilt". He also said "A court is never there to tell who is telling the truth and who is lying".
What? In most criminal cases, the defendant pleads not guilty, in which case the core of the role of the court is precisely what this judge said it is not: to decide who is telling the truth and who is lying.
This judge is clearly an idiot and should be fired.