Politics punditry. Podcast @RightDishonour. Contributions @spectator @unherd @TheCriticMag @CapX
London
Joined February 2009
- Tweets14.9K
- Following806
- Followers924
- Likes7.3K
When I did jury service the prosecuting barrister explained there was no intended difference between these two phrases, and the judge did not object
Important detail re the Russell Brand verdict: The phrase "beyond reasonable doubt" is no longer used to instruct juries. Juries are now instructed in the language of "being sure," as in, "Are you sure that the defendant either knew she was not consenting or was reckless as to whether she did or did not consent?"
The judge (Mr Justice Bennathan) gave the jury a written “route to verdict” with a series of questions for each count. These repeatedly asked “Are you sure…"
These is the recommended Crown Court Compendium approach used in today's
English and Welsh jury trials. Cc @megynkelly @dshensmith
1
83
First they came for the strangle porn, and I said nothing, because it is not the same issue as political speech
"Repeal the porn laws"—my colleagues @TheEconomist on Britain's latest free-speech mess.
"Pornography is an unpopular thing to defend. But Britain has become too willing to ban anything pearl-clutchers dislike, from plastic straws to noisy protests."
economist.com/leaders/2026/1…
62
At a Costa in Wales earlier this year and it almost surprised me that the two young guys behind the till were Welsh. In London it's more common to see foreigners in those entry-level jobs. The lump of labour fallacy doesn't mean that specific people won't struggle to get a job!
One of the most pernicious impacts of the Boriswave is how it led to the complete destruction of part-time for Brits. Every job a teenager would want to do to make a few quid is now gone. Sad.
49
"Not without reason has it pleased Almighty God that Sacred Scripture should be obscure in certain places, lest, if it were freely open to all, it would perhaps be held in little esteem or be ill-understood and lead into error."
Unless you have read & examined his PhD thesis & indeed others you are not qualified to decide whether or not his PhD should or should not have been awarded. You don't seem to be an academic with a PhD relevant to his topic, so you are not qualified to dispute his award.
65
Seems significant that the Economist is publishing this. Confirms the stereotypes, and what rightwingers have been saying for a while
The Economist's estimate of Britain's age- and sex-standardised conviction rates for sexual offences by the offender's nationality
economist.com/britain/2026/1…
69
Taxes are quite routinely passed onto consumers, hence a can of full sugar Coca-Cola subject to the sugar tax costs more to consumers than a Diet Coke
Nope, that’s not how taxes and price works. The price is determined by demand and supply.
Companies charge the highest price they can given demand. A tax levied on *profits* does not affect a company’s cost ie supply.
Taxes on *windfall* profits (like oil and gas) are the most efficient kind of tax there is.
31
I assume as a British person who has benefited from the legacy of stolen wealth from abroad, Butler will be the first person reaching into her pocket?
A stolen watch doesn’t become yours just because you pass it down to your children. So why apply a different rule to stolen labour, wealth and land? Reparations are about inherited benefit and inherited loss. Time doesn’t erase injustice.
72
I take no view on whether Islam was a factor in the recent riots, but topline stats are misleading. Once you adjust for age, urban location, poverty, political outlook etc then Muslims will be above 10% of relevant cohort (and riots not representative of country demography)
Actually quite impressive how wrong Rashid is here and how tendentious his arguments are. Took a banana to a gun fight
Worth listening to this @BBCr4today discussion between Jonathan Hall KC (@terrorwatchdog) and the Culture Editor of the @NewStatesman, @tanjil_rashid_
(3 clips)
34
Can't believe the government banned Sally Rooney because they didn't want the British to know there are sensitive literary types in Dublin doing BDSM
OPEN LETTER: Sally Rooney is a writer, not a terrorist. Her books must be available to the public. Their withdrawal from sale, on the basis of ill-conceived and draconian anti terror legislation, is an affront to basic principles of free speech and expression so long taken for granted in this country. We categorically reject censorship - whether direct or indirect - and urge the government to change course, amending the legislation which has led us to this point of repressive absurdity.
1
76
Find it hard to believe that Americans would get offended about people mocking their culture when 90% of their standup is granular insults about minority groups
49
I'm on board with people not having kids but whenever they explain themselves the reasoning is terrible
John Cena on why he doesn’t want kids:
“Just because someone thinks I would be good at something… is that reason enough to do it?”
“It’s not a commitment where 4 months in I can go, ‘You know, this wasn’t my thing.’”
“The time I’ve had to live life is how I’ve developed the wisdom… If I did have those commitments, I wouldn’t be who I am.”
“I’m on the wrong side of the math. Everybody has kids… so because I don’t want to, I’m an oddball.”
“I’m not second-guessing anything. I’m still so interested in what’s out there.”
2
1
256
Inadvertently a great explanation of why infants keep asking why questions
In 1983, a BBC interviewer asked Richard Feynman why two magnets push each other apart — and he refused to answer it.
What he did instead is the best seven minutes on thinking ever filmed.
Bookmark & watch today, no matter what.
1
77
You can achieve national treasure status in Britain and still be dragooned into a reality gameshow that's clearly just a fortnight of corporate team building exercises
1
2
43
I'd be intrigued if anyone making this argument actually wants to abolish terrorist financing laws
The banning or restriction of the sale or display of Sally Rooney's books (or anyone else's) on the basis of their political views, represents a defeat for liberal democracy and freedom of expression. We only have to go back to the treatment of Salman Rushdie to understand what it means.
28
No "unconscious bias" claim can compete with the amputee from season 1 who was voted off for not raising a glass that had been placed in front of her missing arm
BBC Celebrity Traitors star says 'unconscious racial bias' is part of show after being banished by castmates
gbnews.com/celebrity/bbc-cel…
86
The only people interested in a Brexit inquiry are radical remainers who need to move on and lawyers seeking work
This video is extraordinary to watch again now.
In 2019, @JMPSimor explained to @mrjamesob the constitutional paradox at the heart of Brexit: the referendum was advisory, so the courts would not quash the result, even though the legal challenge argued it had been tainted by proven unlawful campaigning. She told @LBC that, had the referendum been legally binding, the result could have been set aside.
So Britain was left with this absurd position:
The referendum was not legally binding enough to be invalidated but it was treated politically as binding enough to take us out of the European Union.
And that was not the only unresolved constitutional issue.
My own 2018 judicial review, Webster v Secretary of State for Exiting the EU, challenged the missing Article 50(1) decision, the lawful decision to withdraw that had to precede notification. Parliament expressly authorised notification under Article 50(2), but never expressly enacted that antecedent decision.
The courts refused permission in both cases.
Now we are being told by the Prime Minister @andyburnham that Russia interfered in the 2016 referendum. This changes the context again.
It does not automatically undo Brexit. But it makes one thing impossible to avoid:
Britain needs a statutory public inquiry into the referendum, the intelligence, and the Article 50 decision-making process.
We need documents. Witnesses under oath. The Cabinet record. The intelligence assessments. The legal trail.
Because ten years on, the question is no longer simply whether Brexit was right or wrong. It is whether the British public and Parliament were ever told the full truth about how it happened.
33