egafd.com

That was my point. Just because the judge asks the question, doesn't mean he/she doesn't know the answer. Its for the benefit of the courtroom.

Sorry Andy,

I was adding to eroticartist's original point, not replying to you. My post got threaded to yours rather than directly to the top.

Your point is valid but there have been cases (and I've sat through a few) where it has been patently obvious that a Crown Court judge has been totally in ignorance of the modus vivendi of the people appearing before him in the dock/witness box and their culture.

Point taken, Mysteryman. No problem

Yes but of course you get in a situation where a judge who don't smoke a few dodgy cigarettes or take a few larger shandies now and again is then made out to be somebody that don't connect with the Great British public (ala tony blair) ... and then how can they judge what is right or wrong.
I personally do not condone any drug taking whatsoever and I HATE people who touch alcohol ... does that mean I am in line for one of the top jobs as I know Lord/Sir John Prescott has moved aside??

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
As I side note I personally would hang every drug addicted fanny/fannette scrounging off this country or if in employment unwittingly funding some criminal organisation/gang, and the above is only made as a ref. as I have never touched drugs whatsoever ... though I did take two aspirin earlier ... druggies I fucking hate their fucking chavvy arse ... cunting Dibbles pikey bastarding fans!!

Too right, crofter, old son!.. CUNT! WANK! FUCK! TOSS! PIKEY BASTARDS!.. BELLEND! KNOB! TWAT! CHAVY-CHAVER! SKANKIN' DRUGOS!..CHIN THE FUCKERS! TWAT 'EM, I SAY!.. WANK! FUCK! DICK! SCROTUM!...


Officer Dibble

Sam,
I did not say that they were not snorting nose candy but that there was no evidence of it. One may suspect that they did,or not but proof is required in a court of law.!wink!

Mike.

Crofter,
Careful with those aspirins as just one produces stomach bleeding.
Mike.

Dibble,
You did mean to be ironic of course? But what are your constructive comments on Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Mike.

1. This pair of tossers are not real judges, they are Immigration Adjudicators. In a typical piece of NuLabor tossfroth these job titles were amended to "judge", just as stipendiary magistrates are now called "District Judges". I imagine real judges are somewhat fucked off about this.

2. The female "judge" was alleged to be seen snorting coke in a video made in Thailand. However, since the cleaner destroyed the video, we will never know the truth.

3. The male "judge" was named, not because the cleaner was found not guilty of blackmailing him, but because the real judge in the trial thought he had acted so badly that he had forfeited his right to anonymity.

4. Notwithstanding any of the above, this pair of "judges" are a pair of complete fuckwits who are patently not to be trusted to sit in judgment on any fellow human being, and should be dealt with accordingly.

5. This comment is now adjourned.