There have been many times over my long career when I’ve been tempted to tell a member of the judiciary to **** off (m’lud). I wouldn’t of course – if I said **** off I’d be struck off.
However, similar expletives came to mind when it was revealed this week that, in a landmark judgement, Mr Justice Bean set aside the conviction of a foul-mouthed thug for repeatedly using the f-word while being searched by police.
The High Court judge justified his move by saying that the expletive is rather commonplace so was unlikely to cause alarm or distress.
Yes, we hear bad language all the time and most people are immune to the sound of swearing. But does that make it right ?
Instead of seizing an opportunity to claw back some decency in everyday parlance, the judge’s ruling could pave the way for an even greater acceptance of foul language.
Bad enough low-rent comedians already think a swear word is a punchline. And that certain trendy publications quote, verbatim, stars who swear in interviews.
This was an opportunity for the judiciary to tell the f-word to **** off. I’ll remember this judgement next time I’m biting my ****ing tongue in court. Fellow lawyers, take judicial note.
Time to return to polytechic status
In 1978 I graduated from Trent Poly. I’d rather have graduated from Nottingham University but I didn’t get the grades to win a place there. I wasn’t thrilled about it at the time. I wanted the prestige and kudos of a university degree.
Of course, if I went to Trent Poly now, my wish would be granted, as my alma mater has since been rebranded as Nottingham Trent University. What a joke.
When polytechnics were given university status in 1992 the move, in my mind, attempted to appease the anti-elitist voice of the soft Left who believed everybody was entitled to a university degree.
Out went an educational meritocracy. In came a policy which meant every man and his dog could say he went to university.
So, after it was revealed this week that the government is axing 5,000 ‘soft’ degree courses, wouldn’t this be the perfect moment to strip former polys of their university status too.
We need to dispel the myth that everyone is capable of going to what is now deplorably known as ‘uni’ (pronounced ‘unehhh’). That university education does not come with a degree in entitlement.
Academia is not for everyone. We need to make a distinction between the can-dos and the wannabees – particularly for employers in need of some quality control.
That aside, there’s also a desperate demand for electricians, plumbers, decorators and the like. All honourable trades that require a skill and expertise that far out-ranks a BA Hons in Ringtones of the 21st century (or whatever Mickey Mouse courses are currently on offer).
And if more people would swallow this, then there wouldn’t be so many Brits on the dole, whilst hard-working and skilled Eastern Europeans fill these roles.
My inner snob still shudders at having a polytechnic degree on my CV. But it didn’t prove too much of a handicap. Once a poly, always a poly. It’ll never be a change you can make by degrees.
The author of her own misfortune
Baroness Uddin is our first female Muslim peer. What an achievement, what an opportunity... what a responsibility.
For having reached her exalted position in the Lords, itself the very bastion of British society, she could so easily have become an inspirational ambassador for young Muslims in this country.
But she blew it. She stuck her nose in the trough and swindled the hard-pressed taxpayer out of more than £100,000 by making false claims about her main residence.
She then compounded this by ‘playing the race card’: claiming that her investigation was skewed because she is a Muslim.
Let us be clear. Baroness Uddin has been disciplined because of her actions not her religion. She was the author of her own misfortune.
Tweet
Comments
Login or Register to comment
You have come a fare way since you were prosecuting at Manchester Mags back in the 80's.. I wonder how much reaction the comment on the Baroness will provoke, I agree with every sentiment and that's a first !
Next week - How to bake the perfect cheese quiche.
A pile of **** as usual Freeman.
Why does the MEN continue to give this odious clown a soapbox?
Does Mr Justice Bean know the difference that the f word can be used, for example to use it as a superlative such as it was ******* loud or heavy or whatever is not the same as would be used to tell someome trying to do their job to **** off repeatedly.
I know it's not a nice word but I can tolerate it in the former context but not the latter, there is the difference. And, just because something is commonplace doesn't mean it's acceptable, burglaries are commonplace, so is fighting outside pubs at kicking out time (well it is at some places anyway)
It'll be a very cold day in hell indeed before I take advice over bad language from a man who prides himself with the moniker "Mr Loophole" - effectively scrutinising fine print in order to acquit lawbreakers on technicalities - a multi-millionaire as reward for keeping speeding footballers on the road.
A man who is on record for making offensive sexist comments about the clothes some women choose to wear .
The very man who managed to get Alex Ferguson off a charge of driving up the hard shoulder.
In truth, I find the idea of giving this man a column in the Manchester Evening News highly offensive in the first place.
Beyond a joke.
I agree with Mr Freeman, in relation to his points regarding bad language and Baroness Uddin.
As Mr Freeman states, Baroness Uddin had a fantastic opportunity to show her fellow British Bangladeshis that they can achieve the highest roles in British democracy.
Sadly, Baroness Uddin failed to live up to the high standards expected of Peers.
I agree, we should not lose our sense of outrage at the gratuitous use of expletives. If it has become so commonplace, like metal theft, that in itself doesn't mitigate.
Is this Freemans next line of defence in a celebrity speeding case?
"Speeding is so commonplace m'lud that this single incident is unlikely to cause distress"