The first comment on this Daily Mail article Blinkered arrogance and a judiciary in danger of losing the public’s confidence was: “in danger of losing our confidence? They have already lost it.”

This refusal of Maurice’s appeal by Mr Justice Kitchin demonstrates to me:

• no matter how hard we try, it just doesn’t seem worth it: “they” are always right
• the judge is not interested in the spirit of fairness, empathy or, god forbid, sympathy with Maurice
• the judge is determined NOT to let Maurice get anywhere with his legal proceedings.

The questions that arise for me at this point are:

• will Litigants in Person ever have a chance in this adversarial system of lawyers fighting lawyers at the expense of the litigants?
• in this “Judges survey: Judgment day” Mr Justice Kitchin is called “a star in the making” – what does that mean for an “Appellant in Person” rather than fellow lawyers?
• if Justice is put on Trial by The Guardian, who judges the judges and by which yardstick?

It’s strange: my nephew who is studying law tells me that common sense seems to be missing most of the time…

Related articles

• Blinkered arrogance and a judiciary in danger of losing the public’s confidence (vickyhaigh.wordpress.com)
• How can I be accused of contempt of court when the judiciary continues to be in contempt of the law? (wewhoopposedeception.wordpress.com)
• Courts ‘need more women judges’ (bbc.co.uk)
• Litigants in Person – a new resource for ‘new’ victims (edm1297.info)
• Who judges the judges? Someone had better do it (blogs.telegraph.co.uk)