Reply to post:

Sex ban IT man loses appeal – but judge labels order 'unpoliceable'

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Yes, I was just reading the same quote in disbelief.

If having a narcissistic streak is a crime, Trump will never be able to visit his Scottish golf course again. WTF?

I can get that some people think they have identified a risk and act on it, but so far I have yet to see evidence that confirms this. The (pretty much ad hoc) criteria dragged in so far would make any winner of bad sex awards a candidate, and practically all of the current cabinet hit the "narcissist streak" aspect as that is the very core of being a politician these days. As for grandstanding, he who is without sin and so on.

This is the key problem: the very statements made in court as argument make it more look like a judge turning a personal dislike into a judgement - I think some independence is needed here to sort the wheat from the chaff. So far, it stinks and it appears the real risk is active collusion to pervert the course of justice. This requires external, entirely independent experts offering a psychiatric evaluation, not the wanton whims of a pissed off judge. That's not dispensing justice, that's dispensing WITH justice (to paraphrase Mark Twain).

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019