Why should I be chief justice?
First: Who better to become a gamekeeper than a poacher?
When JAL appointed me his defence counsel, I fought for his acquittal and release with every resource at my disposal. I fought for six months. I fought fair, I fought dirty. I used every tactic I could think of, and when I had run out, I invented some more. Every time I was given an inch, I took a mile. And I turned an unwinnable case into one where the only losers were the TNP judicial system. I think it was the boxer Joe Louis who said that the best way to really understand the character of someone was to meet them in the ring. I have met the TNP legal system. I understand it. Because I can beat it, I can make it work.
Second: I have ideas.
Here is what I could/would do:
Bring an end to the JAL trial.
My very first action as CJ will be to end the embarrassing farce that is the JAL trial. I will dismiss all charges, apologise to JAL for the way in which he has been treated, and move on. And let’s never mention that fucktard of a trial again.
A system of mediation.
Trials ought to be the last resort. I would introduce a system of voluntary mediation in an attempt to make them even rarer than they are now. I would rather see a simple conversation ending in a common-sense result decided by an e-handshake than six months of stupidity.
Option of trial by rock paper scissors.
Let’s face it. This is a game. It does not matter, really. For sillier disputes the chief justice will institute “trial by rock paper scissors” where the plaintiff and defendant play RPS (best of five rounds) for a token but deeply humiliating punishment.
This is the big one: A common-sense approach to judicial review.
Somehow, over the years, our constitution and our laws have become the shackles that bind us. Most Chief Justices, including the current incumbent, seem intent on the letter of the law, even if that results in a literal interpretation of the words that goes against the spirit and intent of the law.
I will bring a more common sense approach to legal opinion. If you are the sort who likes arguments over the positioning of a comma in “paragraph 4 sub clause 2i(b)” of the constitution, you will be very welcome to fuck off and wait for another pedant to become Chief Justice. That sort of attitude has turned our legal system into a laughing stock. I will have none of it. My first and overriding legal question will be “are you being a dickhead?” IF you are – don’t expect judicial reviews to go your way. My second question will be “are you making good common sense?” If you are – expect 10 house points and a gold star.
Third: Because I am an unsentimental bastard.
I am not known for my forgiving nature, or my merciful character. If you screw over TNP, my wrath will be the wrath of God, and I will see you burn. Don’t whine on IRC. Don’t winge in Personal Messages. Punishments will be harsh and permanent means forever. Wait for my term to come to an end and find a weakling to cry to.
I will happily take questions.
First: Who better to become a gamekeeper than a poacher?
When JAL appointed me his defence counsel, I fought for his acquittal and release with every resource at my disposal. I fought for six months. I fought fair, I fought dirty. I used every tactic I could think of, and when I had run out, I invented some more. Every time I was given an inch, I took a mile. And I turned an unwinnable case into one where the only losers were the TNP judicial system. I think it was the boxer Joe Louis who said that the best way to really understand the character of someone was to meet them in the ring. I have met the TNP legal system. I understand it. Because I can beat it, I can make it work.
Second: I have ideas.
Here is what I could/would do:
Bring an end to the JAL trial.
My very first action as CJ will be to end the embarrassing farce that is the JAL trial. I will dismiss all charges, apologise to JAL for the way in which he has been treated, and move on. And let’s never mention that fucktard of a trial again.
A system of mediation.
Trials ought to be the last resort. I would introduce a system of voluntary mediation in an attempt to make them even rarer than they are now. I would rather see a simple conversation ending in a common-sense result decided by an e-handshake than six months of stupidity.
Option of trial by rock paper scissors.
Let’s face it. This is a game. It does not matter, really. For sillier disputes the chief justice will institute “trial by rock paper scissors” where the plaintiff and defendant play RPS (best of five rounds) for a token but deeply humiliating punishment.
This is the big one: A common-sense approach to judicial review.
Somehow, over the years, our constitution and our laws have become the shackles that bind us. Most Chief Justices, including the current incumbent, seem intent on the letter of the law, even if that results in a literal interpretation of the words that goes against the spirit and intent of the law.
I will bring a more common sense approach to legal opinion. If you are the sort who likes arguments over the positioning of a comma in “paragraph 4 sub clause 2i(b)” of the constitution, you will be very welcome to fuck off and wait for another pedant to become Chief Justice. That sort of attitude has turned our legal system into a laughing stock. I will have none of it. My first and overriding legal question will be “are you being a dickhead?” IF you are – don’t expect judicial reviews to go your way. My second question will be “are you making good common sense?” If you are – expect 10 house points and a gold star.
Third: Because I am an unsentimental bastard.
I am not known for my forgiving nature, or my merciful character. If you screw over TNP, my wrath will be the wrath of God, and I will see you burn. Don’t whine on IRC. Don’t winge in Personal Messages. Punishments will be harsh and permanent means forever. Wait for my term to come to an end and find a weakling to cry to.
I will happily take questions.
