Will Reid-Tong (née Thong)
@willthong.com
💻 Release Engineer at a cybersecurity firm
🌹 Ex-Labour fundraiser, 2021-2023
🎓 Ex-Magdalene College, Cambridge fundraiser
🧑🍳 Even more formerly a MasterChef 2017 contestant
All opinions personal; RT ≠ endorsement
🌹 Ex-Labour fundraiser, 2021-2023
🎓 Ex-Magdalene College, Cambridge fundraiser
🧑🍳 Even more formerly a MasterChef 2017 contestant
All opinions personal; RT ≠ endorsement
I don't know of a legal system in the world which hands this complexity of case to laypeople! Even the USA (very jury brained; juries for massive IP law cases) decides constitutional cases to judges.
November 27, 2025 at 12:48 PM
I don't know of a legal system in the world which hands this complexity of case to laypeople! Even the USA (very jury brained; juries for massive IP law cases) decides constitutional cases to judges.
spectrum of how much judicial deference they give to administrative decisions: cf en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicia.... It's totally possible they've found 3 judges who think the principle is wider than the guy they replaced him with. And that would be bad. But a jury couldn't solve the problem here!
Judicial deference - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
November 27, 2025 at 12:48 PM
spectrum of how much judicial deference they give to administrative decisions: cf en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicia.... It's totally possible they've found 3 judges who think the principle is wider than the guy they replaced him with. And that would be bad. But a jury couldn't solve the problem here!
That's a straw man - there's no such thing as a "completely independent and trustworthy" judge, esp in judicial review cases - the whole field of law is literally asking the question "were the government authorised to exercise this power the Commons gave them?" Every judge is on a multifactor
November 27, 2025 at 12:47 PM
That's a straw man - there's no such thing as a "completely independent and trustworthy" judge, esp in judicial review cases - the whole field of law is literally asking the question "were the government authorised to exercise this power the Commons gave them?" Every judge is on a multifactor
This is my point - we agree why this (if they don't have some good reason they haven't shared) looks dodge. I'm just saying it's not analogous to getting thrown in prison for 18 months for whacking a guy at the pub - can't pull the same bullshit moves on simpler cases.
November 27, 2025 at 12:15 PM
This is my point - we agree why this (if they don't have some good reason they haven't shared) looks dodge. I'm just saying it's not analogous to getting thrown in prison for 18 months for whacking a guy at the pub - can't pull the same bullshit moves on simpler cases.
Germany? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicia...
Judiciary of Germany - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
November 27, 2025 at 8:55 AM
Germany? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicia...
I accept that this is an alternative solution which would improve diversity, at the cost of them not being legal experts (so eg they need evidence hidden from them, they have to have the law explained to them and even so often get the tests wrong etc)
November 27, 2025 at 8:46 AM
I accept that this is an alternative solution which would improve diversity, at the cost of them not being legal experts (so eg they need evidence hidden from them, they have to have the law explained to them and even so often get the tests wrong etc)
that would massively diversify the profession
November 27, 2025 at 7:48 AM
that would massively diversify the profession
The judiciary is super unrepresentative - I think it's less of a problem than a lack of legal expertise, but you could reduce it by having judges as a 3rd lawyer track like they do in 🇫🇷 . Less serious crimes & cases could be tried by junior judges at the beginning of careers
November 27, 2025 at 7:48 AM
The judiciary is super unrepresentative - I think it's less of a problem than a lack of legal expertise, but you could reduce it by having judges as a 3rd lawyer track like they do in 🇫🇷 . Less serious crimes & cases could be tried by junior judges at the beginning of careers
Mate you just flummoxed me with this one - made me think you were implying it was a "they all know each other through work" thing rather than the (more accurate imv) "they have biases towards those from similar walks of life" claim
bsky.app/profile/trek...
bsky.app/profile/trek...
"why don't we let someone directly involved in the criminal justice system decide if their colleague is right"
November 27, 2025 at 7:42 AM
Mate you just flummoxed me with this one - made me think you were implying it was a "they all know each other through work" thing rather than the (more accurate imv) "they have biases towards those from similar walks of life" claim
bsky.app/profile/trek...
bsky.app/profile/trek...
No - I'm saying they need to find some reason to disagree when they're writing the judgment. That's much harder to do on a simple shoplifting offence than it is on a complex judicial review. It'd be much more likely in this case than in a low sentence crim case so the 2 aren't really analogous.
November 27, 2025 at 7:37 AM
No - I'm saying they need to find some reason to disagree when they're writing the judgment. That's much harder to do on a simple shoplifting offence than it is on a complex judicial review. It'd be much more likely in this case than in a low sentence crim case so the 2 aren't really analogous.
You'd need to predict some level of disagreement between Chamberlain and the new panel to bother doing the stitch up. I'm saying that disagreement would be way less likely to exist for a 3 year sentence crime than for this complicated judicial review.
November 26, 2025 at 8:47 PM
You'd need to predict some level of disagreement between Chamberlain and the new panel to bother doing the stitch up. I'm saying that disagreement would be way less likely to exist for a 3 year sentence crime than for this complicated judicial review.
Yes and the Guardian article on the same topic! I agree it looks really bad! But let's imagine it is an MoJ stitch up and they removed Chamberlain to make sure he didn't let the JR go thru (here and in the F35 case).
November 26, 2025 at 8:47 PM
Yes and the Guardian article on the same topic! I agree it looks really bad! But let's imagine it is an MoJ stitch up and they removed Chamberlain to make sure he didn't let the JR go thru (here and in the F35 case).
So this is the unrepresentative crit, that the judge would be more likely to let someone off if they were similarly old, white and rich as them?
November 26, 2025 at 8:43 PM
So this is the unrepresentative crit, that the judge would be more likely to let someone off if they were similarly old, white and rich as them?
Not good! The lack of explanation stinks. But as a judicial review case it's likely to be a lot more complicated than the average criminal trial (definitely more so than the short sentence offences moving away from juries), so more scope for different judges to disagree.
November 26, 2025 at 8:40 PM
Not good! The lack of explanation stinks. But as a judicial review case it's likely to be a lot more complicated than the average criminal trial (definitely more so than the short sentence offences moving away from juries), so more scope for different judges to disagree.
Actually I'll take that further - the jury trial I sat on 2 years ago collapsed because of police & CPS incompetence - the judge was FUMING. If you think they're "on the same team" I think that's a mistake
November 26, 2025 at 8:27 PM
Actually I'll take that further - the jury trial I sat on 2 years ago collapsed because of police & CPS incompetence - the judge was FUMING. If you think they're "on the same team" I think that's a mistake
I think that's why I initially misunderstood the analogy, apologies
November 26, 2025 at 8:25 PM
I think that's why I initially misunderstood the analogy, apologies
Right sorry, the bit I don't understand is why the CPS or criminal justice system is analogous to a corporation of which a judge is the CEO? Judges don't line manage prosecution lawyer;, court admin and the CPS are totally separate; they share none of the same infrastructure.
November 26, 2025 at 8:25 PM
Right sorry, the bit I don't understand is why the CPS or criminal justice system is analogous to a corporation of which a judge is the CEO? Judges don't line manage prosecution lawyer;, court admin and the CPS are totally separate; they share none of the same infrastructure.
Of course not - I just think they're much less prone to misunderstanding the law (altho I suspect that's only a problem in a minority of criminal cases), and I think that makes them less likely to make incorrect ones
November 26, 2025 at 8:20 PM
Of course not - I just think they're much less prone to misunderstanding the law (altho I suspect that's only a problem in a minority of criminal cases), and I think that makes them less likely to make incorrect ones
"whether X did conspiracy to murder can get legally complicated, let's get in a judge even if each side's barristers might know the judge"
November 26, 2025 at 8:17 PM
"whether X did conspiracy to murder can get legally complicated, let's get in a judge even if each side's barristers might know the judge"
Ohhhh I get you okay. Well 🤷♀️ makes sense in my head: "companies suing each other can get legally complicated, so let's get in a judge even if each side's barristers might know the judge" seems analogous to
November 26, 2025 at 8:17 PM
Ohhhh I get you okay. Well 🤷♀️ makes sense in my head: "companies suing each other can get legally complicated, so let's get in a judge even if each side's barristers might know the judge" seems analogous to
Who else are you claiming deals with lawsuits between or against companies?
November 26, 2025 at 8:13 PM
Who else are you claiming deals with lawsuits between or against companies?
station, let alone prosecution!
November 26, 2025 at 8:10 PM
station, let alone prosecution!
Thanks for the link - I enjoyed the article. Don't agree though - I think the thing the author misses is that juries' lack of legal expertise makes their verdicts inevitably more error prone. Also, this is a rough thing to say is "good" given how few sexual violence cases make it to the police
November 26, 2025 at 8:10 PM
Thanks for the link - I enjoyed the article. Don't agree though - I think the thing the author misses is that juries' lack of legal expertise makes their verdicts inevitably more error prone. Also, this is a rough thing to say is "good" given how few sexual violence cases make it to the police
No, all lawsuits against corporations are mediated by a judge, and so too should all criminal suits!
November 26, 2025 at 8:04 PM
No, all lawsuits against corporations are mediated by a judge, and so too should all criminal suits!
Yeah I totally accept that the downside of judges is they come from a disproportionately privileged background. The core disagreement is weighing that limitation vs the lack of legal expertise on a jury. (Magistrates are worst of both worlds; don't know law and super posh to boot)
November 26, 2025 at 8:03 PM
Yeah I totally accept that the downside of judges is they come from a disproportionately privileged background. The core disagreement is weighing that limitation vs the lack of legal expertise on a jury. (Magistrates are worst of both worlds; don't know law and super posh to boot)