Shubtill v Director of Public Prosecutions: Difference between revisions

Shubtill v Director of Public Prosecutions (view source)

Revision as of 11:54, 26 October 2022

805 bytes added , 26 October 2022

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,891

edits

@@ Line 94: / Line 94: @@
 Sir Anthony Clunge organised his principle around the principle of what he calls “unequivocality”. A licence such as this granted by action requires a clarity of conduct such that a prudent bystander could not misunderstand the complainants’ intent.
-Sir Anthony argues that the complainants’ behaviour did not could attain the clarity the common law requires. It could hardly have been further from it. Ms. Bott’s oration, he contends, was little short of baffling: a confused assemblage of illogicalities, sophistries, begged questions, miscued rhetoricals and conclusions not even hinted at by their premises. One could not with safety know that Ms Bott understood herself.
+Sir Anthony argues that the complainants’ behaviour did not could attain the clarity the common law requires. To the contrary, he says, it hardly could be further from it.
+We should not expect citizens to conduct their relations with the world in careful syllogisms. Mr Clunge concedes this would be too much. We agree: polite society lubricates its gears with subtle gestures. Nods, winks and waggled heads are quite enough to covey assent. The respondent knows this well. <Ref>{{Cite|Shubtill|Finchley Port Authority}}</ref>
+But nor, Says Sir Anthony should we impute an invitation to make ostensive mess lightly. There must be a basic sense of coherence to raise a presumption.
+And Ms. Bott’s cloth-headed oration, he contends, was  nowhere near. It was little short of baffling: a confused assemblage of illogicalities, sophistries, begged questions, trite slogans, miscued rhetoricals and conclusions not even hinted at by their premises. One could not with safety know that Ms Bott understood herself.
+What do you make of someone whose teeshirt says “No” to oil, but who complains about the cost of energy? Who demonstrates about  hunger by tipping out soup?
+Ms Bott was crying out for help, not a face-ful of soup.
 In the alternative, Sir Anthony says that should a licence be inferred it was smartly revoked.