Tag Archives: Bar of England and Wales

Diary Blog, 24 April 2021

The Keys of the Kingdom

Saw a fine old film called The Keys of the Kingdom [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Keys_of_the_Kingdom_(film)]. Based on a book by the arguably now-almost-forgotten A.J. Cronin [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._J._Cronin], one of those writers who, while bestselling authors in their day, are later rather neglected. I suppose that Edgar Wallace was another example; he sold 50 million copies of his many works: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Wallace.

Watching The Keys of the Kingdom, it again occurred to me how many deeply Christian films were made by Hollywood in its days of greatness, despite the fact that all or almost all studios were owned by Jews. Ben Hur would be just one other example, others yet being Quo Vadis, The Robe, etc.

Today, it is different. Film studios are now usually not only owned by Jews, but the films often directed by Jews, and those films tend to be bitterly Zionist (often promoting the “holocaust” narrative) and/or serving a materialist agenda. Spielberg is only one example.

More from the Bar of England and Wales

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9505889/Falsely-accused-rape-married-barrister-thrown-cells-just-campaign.html

Multikulti Britain 2021… a dustbin.

Tweets seen

Wonderful. A stand taken against the “control” agenda.

As far as the facemask nonsense is concerned, the fear engendered by the System propaganda of a year ago is only a veneer now. Few really believe that everyone is at risk of death. They know (or have guessed something similar) that only 1 in 4,000 people in the world has been killed by “Covid-19”, and that even in swamped (by immigrants and tourists) Britain, only 1 in about every 1,000 people has died from “the virus” (or, more accurately, “within 28 days of a positive test”, though in reality from other conditions).

No doubt the propagandists will try to enforce continued facemask muzzling, but the people are already giving up, despite the dictatorial and possibly invalid “laws”, “rules” etc. The social pressure is less now, as well. I filled up the car with fuel a few days ago and genuinely forgot to put on a disposable mask as I went to pay at the kiosk. A woman exited, also maskless, and the cashier, likewise maskless, did not ask me to put on any mask; in fact, the matter was not mentioned, and she even smiled, a fact I attribute either to her sunny personality or to my charming manner…

Boris-Idiot

I see that my blog post of July 2019, assessing the then new Boris Johnson Cabinet, has been receiving many hits: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/07/25/the-boris-johnson-cabinet/.

Dominic Cummings

I see that Dominic Cummings has turned against Boris-idiot…https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/apr/23/dominic-cummings-launches-attack-on-boris-johnson

I blogged about Cummings several times over the past two years: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2020/01/03/dominic-cummings-a-government-of-dystopia-and-lunacy-posing-as-genius/; https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/08/10/les-eminences-grises-of-dystopia/ etc.

In what were “normal” times, this present government of clowns could and would not exist, certainly not for long, but we have a situation in which there is no legitimate government, yet also no legitimate nor effective official Opposition or opposition party. The former Labour leader, Corbyn, who was weak, and was a bit of a joke, but at was least anti-Zionist (up to a point), was replaced by the Jew-lobby puppet, Keir Starmer, whose idea seems to be to say, all the time, to the Government “we support 90% of what you do, but you should be doing it better…oh and doing it on bended knee, and wearing a facemask“!

I should not be surprised if Labour under Starmer were to start to do worse in elections even than under Corbyn and Miliband.

In Scotland, looks as though Scottish Labour (led now by a Pakistani) has pretty much given up (see tweet below):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anas_Sarwar; https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19251664.scottish-labour-leader-anas-sarwar-admits-hypocrisy-childrens-private-education/; https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19255314.being-hypocrite-means-can-see-greed-sides—week-anas-sarwar/

Truly pathetic…

Afternoon music

Quiz

Image

Well, this week I scored 8/10, thus again beating political journalist, and diehard Blairite, John Rentoul, though he managed 7/10, far better than his embarrassing 1/10 of last week (I always give him full credit for honesty, though). The questions which I was unable to answer this week were questions 6 and 8.

William Joyce

CA7FF098-A25E-4B1D-973A-C31BAA49AAC8.png
[William Joyce, born 24 April 1906, New York NY, USA; died 3 January 1946, London] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Joyce
66BEBF7D-B30B-4AE3-89F4-816D33A7ACB8.jpeg

Late music

Diary Blog, 20 June 2020, including thoughts about Twitter and Katie Hopkins

[above: a sentence which the censors of free speech, and the enemies of Europe’s future, should consider]

Katie Hopkins

It had to happen. The censorship and hypocrisy pervasive in the whole society is magnified on Twitter.

On Twitter, white (i.e. European, or Aryan, or post-Aryan if you like) people are always in the wrong, unless they “bend the knee” (literally or metaphorically) in sign of fealty to those of inferior race and culture.

There is, of course, a double standard on Twitter. The blacks and browns and— a fortiori— Jews are allowed pretty much free rein. White (i.e. European or European-origin) people can be “suspended” and/or “permanently suspended” (they mean “removed”) quite easily, especially when packs of Jews (or those effectively controlled by Jews) gang up against them.

That is what happened to me in 2018. I joined Twitter in 2010 but tweeted almost nothing until 2011. The Jew-Zionist pack on (UK) Twitter targeted me after I tweeted something about a BBC Radio 4 Today Programme piece about the “restitution” scam, whereby Jews whose ancestors owned property (buildings, houses, gold bars, Old Master paintings) in Central or Eastern Europe in 1930s (sometimes procured by the Jews via fraud and outright theft) have such property (or money in lieu) “restored” to them.

Basically, the governments of various European states end up paying money to the Jews in “compensation” for what was expropriated from the Jews’ grandparents or great-grandparents. All claimed to be an outcome of the “holocaust” farrago (in fact most of the property was abandoned when Jews left Germany, Poland etc for the UK, USA, France etc).

The relentless Jew-Zionist attack on me, from about 2011 onwards resulted in my being disbarred, albeit only in 2016, 8 years after I had left Bar practice.

The now-disgraced and infirm Jew-Zionist solicitor, Mark Lewis, was trying to “get” me for years, and the two Jew-Zionist packs with which he was most associated, the “Campaign Against Antisemitism” and “UK Lawyers for Israel” both tried to have me disbarred, arrested and charged (with various faked-up offences), and expelled from Twitter.

Well, I was never arrested, let alone charged, tried or convicted of anything, but I was disbarred, after a nearly two-and a-half-year struggle. I have blogged about all this:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/07/13/when-i-was-a-victim-of-a-malicious-zionist-complaint/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/07/09/the-slide-of-the-english-bar-and-uk-society-continues-and-accelerates/

I have also blogged fairly extensively about self-publicizing Jew solicitor, Mark Lewis, now a resident of Eilat, Israel:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/01/11/update-re-mark-lewis-lawyer-questions-are-raised/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/22/mark-lewis-lawyer-latest-update/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/20/self-publicizing-supposed-top-lawyer-mark-lewis-full-transcript-of-disciplinary-hearing-judgment-now-released-by-tribunal/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/19/the-latest-revelations-about-zionist-supposed-top-lawyer-mark-lewis/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/13/more-details-about-mark-lewis-lawyer-and-his-abusive-social-media-presence/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/11/mark-lewis-lawyer-disciplinary-case-now-updated-to-11-december-2018/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/11/23/mark-lewis-lawyer-tries-to-have-part-of-the-case-against-him-thrown-out/

[above: the Jew solicitor, Mark Lewis, tweeting to people…]

Incidentally, Mark Lewis is still on Twitter and even has a “blue tick”, meaning that he is considered favoured; that despite the fact that Lewis actually bought about 70,000 non-existent “followers” (his wife at the time, Caroline Feraday, did similar; the marriage itself was brief, and lasted months not years). Lewis has kept at least 15,000 of his bought “followers” (he originally, when briefly “famous”, around 2012, had about 8,000, I thought, though Legal Cheek magazine said only 3,000, the same as me, ironically). That magazine pretended, for the sake of convenience, or for purposes of satire, to accept Lewis’s ludicrous “I wuz hacked” plea:

https://www.legalcheek.com/2014/06/phone-hacking-lawyers-twitter-gets-hacked-and-he-becomes-most-followed-member-of-uk-legal-profession/

When I was expelled from Twitter, I had only 3,000 followers, but at least they were all real (I also followed only about 50 accounts, mostly organizations; Lewis follows, even now, 660 at time of writing).

Thousands of other tweeters have blue ticks, but I can think of only one social-national tweeter, Nick Griffin, and I doubt whether he will be on Twitter for much longer now.

The only consolation is that Twitter is largely a waste of time anyway. Twitter thought that the Brexit Referendum would be easily won by Remain, and that Trump had no chance of election in 2016 (etc).

I have blogged about freedom of expression. I have also blogged and (before I was expelled) tweeted about a connected topic, what I call “the privatization of public space“, meaning how a few huge quasi-monopolies (particularly Twitter, Facebook, ebay, Amazon, YouTube) have arrogated to themselves and their employees the right to deny a platform to those with the “wrong” views, i.e. anything that stands against a Zionist-controlled or influenced globalized dystopia:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/02/26/tommy-robinson-banned-on-facebook-the-repression-of-free-speech-online/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/01/06/free-speech-individuality-v-collectivity/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/03/the-knives-are-out-for-freedom-of-expression-and-more/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/03/the-knives-are-out-for-freedom-of-expression-and-more/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/09/11/to-what-extent-can-the-uk-still-be-called-a-free-country/

A few cartoons that make the point(s):

A few tweets seen supporting freedom of expression online

https://twitter.com/notasheepyet/status/1274198445134278658?s=20

More tweets, this time “celebrating” the removal of Katie Hopkins from Twitter. It is noticeable how many of those tweets are from those who make money out of the msm and who (unlike brave Laurence Fox) are desperate not to be blacklisted.

Look at the sneering, sadistic little bastard below, one Jamie East (note his proud “blue tick”, btw). Is, or was, an msm presenter (though I myself had never heard the name until today). The sheer nastiness comes out strongly. Also, like many others attacking Katie Hopkins, he seems to relish kicking someone who is down.

Here below is the contribution of Mehdi Hasan, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehdi_Hasan, who “bravely” puts the boot into Katie Hopkins now that she has been removed from Twitter.

Below, another nasty little man who probably thinks himself terribly clever laughing at serious and important concepts such as freedom of expression etc…

Above, the logical conclusion: a witch-hunt, as seen in, eg, the Stalinist purges. Guilt by association and assumption (though I see now that the above tweeter is just a dim troll of some kind, possibly hoping to add to his 25 followers on Twitter).

The mob of “useful idiots” crawls over the marble ruins of a civilization that it could never build…

More tweets seen

Take a look, below, at tweeter “@LdnPearl”/“coons be gone” (well, in the reported words of Jesus Christ, “you have said it“…):

[Update, 21 June 2020: the very next day, tweeter “@LdnPearl” changed her “coons be gone” name to “Pearl”. Why? I mean, after all, “tell the truth and shame the Devil”, in the old saying…]

Conclusion? Quite a few of the blacks, the younger ones mainly, just hate us. There can be no society with them. A tweeter like “coons be gone” is a useless millstone round the necks of the British people.

And here (below) is another seemingly dim person (why are so many dim people from Manchester? Still, that’s one for the psychologists or social historians, I suppose).

Below: another dim fellow?

Also, one of the huge number of tweeters for whom Twitter really matters. In fact, it matters scarcely at all. The reality is that Twitter is an adjunct to politics, not the main substance of it (as the obsessed believe).

My own view of the Katie Hopkins/Twitter matter

As said above and elsewhere by me, Twitter is largely a waste of time. It helps those who have external activity happening; it is not useful as a standalone. If you are, say, Donald Trump, and you are expelled from Twitter, well, in the end, you are still President of the United States.

To put it another way, and to deploy the “Ken Livingstone” argument, were Adolf Hitler around today and had the NSDAP, SA, SS etc, Twitter would certainly assist the dissemination of his views, but it would not, of itself, help him to attain power or to retain power.

Switching that around, if a person today has no real organization behind him (or her) but only a “social media” presence, that person, be he or she ever so “famous”, is a colossus on legs of straw. Take away the social media platform(s), and the online personality is left with nothing.

The above “de-platforming” has happened to quite a few already. At more or less random, one thinks of that ghastly American degenerate, “Milo”. Others hit by “de-platforming” from all or most large online fora (Twitter, Facebook, YouTube etc) have been such as “Prison Planet” (Paul Watson), “Sargon of Akkad” Benjamin, and of course Katie Hopkins.

The irony is, that several of those removed from various online platforms, though removed mostly because the Jew lobby wanted it so, have been almost desperately pro-Israel and pro-Jew. “Prison Planet” Watson and Katie Hopkins are two such supplicants. Another is Tommy Robinson.

Lesser known people (intellectual dissidents, dissenting artists etc) are also being removed from the major platforms. Alison Chabloz, Brother Nathanael, Ian Millard (me!) and many another. Some cling on here and there, but all are being purged now and will not be on those platforms for long.

For the “alt-Right” wastes of space, being “de-platformed” means that their income streams largely dry up. Take away their online stuff, and they have nothing left. Take away the online presence of a real social-national party (were one in existence) and it would be not fatal, but merely an inconvenience.

The “alt-Right” wastes of space (Watson, Hopkins, “Sargon of Akkad”, “Tommy Robinson” etc are indeed men (and women) of straw. The only one with any real troops is Tommy Robinson, but he is not social-national, more like a clan leader, and without real ideology.

I support the rights of free expression of those mentioned above mainly from general principle. I believe that people should be able to express, without let or hindrance, views on political, social, or historical topics. The enemies of our culture and civilization (the black mobs, the “antifa” idiots, the Jew-Zionists) believe in preventing free speech.

I might add that Katie Hopkins and the other “alt-Right” and associated types never said a word in support of me; few of them said anything in support of persecuted singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz; none said a word in support of Jez Turner, of the London Forum, who was actually imprisoned for a year at the behest of that same pack of Jew-Zionists, the “Campaign Against Antisemitism”.

My own views are not at one with those “alt-Right” and similar people, at least on most issues. For example, Katie Hopkins is, or says that she is, pro-Israel and pro-Jew. For me, that is the end, and “Ian Millard has left the building”. However, she has courage, that’s for sure, and I think that she is genuinely against the migration invasion of Europe by blacks and browns.

In the end, does online ranting, opining, analyzing (and yes that does include this blog) accomplish much? I say no. It may have some utility, and I blog out of a sense of duty, and because who knows what might not happen because I blog? I do not regard blogging as truly politically or socially significant. Neither is vlogging, or (still less) tweeting.

Katie Hopkins is not social-national in ideology, of course. She is also callous in her attitudes.

What is needed is a real social-national organization in the UK. The time will never be more auspicious than in the next 7 years.

Tweets seen on various topics

Coronavirus and the “lockdown”/shutdown madness:

Migration-invasion:

Birmingham has fallen…

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8441055/Birmingham-police-officers-knee-alongside-protesters-Matter-anti-racism-rally.html

In fact, all the police bending their knees in that report seem to be black. Scandal. Incidentally, the Daily Mail refers to the organizer of the protest as “Bishop” Desmond Jadoo (or should that be “Baboo”?). The church of which he is apparently a “bishop” is not the Church of England (God be praised for small mercies…) but the “Vision Temple of Praise Church”, whatever that may be.

Glasgow

I was unaware until today (looking at tweets) to what extent Glasgow has become non-European (I have never been to that city). Shocking infiltration into government, the legal system etc.

More tweets

That has been my assumption, that the “Black Lives Matter” semi-insurrection is centred on the kind of young blacks who have been born in the UK, and who hate everything about Britain and the British, largely because they have been filled with “anti-fascist” and anti-British propaganda at ghastly comprehensive schools, aka educational prisons (in some cases).

The tweet below must be a contender for “thick tweet of the day”!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diane_Abbott#Political_controversies

More?

This (below) is the original interview:

Diane Abbott could have been Home Secretary…imagine that.

Fragments of Memory…#From Pupillage: Neil’s Party

Foreword

Some reading this may also have read my previous blog posts [see Notes, below] about my rather untraditional Bar pupillage in 1992-93, and also about my early post-pupillage days in Bar practice. I thought to write about a few other stray incidents from those times. Humour was rarely entirely absent, though sometimes in the context of events which were, especially for the people advised or represented, taxing and upsetting. I was, of course, in the first six months of my pupillage not allowed to advise or represent, and so was basically a spectator and supernumerary.

Anyway, here is one event that has stuck in my recollection. It is not directly “legal”, but connected to some lawyers I knew.

Neil’s Party

At the time, in 1992, I was very friendly with a young barrister called Neil M. and his charming wife, Helen. Both had been in the same small “Practical Exercises” group at “Bar School” (the Inns of Court School of Law in Gray’s Inn, at the time the only place where aspiring barristers could study and be examined) in 1987-88. Our surnames all started with “M” (Neil and Helen had different surnames at that time, being unmarried; in fact they first met in that little group of 7 or 8 people).

I had gone to the USA (initially in 1989, but somewhat commuted UK/USA in the following few years) and had married a US citizen; I also qualified by exam (and pretty tough it was) at the New York Bar. Neil M. had started pupillage in London and, by 1992, was already a rising barrister at the criminal Bar. Helen, his wife by that time, had left the Bar for the solicitors’ profession. In 1992, when I returned to the UK after one of my sojourns in New Jersey, the country was just going to hold the General Election of that year.

I was not actively political at the time, though I of course despised the System parties. Neil M., on the other hand, was a Labour Party stalwart, a political position which originated from his upbringing in the North West of England: he was the son of an amiable “tankie” Communist (literally so, a member of the C.P.G.B.), whom I met a couple of times in later years.

Neil M. was, I suppose, somewhere in the middle of the Labour Party, ideologically, close to the outlook of John Smith, the Scottish advocate who led Labour for about 20 months until his death in 1994. I should characterize Neil’s outlook as “tribal Labour”; to me that had no greater weight than that of someone who supports this or that football team, or Oxford/Cambridge in the Boat Race. In fact, Neil M. concurred with my view up to a point, saying that I could not understand why people like him were so partisan in favour of a System party; for him it indeed was like “…supporting a football or rugby team; you don’t understand that either!”

I was invited to attend the special election night dinner at the beautifully-refurbished National Liberal Club, once the haunt of Gladstone, Lloyd George and Asquith, later (in the 1970s) the decayed and dilapidated place where the likes of Cyril Smith and Jeremy Thorpe had stayed and behaved badly. By 1992, most members were “non-political” (meaning not Liberal Democrats). Much later yet, in 2001-2002, I was myself a member.

Large TV screens had been set up in the Club dining room, in order to relay the election results from the BBC as they came in.

Older readers will recall that the opinion polls made Labour favourite to win the 1992 General Election. Neil Kinnock was widely expected to become Prime Minister, though later his triumphalist and arguably too-“Labourite” speech at Sheffield was blamed for putting off floating voters:

At any rate, Labour went into the final day and evening confident, a position echoed by many of those at the dinner I attended. In fact, I noted that many were not pro-Labour, but were quieter than the Labour partisans. At my table, I sat near Neil M. and his wife, as well as another barrister, a markedly iconoclastic (and amusing) Jew commercial barrister called Robert L. and his extremely engaging, attractive and articulate wife, a City of London banker, with whom I had an interesting and slightly barbed conversation.

All went well at the dinner until, after midnight, it started to become very obvious that Labour was not going to win the election. The scene in parts of the large Club dining room reminded me of a smarter and English (and far less sexualized) version of Don’s Party, the Australian film about a party which unravels when the expected victory of the Australian Labor Party (in 1969) fails to occur. I left the Club very late but still before most of the diners. I was told later that, after I left, scuffles and the like broke out between mocking “Conservatives” and angry, frustrated and drunken “Labour” partisans.

I myself was highly amused by the outcome of the election, mainly because, to me, it was obvious that most of the Labour MPs in the Shadow Cabinet were a bunch of fakes and/or hypocrites, led by Kinnock himself, a creeping crawling doormat for Zionists, and an apologist for mass immigration and finance-capitalism ameliorated slightly by a Welfare State already beginning to show signs of disappearance.

Neil M. was angry at me (and years later admitted to me that he had come close to hitting me! In the sacred precincts of the Club, at that!). He himself later became a local councillor in Islington and was informally offered the chance to become a Labour MP, but turned down the opportunity on the ground that as a barrister doing very good criminal work, he was making about twice an MP’s salary and needed the money. Years later he ruefully explained that he had thought that MPs lived off their salaries! He had no idea back then that not only did they have very generous expenses (and in many cases cheated badly on those!) as well as the really quite good salary (compared to most people), but also often had offers of lucrative “work” from all sorts of “consultancies” etc. Disguised near (or actual) corruption. Pity that Neil M. did not become a politician in the Westminster monkeyhouse. He would have been a good and conscientious constituency MP.

Final Word

In fact, Labour improved their position in the election, with an extra 42 MPs, though that still left the Conservatives under John Major with an overall majority of 21. It took 5 years before Labour under Tony Blair could sweep away the Conservatives and many of their MPs. Neil Kinnock ceded control of Labour to John Smith and then (after Smith died in office) to Tony Blair.

As for my friends Neil M. and Helen M. (I shall not say too much, to save them from embarrassment, now that the Zionist Jews label me in the msm and on social media as a “far right” “extremist”, “anti-Semite” and “neo-Nazi”), I maintained friendship for another 15 years, and in fact still regard them as quite close friends today, though I have not seen them now for a decade. I always send them a Christmas card (I’m like that, a bit like Jacob and the Angel: I will not let you go until you bless me…).

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/08/05/an-embarrassing-morning-in-court/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/08/03/first-steal-a-chicken/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Liberal_Club

http://www.nlc.org.uk/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1992

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27s_Party

 

The Slide of the English Bar and UK Society Continues and Accelerates

When I started to blog, I intended to write about things of general or objective importance. I intended to avoid the personal and subjective. Above all, I wished to avoid mixing the objective and the subjective. However, I think that some of my personal reminiscences and thoughts might be of interest to others. I also consider that objective conclusions can be drawn about UK society from some of my experiences.

Many of those who are reading this will be aware that I was disbarred in late 2016. That happened after a group of Jew-Zionists calling themselves “UK Lawyers for Israel” (some of whom, probably many, also belong to the so-called “Campaign Against Anti-Semitism”) made official complaint (in 2014) about a number (at first, several dozen) of tweets which I had posted on Twitter. Eventually, the number of tweets comprising the subject-matter of the charge was reduced to seven. Seven (7) tweets (reduced to 5 at Tribunal) out of, at the time, at least 150,000.

Now, though I may blog in detail about the manifold injustices around my own case at a later date, my purpose today is to compare the overall “justice” I received with that meted out to another Bar defaulter recently, in order to illustrate wider points.

Now the bare bones of my own situation were that:

  • I ceased Bar practice in 2008 and last appeared in court in December 2007;
  • I did not hold a Practice Certificate after 2008;
  • I joined Twitter in 2010 and started to tweet in 2011 or 2012;
  • My Twitter profile and picture never made any reference to my being or having been a barrister (whether practising, non-practising or employed);
  • Only a tiny handful of the 155,000-200,000 tweets I had posted made any mention of the fact that I had, years before, been a practising barrister; none of the supposedly “offensive” tweets did so;
  • The tweets I posted (whether complained of or not) were all posted as part of my “personal or private life”, I having had no professional life after 2008 anyway.

It should be said (without getting too technical) that the Bar Code of Conduct was once a slim volume but has expanded into a fairly lengthy and complex code. Suffice to say that the now-usual “race and religion”, “diversity” etc stuff is now included (and I think that we can be sure what kind of persons drafted those clauses…).

In the past, a barrister’s private life was not justiciable under the Code except in a few carefully-drawn exceptions, the main one being where a barrister had been convicted of a (serious) criminal offence (parking, speeding etc excluded). The new Code, in force for a number of years, kept those boundaries but, crucially, made them advisory only, taking away the cast-iron defence that whatever was complained of had been done in the course of the barrister’s personal or private life.

At the same time, the old and sensible distinction between barristers who are in practice, or who are employed as barristers, as against those not practising, or not employed as barristers, was removed in relation to “Core Duty 5”, i.e. in effect “bringing the Bar into disrepute”.

In short, I was, in effect, “bringing the Bar into disrepute”, or so decided a Bar Tribunal panel of 5 chaired by a retired Circuit judge, when (6+ years AFTER having given up Bar practice) I tweeted the seven *reduced at Tribunal to five) “offensive” tweets (on my Twitter account that made no mention in its profile etc that I had ever been a barrister).

I should say that the presiding judge made the point in his summation and sentencing that I had had an unblemished record at the Bar throughout the years since I was Called in 1991.

Other barristers had and have Twitter accounts. Some post obscene comments, such as the “lady” QC whose every sentence contained a swear word. Many have pictures of themselves in wig and gown, or advertise their practices via website links etc (which is now OK but would have been a serious Bar offence only 20 years or so ago). None of those who have used obscene language etc (including telling people to “fuck off” etc) has ever been hauled before a Bar Tribunal, despite their proclaiming their professional status, despite having photos of themselves in Bar clothing in some cases, despite their being in practice at the Bar and talking about it and the law constantly. The presiding judge at my 5-person Tribunal called my case “unprecedented”.

There are so many examples today of barristers doing things which would have meant disbarment decades ago but which are now laughed at and even applauded. We see, for example, the Jewish barrister known to the public as “Judge Rinder” (not in fact any kind of judge) on TV, the show aping that of (also Jewish) “Judge Judy” in the USA. The barrister who plays the role of “Judge Rinder” is acting entirely within the ambit of what is now tolerated by the Bar regulators, but one could not imagine such a show on TV in, say, 1967 or even 1987.

That is even leaving aside the vulgar advertizing and self-promotion undertaken by members of the Bar in practice. That was not permitted until the 1990s. The following example of a Bar defaulter was also one of the most shameless self-promoters.

Now let us look at how the Bar treated so-called “celebrity barrister” Henry Hendron, who, despite being a horrible little bastard –from what I have heard on radio and read in newspapers (I have never met him, admittedly)–, was treated very leniently by the Bar Tribunal, certainly as contrasted with my case.

Hendron supplied so-called “chemsex” drugs, apparently used in gay orgies, to his 18-y-o foreign boyfriend, who died as a result.

http://metro.co.uk/2016/05/09/celebrity-barrister-sentenced-after-supplying-drugs-that-killed-teen-boyfriend-5870206/http://metro.co.uk/2016/05/09/celebrity-barrister-sentenced-after-supplying-drugs-that-killed-teen-boyfriend-5870206/

Hendron was ALSO found guilty, on his own admission, of failing to administer properly his chambers (which he headed as Head of Chambers) and in respect of that was fined £2,000, a trivial sum for someone who made hundreds of thousands of pounds in a year.

https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/media-centre/press-releases-and-news/barrister-henry-hendron-suspended-for-three-years-following-criminal-convictions-for-supplying-illegal-drugs/

So the Bar Standards Board and a Bar Tribunal think that a barrister and indeed head of chambers who was convicted at the Central Criminal Court of supplying illegal drugs for immoral purposes, and that supply having resulted in death (within the Temple itself at that!) AND failing to run his chambers properly should get suspended from practice for three years (in fact only two, because time was ruled to run from 2016!) and get a modest fine, whereas I, “found guilty” of having tweeted five (reduced at hearing from seven charged) supposedly “offensive” tweets about Jews, and not a practising or employed barrister at all, had to be disbarred! You really could not make it up.

This is what the Bar Standards Board official , Sara Jagger, Director of Professional Conduct, said about the Hendron case:

“A conviction for supplying illegal drugs is a serious matter. In this case, it had tragic consequences. Mr Hendron failed to meet one of the core duties of a barrister, which is to uphold public trust and confidence. The suspension imposed by the tribunal reflects this.”

This is what the same woman said about my case:

“The use of such offensive language is incompatible with the standards expected of barristers. The Tribunal rightly found that such behaviour diminishes the trust and confidence the public places in the profession and the decision to disbar Mr Millard reflects this.”

The Board’s press statement (still on its website today) also repeated the lie that my Twitter account “made it clear that” I was a barrister. An out and out lie.

Who, I wonder, would the public think less properly able to reflect the standards expected of a barrister? A snivelling, drug-taking degenerate, convicted of illegal drug supply resulting in death, and who also ran his chambers improperly, OR someone who, as part of his non-professional life and indeed post-professional life, posted seven supposedly “offensive” tweets (taking them as described by the Bar Tribunal)?

You decide.

Postscriptum: The BBC Radio 4 “PM” programme interviewed Henry Hendron in a very sympathetic way recently; the popular Press handled the story with a relatively light touch. Contrast that with the day or three of msm storm around my case last year! We can see the way society is going: downhill, fast.

Update, 26 January 2019

Now he is or has been selling “legal packages”! Perhaps he could set up a stall or barrow in one of the London street markets? Is the Bar Standards Board OK with this? Is the Bar itself OK with this?! I begin to think that the whole bloody system should be chucked into the mire…

https://www.legalcheek.com/2018/05/suspended-chemsex-barrister-sells-4000-legal-advice-for-life-on-facebook/

And what is one to make of this? He now intends to sail around the world! Hello sailor! He even has the cheek to solicit donations from the public! As for his hypocrisy, in pretending to be a “victim” of “unequal justice” when he has been treated so incredibly leniently compared to me (read the blog article, above!), words fail me…(his crowdfunding page from August 2018 raised….just £40. Seems that the public are not so stupid after all). [Update, June 2019: Hendron has now deleted all his blog posts about sailing around the world with a bumboy etc and seems to be intending to use his website to flog more “legal services”]

https://henryhendron.com/

According to the blog below, he set off in August 2018, not knowing how to sail, and had to be rescued by the Coastguard the same day…then set off again a day later…The blog writer wants him to give up his “suicidal” journey. Seems that Hendron has one friend, anyway. [see above update, however]

https://www.russelldawkinsbackontrack.co.uk/my-mates/

In fact, it seems that he survived at least until 4 September 2018 (see his blog, below). What appals me about it is the poor grammar, spelling, use of English generally. That such a person was not only treated better than me by the Bar “regulators”, but was at the Bar at all, makes me fume (almost literally). Incidentally, and as of September last year, he had managed to get as far round the globe as Yarmouth, Isle of Wight, having started off in…the Isle of Wight or the nearby Hampshire coast.

https://henryhendron.com/author/hhendron/

[see update above]

I have to wonder, looking at his obviously disordered mind and his poor use of the English language, whether there really are mugs stupid enough to want to retain him on any basis. He asks for £600 an hour. Apparently, in the past his services were utilized by Nadine Dorries MP! Comedy gold.

Ah, seems that Hendron is no longer sailing around the world, unless his navigation is up the creek (literally)…he’s in Romania! https://twitter.com/henryhendron/status/1079764170…

[again, please refer to update, above]

or was, as of New Year’s Eve. Listening to him, I have to admit that I start to feel sorry for him, so pathetic is he. Compassion is my weakness, often.

A Few Stray Bits of News

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4618544/Celebrity-barrister-fighting-sibling-court.html

a dissatisfied client of Hendron having his or her say… 

Update, 15 March 2019

Now he is on Question Time! (ironically, I agree with most of what he is saying!)

Update, 10 May 2019

Just noticed this (see below). Made me laugh that a young (?) lady calling herself @pussycatt1984 tweeted that she wanted to have the babies of “pink jumper man”. She might be disappointed…

https://www.legalcheek.com/2019/03/drug-suspension-barrister-goes-viral-after-pro-brexit-rant-on-bbc-question-time/

Update, 21 July 2019

The online legal news site, Legal Cheek, reports on Henry Hendron’s return to Bar practice, presumably operating from home or his boat (if he still has it):

https://www.legalcheek.com/2019/06/henry-hendron-returns-to-practice-three-years-after-drug-conviction/#.XQZ78yEYw-k.twitter

Another barrister does not sound very thrilled at the news (or at Hendron being described in a “newspaper” as “QC”!)…

Quite. Rather a shame, though, that Cherrett apparently does not know the difference between “practise” (as in “to practise”) and “practice” (as in “his practice is criminal”). Still, I suppose that one could be broadminded or charitable and say that, in the USA, the words are reversed…I should not want to be too much of what some call “a grammar nazi”…Oh, fuck it! Why not?! I am sick and tired of semi-educated or narrowly-educated people at the Bar (especially..) and elsewhere in good positions in this sliding country! The Bar, journalism, msm generally, Westminster.

In fact, reverting to Hendron, I was just reading a few of his recent tweets. He is at least not too bad from the political point of view:

and he seems to be an animal lover, so not all bad in that respect either, having retweeted this:

Update, 30 July 2019

Seems that Hendron has yet again been suspended from Bar practice, though only for 3 months:

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/chemsex-barrister-suspended-again-by-tribunal/5071174.article

https://www.legalcheek.com/2019/07/henry-hendron-suspended-again/

https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/media-centre/press-releases-and-news/barrister-henry-hendron-ordered-to-be-suspended-from-practice/

So Hendron

  • supplied illegal drugs to his foreign teenage boyfriend;
  • as a result of which the boy died;
  • at a “chemsex” orgy held
  • within the precincts of the Temple in London;
  • as a result of which Hedron and others were convicted and sentenced
  • at the Old Bailey

and

  • also found guilty at Bar Disciplinary Tribunal of failing to run his Chambers (of which he was Head) properly

and now also has been found guilty by a BDT of

  • failing to pay a lay client monies
  • despite having been ordered to by the Legal Ombudsman

but instead of being disbarred, has once again been only suspended. He must really have some good contacts in the Bar establishment! Or does he “know too much”?

Still, he only did what is chronicled above (oh, and sold so-called “legal packages” to the public from a metaphorical barrow), all of which have been in the newspapers. It is not as if Hendron did something really bad, like tweeting a few critical remarks about Jews…

I was looking at a few of Hendron’s tweets from 2016 and 2017. Only semi-literate. Does he claim to have dyslexia or something? No wonder that the Bar has lost most of the prestige it had half a century ago. It is just a multikulti dustbin now.

Update, 2 September 2019

Jew-Zionist hypocrite Simon Myerson Q.C. belongs to both main organizations that have persecuted me, “UK Lawyers for Israel” and “Campaign Against Anti-Semitism” [“CAA”]. Now he is playing the Jewish “victim” because others are trying to get him disbarred for his tweets etc…Ha ha! What goes around comes around.

It must be yet another case of “anti-Semitism”!…Another Jew hypocrite. Myerson was one of those who conspired to have me expelled from the Bar, and he has been both snooping on me and trolling me on Twitter for a decade.

Ha ha!

Update, 25 October 2019

“They” are still mentioning me online, really getting “full value”…

https://antisemitism.uk/new-guidance-from-bar-standards-board-tells-barristers-to-avoid-heated-social-media-spats/

Update, 5 January 2021

Henry Hendron wins appeal against second suspension

Mr Justice Fordham wrote: “[T]he BSB’s position is that a barrister whose practising certificate has been suspended is not a ‘BSB regulated person’”, adding that “I have heard no argument and seen no analysis to the contrary.

The judge praised the BSB and its barrister, Zoe Gannon, for telling him about the “suspended-barrister problem” even though it cost them the case. Hendron himself “had not identified it or relied on it in his grounds of appeal”.

Hendron himself had not identified it…“, Well, it is well known that “a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client“. I would not want his barrister to represent me, though! Semi-literate, and unable to identify legal issues, as well as morally suspect in various ways.

I should remind myself and my blog readers that the purpose here is not to attack Hendron but to show up the Bar itself, and to highlight the injustice to which I was subject.

I saw a few tweets from Hendron:

The “Crime Bar“?! As I said, semi-literate…

More?

I don’t care if he does claim “dyslexia”; if so, he should never have become a barrister.

As for this, what is one to make of it?

Your“? (Should be “you’re” or “you are“, of course). Calls his chambers his “office”, and seems to be in a position to pay someone up to £60,000 p.a.! Not sure that I believe a word that he says, though.

An older tweet, from 2011:

The Petersham Hotel? All human life must have been there! I certainly have been, though in the 1980s. “SS Headquarters Normandie”, as my friends and I used to call it! https://www.petershamhotel.co.uk/. Used to be a good place for a quiet drink.

Update, 3 February 2021

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9220171/Barrister-40-tells-misconduct-hearing-charges-against-rubbish.html

Looks like Hendron has finally run out of road. Not that I was ever personally hostile to him; I have never met him, and indeed only heard of him after the scandal involving his “drugs and sex” activities came to light in the Press a few years ago. My aim in the blog was to compare his very lenient treatment by the Bar with the totalitarian repression that bore down on me because I said (on Twitter) a few supposedly “offensive” things about Jews.

Update, 20 March 2021

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9376997/Barrister-40-dealt-chemsex-pills-represented-client-banned.html

Yevgeny Yevtushenko, Darcus Howe and the MSM: Cultural Musings

Introduction

The deaths of two people came to notice particularly in the past week. One person had been a significant cultural influence in the Soviet Union, was world-famous, is still oft-quoted. The other was a West Indian immigrant to the UK, best known for his support for black rioters, gangster criminals and others, as well as his assault on British cultural norms.

The first was Yevgeny Yevtushenko [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yevgeny_Yevtushenko] about whom The Guardian newspaper published this by way of obituary: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/apr/02/yevgeny-yevtushenko-obituary.

The second was one Darcus Howe: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darcus_Howe], about whom the Guardian said this: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/02/darcus-howe-writer-broadcaster-and-civil-rights-campaigner-dies-aged-74.

It can surely be seen that even the Guardian was unable to make out Darcus Howe as being a greater cultural figure or a more positive one than Yevtushenko.

Comment and Personal Musing

I knew neither of the two recently deceased. I had heard of Yevtushenko vaguely, en passant, as a child and teenager, about the poet who was able to fill stadia in Russia with fans listening to his declamations. Black and white pictures from Life magazine and books. Later, in my twenties, I knew a few people who had been well-acquainted with Yevtushenko in Moscow. I even met his third wife on a couple of occasions during that time and once swam with her and her children (Yevtushenko’s) in a semi-private wooded beach area in some expensive part of Bournemouth, on England’s southern coast.

I never met Yevtushenko himself, though I heard plenty about him. His private life was messy, not always commendable, but that is hardly unusual in the biographies of poets and artistic people generally. One cannot judge a poet primarily by his private life (think of Byron etc). At a distance, he seemed to me to be a Soviet cultural windvane, able to change direction not so much with the prevailing wind but at the moment before it changed. Thus Yevtushenko was seen by some , e.g. Irina Ratushinskaya [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irina_Ratushinskaya] as an “official poet”, with all the moral compromise and material benefits which that term implied; by others, as a brave and anti-official –even a little bit anti-Soviet– quasi-dissident.

Certainly Yevtushenko was willing to argue even with such as Khrushchev on occasion. He was lucky, perhaps, to have been born in 1932 and not 1922 or 1912. He escaped Stalinism to a large extent. Also, he was born and mainly brought up in Siberia, where (ironically) the Stalinist pressure was slightly less. Having said that, he lived in Moscow from age 18, studied there, was never in political trouble. I once heard privately that his mother had been an informant (“secret co-worker”) for the KGB and went weekly to an address not far from the Lubyanka to receive her stipend, signing for it on a list which had all the other names blanked out via a kind of stencil. Perhaps. That would not imply, however, that Yevtushenko himself was implicated with such work (and as I heard it, his mother only went through the motions anyway, giving little but avoiding conflict).

Certainly, Yevtushenko lived rather well by Soviet and indeed Western material standards. Robert Conquest [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Conquest] described that as “well-rewarded collaboration”. By the 1970s, if not before, he had a house or “dacha” at Peredelkino [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peredelkino] with (I believe I was told), 4 or maybe 5 bedrooms –unheard of luxury in the Soviet Union for all but the highest-regarded citizens. He also had an apartment near the Kremlin with no less than (from memory) 14 rooms (a friend of mine was offered the chance to stay there for a week while it was unoccupied; she returned to London gushing about how wonderful it was and how she had not realized that people in the Soviet Union lived like that!); the apartment had been occupied at one time, I was told, by Beria [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavrentiy_Beria] though Beria did have a mansion in Moscow, perhaps in addition. Yevtushenko also had a house on the Black Sea, situated, I believe, at Yalta.

Yevtushenko is now known for several “soundbites”, in today’s terminology, as much as for his poems: “in Russia, a poet is more than a poet”; and the 1962 lines usually slightly changed to (and improved?) “double and triple the guard on Stalin’s tomb, lest he return….and with him, the past” [http://osaarchivum.org/files/holdings/300/8/3/text/60-4-47.shtml].

Whatever one’s view of Yevtushenko, there is no doubt that he was a significant cultural figure, who personified the changes in the Soviet Union from Stalin’s rule, through the Thaw of the 1950s and early 1960s and on to the retrenchment which led up to Gorbachev, corrupt laxity and then complete collapse. Yevtushenko himself spent his later years living partly in the USA, paid generously by the University of Tulsa (Oklahoma) and the City University of New York (CUNY). A weathervane to the last.

As to Darcus Howe, I know little of him beyond a few items recently read, though I do recall that rather menacing figure on “British” TV from time to time, always promoting the idea that the blacks in the UK had been and were oppressed by white British people and culture.

I cannot imagine that Howe ever contributed much to the UK, though others, in the mainstream media especially, seem to think otherwise. On Twitter, the death of Yevtushenko was like an express train at night, flashing quickly through a country station (Zima Junction?) without stopping. Darcus Howe’s death was trending for far longer. The mainstream TV and radio almost ignored Yevtushenko’s death (and life), while eulogizing about the life of the West Indian rioter and troublemaker. Channel 4, the tax-subsidized “independent” channel, was especially loud in its praises.

Where the msm did notice Yevtushenko’s death, the reports concentrated mainly on his poem “Babi Yar”, about the death of Jews in the Ukraine during the war with Germany. Typical.

The cultural sickness of the West can be seen in the juxtaposition of the two recent deaths and how they have been treated. The time must come when real merit is respected, when people are able to properly discriminate between what is worthwhile and what is not. Most of the existing cultural organizations and faces must be removed.