Talk:Mark Potter (judge)

Untitled
Potter being investigated by the Board for Judicial Complaints - Replaced reference to Guardian article that had been rather naughtily removed, but we know these are naughty people who need to be kept a close eye on! 147.114.226.193 (talk) 12:22, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

The naughty person who keeps removing the piece about the complaint against Potter is using the tactic of generating a new user id for each edit. Each user id seems to be made up of a random character sequence and then used only for a single edit. This obscures the IP address of the user from other users, but not from administrators. If and when a Wikipedia administrator goes and checks the logs and uncovers the source of this vandalism, it will be interesting to see where that leads. It's probable that since the vandal user is taking the trouble to hide his IP address from fellow users then that IP address might belong to someone who is concerned about their reputation, little-realising that they are actually going to damage it more once their deviousness is uncovered. 147.114.226.180 (talk) 09:53, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

It looks as though, after more than a few months, Jack Straw and his chums are starting to feel that they have put off for long enough the embarrassing business of either having to whitewash the behaviour reported in the Observer or make some signal that New Labour can't really be seen to endorse overt cronyism within the upper echelons of the judiciary. Interestingly the Board for Judiciary Complaints doesn't have any power to disbar a judge, only to say, for very serious offernes, things like, "You naughty naughty boy." or, for lesser offences, just "You naughty boy." It will be interesting to see which blandishment they'll choose here. Matt Stan (talk) 15:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)