This is exactly how Chief Justice Mum used to decide law suits

8 Responses to This is exactly how Chief Justice Mum used to decide law suits

1. Petros says:

   3 August, 2022 at 4:52 am

   And yet the attorney general gave conflicting evidence. Is that a crime? Nothing happens to him? I ain’t no law talking guy.
2. Damienski says:

   3 August, 2022 at 10:40 am

   I’m sure the Western Australian Director of Public Prosecutions will be preferring charges against the Attorney General. Any day now…..
3. Shy Ted says:

   3 August, 2022 at 11:23 am

   Not fair at all. Big Clive has to pay 4 x what McClown does and he has to pay his own legal fees.
4. Jannie says:

   3 August, 2022 at 12:09 pm

   Not fair. I was gonna say that Ted.
5. jupes says:

   3 August, 2022 at 1:41 pm

   Not fair at all.

   It could never be fair because the taxpayer funded McClown, while Tubs had to fund himself. Not that he minds doing that of course.
6. Buccaneer says:

   3 August, 2022 at 1:54 pm

   Years of the legal profession refusing to stamp out lawfare activists ends with this kind of tripe. Only a short step to locking up palmer and anyone else they don’t like for simply for daring to breathe.
7. twostix says:

   3 August, 2022 at 3:21 pm

   What a gutless cop-out, playing to the mob too.

   Is there a single spine anywhere in the state judiciaries in Australia?
8. Entropy says:

   3 August, 2022 at 5:21 pm

   The legal profession is interested in increasing lawfare. The Elysian Fields to lawyer wealth beckon.