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

This entry was posted in Legal affairs, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

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

  1. Petros says:

    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:

    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:

    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:

    Not fair. I was gonna say that Ted.

  5. jupes says:

    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:

    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:

    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:

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

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *