Skip to main content

CTB and Identification

Here is a question. What is the public interest in identifying CTB?

The answer is very clear. Anyone who believes they have a legal right of access to Kelvin Mackenzie's emails should not be anonymous.

Similarly if they are going to hunt down and attempt to imprison people who tweet on twitter they should not do this anonymously.

Personally I believe that trying to get journalists emails is an anti-democratic action.

Comments

Unknown said…
Well done!! what a farce - I am grateful that finally someone has had the sense to put an end to this. What a mockery this how fuss has madde of our judicial system and our country a laughing stock!! Now if we could just get rid of this stupid judge that has allowed this to continue I would be a lot happier - what an earth was he thinking, obviously Ryan Giggs senseless lawyers have been paid lots but what about the judge - can see no other reason for him being so bloody minded. Once again well done for finally putting this sorry story to bed (so to speak) now maybe we can have the important issues discussed.
Fergus said…
"Anyone who believes they have a legal right of access to Kelvin Mackenzie's emails should not be anonymous"

But presumably you think it's perfectly alright for tabloid newspapers to tap into celebrity mobile phones because it's in the 'public interest?"

Why not be honest and admit that you are an attention-seeking nonentity who is trying to garner publicity for yourself and a political party which the nation now knows is a pathetic excuse for one.
Jerry said…
So the basis of the elusive initials C.B.T actually stood for "Caution, Be careful, Twitter" the initials should now be changed on all future Hyper/Super injunctions to "CJH", As in "Caution, John Hemming", he is listening you know!!!!

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England.

The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity.

The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back.

This is an issue that needs further work.

In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.

Problems with Outlook Express - emails lost dbx corruption

In the light of the enthusiasm shown for my post relating to the OCX control that must not be named (and probably Microsoft's most embarrassing error of recent years) I thought I would write someting about Outlook Express.

Outlook Express is the email client that comes as part of windows. I use it myself, although I have my emails filtered through a spam filter of my own devising written in java. It takes email off a number of servers using POP3 (Post Office Protocol TCP Port 110) and sends it using SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol port 25).

I have recently spent a few hours dealing with the problem that arises when .dbx files get corrupted during compacting.

Outlook Express (OE) stores the emails (and other things) in files with the suffix .dbx. Each folder has its own .dbx file. They are stored in hidden directories. This makes it harder to deal with things when OE goes wrong.

It is very important to back up your stored *.dbx files as otherwise if you have a disk crash/stol…

Statement re False Allegations Campaign

Many people will know that my family and I have been subject to a campaign of false allegations by Esther Baker for the past 4 1/2 years. Yesterday there was a court judgment Baker v Hemming [2019] EWHC 2950 (QB) which formally confirmed that the allegations were false. Esther Baker, who had brought a libel claim against me, dropped her defence of Truth to my counter-claim and was taken by the judge as no longer trying to prove her allegations. Due to Baker's various breaches of court rules and orders, she has been barred from further repeating her allegations even in the court proceedings. Further claim of mine in libel against Baker are ongoing. There is a good summary in the Daily Mail here.

This demonstrates the challenge in fighting false allegations in today's Britain. A substantial campaign was built up to promote allegations which had no substance to them. Various Labour MPs and in pa…