Magistrate acquitting person threatening violence

[anyolddinosaur]

Is there any way to protest against the actions of a magistrate when their decision was clearly biased and wrong?

As I found at the outset @anyolddinosaur seems only to want their own take on this recognised. Anyone who says that's not how the law works, ie right to review and acquittal or admissibility of previous convictions is biased against them.

You can't advise folk who think that way.

I dont know enough about SJB's original conviction - which involved kidnapping and torture by more than one person, resulting in 39 separate injuries - to know which of the participants was inciting the violence at the time or the age/ length of conviction of the other person involved in the violence. SJB's birth name is easy enough to find as is the name of their victim. Entirely possible they were egging each other on.

Previous reporting by tribunal tweets has been accurate - do you have any evidence it is not?

The libellous allegation is attacking the character of another person, one of the reasons given for being able to raise previous convictions. Of course it is relevant to whether SJB was inciting violence.. I think SJB was probably getting very muddled at that point and may have been referring to a case where arrests have been made but it has yet to come to court. To date there has been no suggestion it was a hate crime. Violent crime ( I do not count hurt feelings) against trans people is rare and often domestic abuse. It's rarer than the 3 - 4 women killed each week, again quite a few domestic abuse cases. It's so rare the Office of National Statistics cant publish their data. https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/violentcrimeratefortransgenderpeoplecomparedwiththegeneralpopulation2013to2023

It doesn't matter who was inciting violence in SJB's prior convictions. The important point is that none of them are for SJB inciting someone else to commit violence. They therefore cannot be introduced as bad character evidence.

I wasn't suggesting that tribunal tweets is inaccurate, but it is not the official transcript. If there are any differences, the transcript is assumed to be correct.

The "attacking another person's character" gateway is more limited than you appear to think. It only applies if the person whose character is attacked is part of the prosecution case. Attacking the character of a prosecution witness or the victim may trigger this gateway. Attacking the character of someone who has no involvement in the case does not. The bar for this gateway is quite high. Simply suggesting that a prosecution witness is lying does not allow bad character evidence to be introduced. Suggesting that the prosecution witnesses have conspired to concoct a false story may allow the introduction of such evidence. So no, the allegation to which you refer is not even vaguely relevant and has no bearing at all on the question of whether the defendant was inciting violence.

While I still havent been able to find the appeal court judgement you referenced earlier I've spent the past couple of days studying other appeal court judgements relating to bad character evidence, noting that this normally relates to jury trials. I've yet to see a judgement on a single magistrate case. I have not got through them all yet as, contrary to your suggestion that the use is limited, there are a considerable number. A much wider range of evidence can be cited for a "bad character" than I had realised - or you seem to realise.

The magistrate is a "Diversity Champion" and should have recused himself on that basis. The prosecution could have brought evidence of SJB's previous actions towards people SJB regards as "terfs". I understand this includes a kill JKR sign and targeting a person filming a protest against a woman only event. That person was obstructed and had their phone stolen but police recovered it. A libellous allegation is part of that pattern of hostility and inciting violence. And since SJB has tried to prevent filming on a previous occasion it rather undermines the whole "only seeking publicity" argument.

Defence witnesses certainly created a false story, one not challenged in any meaningful way by the prosecution.. That doesnt mean that the magistrate's decision will not be seen as biased and hence undermining confidence in the criminal justice system.

The police didn’t want to charge the defendant. The prosecution didn’t want to make their case convincingly. The judge didn’t want to convict.

Nothing to see here. Shut up while I punch you, TERF.

You didn’t pay much attention in magistrates’ school, did you.
Tan Ikram is a district judge (magistrate) ie a proper judge with a legal qualification (previously called stipendiary magistrates) not a well meaning lay amateur as you were. Lay mags sit in benches of three and are told the law by a legal adviser since they don’t know the law themselves. Dj(mags) sit alone and do not need a legal adviser as they are lawyers.
The chief magistrate (and deputy) are DJ (Mags).

to have sat as a magistrate and have no idea of the existence of DJ(mags) in your court centre/region shows a special kind of failure to pay attention

You haven’t found an appeal from a mags court to the court of appeal because there is no route of appeal to the court of appeal from the mags court.
mags court decisions are appealed (as to conviction or sentence) to the crown court. They do not analyse the mags court decision but have a retrial and make a fresh decision.
Crown court appeals are not authoritative and so are not reported.

This is why non-lawyers opinions on the law are rarely helpful. They don’t understand it.

I have not at any point suggested that the use of bad character evidence is limited in terms of how often it happens. However, there are limitations around when it can be used. You seem unwilling to understand and accept these limitations. And no, the judge being a "diversity champion" is not grounds for him to recuse himself.

Oh, no prh47, I'm not unwilling to understand the limitations. If I was I wouldnt be wading through pages of appeal court judgements. However they seem to be applied considerably less stringently than you suggest.

The magistrate being a diversity champion and being less readily convinced in this case than in a case of threatening tweets towards a well known footballer gives the appearance of bias. He should have recused himself.

@anyolddinosaur the threatening tweets were, presumably those sent to Rio Ferdinand by Robert Whippe?

Different case, totally different facts and different 'route to verdict' to find him guilty.

Whether SJB was as pure as the driven snow or 'got off' by a hairsbreadth is neither here nor there. She was found not guilty and there's no practical route by which you as a 'concerned citizen' are likely to get it looked at again.

There are Diversity Champions in various roles in Justice, both staff and Judiciary. There's no reason why being one means a judge should recuse himself from a case that in some way touches on diversity or an person who may have or claim to have a protected characteristic.

Quite frankly it's offensive to the professionalism of Judge Ikram or anyone else to suggest otherwise.

Your barking at the moon and need to ground yourself and spend time effort on something with a chance of success...