M'Lud Guilty Of Internet Ignorance

M'Lud Guilty Of Internet Ignorance
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...266385,00.html
A judge overseeing the trial of three alleged 'cyber-terrorists' had to halt
the hearing to ask what a website was.
It seems the internet has passed by the non-virtual world of Mr Justice
Peter Openshaw.

What's a court?
The judge admitted he had a problem comprehending the evidence at Woolwich
Crown Court: "The trouble is I don't understand the language. "I don't
really understand what a website is."




---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 000741-0, 17/05/2007
Tested on: 18/05/2007 11:56:34
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

In article <f2k0p5$rbj$(E-Mail Removed)>, lon <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

> M'Lud Guilty Of Internet Ignorance
> http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...266385,00.html
> A judge overseeing the trial of three alleged 'cyber-terrorists' had to halt
> the hearing to ask what a website was.
> It seems the internet has passed by the non-virtual world of Mr Justice
> Peter Openshaw.
>
> What's a court?
> The judge admitted he had a problem comprehending the evidence at Woolwich
> Crown Court: "The trouble is I don't understand the language. "I don't
> really understand what a website is."
>
Perhaps this *may* not appear to be quite as stupid as it first
appears. For example, we all know what a pony is, but if a guy
steals a pony is it legally the same as stealing a horse?

Maybe the judge wasn't sure of what *legally* constitutes a website.
e.g. Is it the computers that physically host the information? Is it
the code and data? Is it the fact that this data is available in a
certain format that is accessed over the internet by a 'web browser'?

Kit

On Fri, 18 May 2007 12:40:01 +0100, Kit <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>In article <f2k0p5$rbj$(E-Mail Removed)>, lon <(E-Mail Removed)>
>wrote:
>
>> M'Lud Guilty Of Internet Ignorance
>> http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...266385,00.html
>> A judge overseeing the trial of three alleged 'cyber-terrorists' had to halt
>> the hearing to ask what a website was.
>> It seems the internet has passed by the non-virtual world of Mr Justice
>> Peter Openshaw.
>>
>> What's a court?
>> The judge admitted he had a problem comprehending the evidence at Woolwich
>> Crown Court: "The trouble is I don't understand the language. "I don't
>> really understand what a website is."
>>
>Perhaps this *may* not appear to be quite as stupid as it first
>appears. For example, we all know what a pony is, but if a guy
>steals a pony is it legally the same as stealing a horse?
>
>Maybe the judge wasn't sure of what *legally* constitutes a website.
>e.g. Is it the computers that physically host the information? Is it
>the code and data? Is it the fact that this data is available in a
>certain format that is accessed over the internet by a 'web browser'?
>
>Kit

I understand that judges often ask what appear to be daft questions in
order that he can be sure that all the members of the jury understand
what a particular term or description means
--
Cheers

Peter

Please remove the invalid to reply

Kit wrote:

> Maybe the judge wasn't sure of what *legally* constitutes a website.

If only !

Graham

"lon" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:f2k0p5$rbj$(E-Mail Removed)
> M'Lud Guilty Of Internet Ignorance
> http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...266385,00.html
> A judge overseeing the trial of three alleged
> 'cyber-terrorists' had to halt the hearing to ask what a
> website was. It seems the internet has passed by the non-virtual world
> of Mr Justice Peter Openshaw.
>
> What's a court?
> The judge admitted he had a problem comprehending the
> evidence at Woolwich Crown Court: "The trouble is I don't
> understand the language. "I don't really understand what
> a website is."

One would have to ask, if that was really the case, whether the judge in
question was fit to try the case. If I were up for doing something, I'd
like to think the judge had some idea of what the crime was.

Ivor