I’ve had little confidence in the judiciary since my university days when we found out just how hard it was (and maybe still is) to sack a judge. Damn near impossible (if memory serves) even if all that judge’s marbles have fallen out of his pockets and rolled down the London sewers.
I’d be interested to know just what Mr Justice Eady knows about blogging and the internet in general. One can only make an informed judgement when one understands the contexts of the case. It Mr Justice Eady doesn’t know that much about blogging and the internet then could it be argued that his judgement wasn’t fully informed?