Rusty Iron Ring wrote:
Hunter S Thompson wrote:
bumblebee wrote:

This has nothing to do with any specific incident whatsoever and is just a general question.

I'm assuming (having not read it) the "difference" in the Advice Scene Judge's book is that he is writing it for the general public. In my opinion, there's nothing wrong with this, and it's likely even a positive development, especially in the area of family law where (as I understand it), people are often quite content to represent themselves.

I think you mean "the difference in the general hypothetical question having nothing to do with any specific incident whatsoever". It's ok. I also occasionally mis-type a word or two when I am perusing multiple legal websites to participate in democratizing the law. I think it's called a Freudian lawsuit. I mean slip.


Thanks Rusty. I'm relatively certain my post doesn't breach my provincial law society rules, or the informal convention that we should present the justice system in a favourable light. It deals more with what the appropriate response of the bar should be, should they want to make any response at all.

The reality is that I don't know the answer. In fact, I'm not even sure that what the judge is doing (talking on-line, providing a link to his book) is wrong, although it's clearly not common. I happen to buy the Watt/Fuerst Code because I prefer the format, and am a creature of habit, but I don't recall them ever doing anything similar to [any judge who happens to be on-line] (perhaps there's a clear precedent or rule for this type of conduct, and I'm simply not aware of it). As far as I know, the situation is quite unique, so I trust that the law society will excuse my humble musings.




Edited 1 time by Hunter S Thompson Jan 22 10 1:14 PM.