Comments on: Wigs and Gowns http://blog.geeklawyer.org/2006/03/23/wigs-and-gowns/ A barrister gossips & rants on intellectual property law, the legal system and civil liberties. Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:59:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Mome http://blog.geeklawyer.org/2006/03/23/wigs-and-gowns/#comment-30 Mome Sat, 13 May 2006 14:16:11 +0000 http://blog.geeklawyer.org/?p=22#comment-30 Ruthie got it all wrong! Ruthie got it all wrong!

]]> By: Geeklawyer http://blog.geeklawyer.org/2006/03/23/wigs-and-gowns/#comment-29 Geeklawyer Thu, 23 Mar 2006 11:14:31 +0000 http://blog.geeklawyer.org/?p=22#comment-29 <em>"... write a blog called Ruthie.org, which in his opinion no-one will read..."</em> Bloody liar! I never said any such thing. Anyway, if you have a look at <a rel="nofollow" href="http://ruthie.org">ruthie.org</a> you'll see that had I said it I would have been right. And totalitarianism is not objectionable when it's inflicted by me. As for wigs they're an expensive pain in the arse. Mine was second hand and cost me £400 and I'm not entirely sure its previous head didn't have lice. That said, I like all the dressing up but I'd accept that the justifications are a bit thin and no more than the maintenance of tradition. I did once speak to a rather crusty judge who swore blind that they enabled safety for the judiciary and the Bar by disguising them. Not a terribly convincing argument. I'm sure that if I had to oppose Ruthie I would be too terrified to speak, let alone call her <em>"my friend"</em>. Even if she is just a solicitor :P “… write a blog called Ruthie.org, which in his opinion no-one will read…”
Bloody liar! I never said any such thing. Anyway, if you have a look at ruthie.org you’ll see that had I said it I would have been right. And totalitarianism is not objectionable when it’s inflicted by me.
As for wigs they’re an expensive pain in the arse. Mine was second hand and cost me £400 and I’m not entirely sure its previous head didn’t have lice.

That said, I like all the dressing up but I’d accept that the justifications are a bit thin and no more than the maintenance of tradition. I did once speak to a rather crusty judge who swore blind that they enabled safety for the judiciary and the Bar by disguising them. Not a terribly convincing argument.

I’m sure that if I had to oppose Ruthie I would be too terrified to speak, let alone call her “my friend”.
Even if she is just a solicitor :P

]]>