Real motives, personalities and attitudes in history are often opposite of the mealy-mouthed whitewash we get from reference books.
Saml. Johnson - on `History'
After all, the reference books are written by people who want to please - or daren't offend - the elite.
Britain does not have impartial judges, they are chosen and "appointed" by the political elite, not democratically selected by the people.
In Britain most judges are chosen by the "Lord Chancellor" - once the monarch's priest and secretary. He controlled the "Seal" that gave authority to documents.
`Perceptions' note: Most historical Kings & Queens couldn't read or write; they authorized documents by using a "Seal".
I.e. - `Magna Carta' wasn't signed by the illiterate King John, but "sealed".
The "Lord Chancellor" is today a leading member of the "House of Lords" - a sort of hereditary Senate. That gives a strategic advantage to a member of the elite - he cannot be voted out of office.
Not only does the "Lord Chancellor" nominally control the "appointment" of most judges, he also is in charge of the highest court of appeal.
Examine the scope for corruption this situation allows, or even demands:-
Elite pedophiles were committing their crimes in London (same time as Jack the Ripper) and the legal situation was more or less as it is now. The Prime Minister was then Lord Salisbury.
His Lord Chancellor was a Lord Halsbury (sorry about these stupid titles), who was well known as a seller of influence.
But even he was surprised when Lord Salisbury (the Prime Minister) instructed him to appoint a notorious member of the elite as a judge.
Quote from "Prophets, Priests & Kings" by A.G.Gardiner (1914) -
"Even Lord Halsbury was staggered at the proposal. "But," he said, "a Judge must know a little law. It would be a scandal to put ---- on the Bench".
"It would be a worse scandal," replied Salisbury, "for a member of an old county family to pass through the Bankruptcy Court".
In other words - the taxpayers (us `poorer' folk) had to pay a high salary to a notorious incompetent, simply to maintain the high-life of a member of the elite. Us taxpayers were then additionally deprived of Justice by his incompetent or pervert judicial decisions.
The legal and constitutional situation in Britain has not materially changed since then, and, even if the House of Lords were to be abolished, the selection of judges will remain corrupt and undemocratic.
Lord Salisbury, and his creature Lord Halsbury were also heavily implicated in the cover-up of the elite pedophiles.
To suppress the truth, they imprisoned a brave editor and coerced (corrupted) the police-force.
The judges were already corrupt.
Try the Encyclopedia Britannica
"Salisbury, Robert Arthur Talbot Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd marquess of, Earl Of Salisbury, Viscount Cranborne, Baron Cecil Of Essendon" Encyclopædia Britannica Online
The reference gives Lord Salisbury this assessment: - "his courtesy, modesty, and fair-minded tolerance combined to make an attractive personality". - Ha!
June 2003 - Plans announced this week to clean up and democratize the UK legal mess, admitted to be corrupt, are being contested by :-
the lawyers and `barristers'
elite's media - BBC especially, but disguised as "comment"
those speaking for big companies, big landowners etc.
those speaking for elites, aristocrats etc.
See the bleats.
It is easy to see:-
who profits from the present corrupt system;
who are the enemies of democracy.