GUILTY UK - Sara Sharif, 10, found murdered in house, Surrey, Aug 2023 *POIs ARREST* #5

[JennieM]

Ban on naming Sara Sharif care case judges would have ‘corrosive impact’, court told​

Media organisations are challenging ruling that they cannot name three judges involved in proceedings relating to 10-year-old who was later murdered

A unprecedented ban on naming judges who oversaw proceedings related to the care of Sara Sharif before she was murdered is likely to have a “corrosive impact” on public confidence in the justice system, the court of appeal has been told.

[…]

Several media organisations that won the right to challenge the order, including the Guardian, told a court of appeal hearing on Tuesday that the ban posed a threat to open justice and the judges should be named in the interests of transparency.

Chris Barnes, representing the freelance journalists Louise Tickle and Hannah Summers, told the court: “The order is unsound and it is also one likely to raise public suspicion and prove counterproductive.”

In written submissions, he said the judge’s decision was “unfair, poorly reasoned and unsustainable” and “out of step with the recognised need to promote transparency, and media reporting, in the family court”.

Ban on naming Sara Sharif care case judges would have ‘corrosive impact’, court told

Media organisations are challenging ruling that they cannot name three judges involved in proceedings relating to 10-year-old who was later murdered

www.theguardian.com

 

[Moll]

One more:

CoA hears challenge to ban on naming judges in Sara Sharif family case

High Court order banning naming of judges involved in family court proceedings is at centre of Court of Appeal hearing.

www.lawgazette.co.uk

There are others but similar, I think.
I wrongly thought yesterday we wouldn't get many reports on the first day! But of course many of the media concerned are parties in this case.

It looks as if Mr Justice Williams has had the opposite effect from what he wanted, in that far more attention has now been drawn to the family court judges. If as seems likely the journalists win their case, because it is not normal for judges to be given anonymity, I'm afraid the press will descend on them as Williams feared.
None of it will do Sara any good now so I don't feel any enthusiasm about that. But the principle has to be re-established for the future.

 

[Dotta]

It looks as if Mr Justice Williams has had the opposite effect from what he wanted, in that far more attention has now been drawn to the family court judges. If as seems likely the journalists win their case, because it is not normal for judges to be given anonymity, I'm afraid the press will descend on them as Williams feared.
None of it will do Sara any good now so I don't feel any enthusiasm about that. But the principle has to be re-established for the future.

"Streisand effect"

JMO

 

[Moll]

"Streisand effect"

JMO

Yes, if that helps!

 

[Dotta]

Yes, if that helps!

Anything to discover the Truth!

It is really funny to me when some people try soooo hard to conceal something
and the effect is opposite
It brings magnified scrutiny in the end hehe

JMO

 

[Moll]

The hearing seems to have finished, but the decision will be given in writing later. I've looked in on it several times today but it was quite difficult to hear - the mikes seemed to pick up coughs and sneezes more clearly than some of the speeches. There were submissions from the three family court judges, who are worried about danger to their families as well as themselves.

Sara Sharif: Girl’s family court judges concerned over naming

A decision not to name judges in historical family court cases about Sara's care is being appealed.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Moll]

Judges who oversaw Sara Sharif care cases before her murder fear safety risks for their families if they are named

Several media organisations are challenging a ruling preventing journalists from identifying judges who oversaw court proceedings about Sara's care before her death.

news.sky.com

https://www.itv.com/news/london/2025-01-15/sara-sharif-care-cases-judges-have-serious-concerns-about-risks-of-being-named

 

[Moll]

From the ITV report linked above:
'Sara’s father Urfan Sharif opposes the appeal.

Cyrus Larizadeh KC, for Sharif, said in written submissions that he was “concerned that no harm should come to the judge(s) who presided in the historic proceedings”.'

Why does it matter to Sharif now anyway? Who decides he can oppose this? I can't imagine Sharif actually had a view. Perhaps this will become clearer...

 

[Skigh]

From the ITV report linked above:
'Sara’s father Urfan Sharif opposes the appeal.

Cyrus Larizadeh KC, for Sharif, said in written submissions that he was “concerned that no harm should come to the judge(s) who presided in the historic proceedings”.'

Why does it matter to Sharif now anyway? Who decides he can oppose this? I can't imagine Sharif actually had a view. Perhaps this will become clearer...

Is it possible Sharif wants to protect the judge because the judge is a Muslim and it would show that the judge was biased in his favour?

 

[Dotta]

The body of the child who was meant to be protected by Judges in Family Court
is now lying in a cold grave.
Tortured, abused.

Decisions have consequences.

JMO

 

[Skigh]

Decisions have consequences also applies to the judge and his family should vigilantes decide to attack the judge and/ or their family.

 

[Dotta]

Decisions have consequences also applies to the judge and his family should vigilantes decide to attack the judge and/ or their family.

Pardon?

I wouldn't be too worried about it.

After all,
Nobody paid any attention when a child was being murdered in a crowded council house in the middle of the town.

Now,
shedding crocodile tears is ridiculous IMO.
The child is DEAD.

The deed is done.
The time to really help has passed.

Vigilantes???
Let's be serious.



JMO

 

[Moll]

Decisions have consequences also applies to the judge and his family should vigilantes decide to attack the judge and/ or their family.

Exactly. I think it's wrong to imply that Sara's death means that everyone whose interaction with her case could be said to have led to it, however unknowingly and in however small a degree, should be vilified or attacked, still less their families. The likelihood of physical, as opposed to social media, attack is an issue that was discussed yesterday in the Appeal Court and the judges have asked for a police risk assessment.

The three family court judges did not ask for anonymity in the first place, and the fact that it was imposed by Mr Justice Williams without any such request was mentioned in the journalists' appeal. Now that there has been so much fuss two of them, both retired, who had minimal involvement in Sara's case, are asking for it to be retained:

'The two retired judges who were referred to as CJ/1 and CJ/2 had made only protective orders — an emergency protection order and an interim care order respectively — and had no other involvement in the proceedings. In the circumstances, said their counsel, they considered that “it would be right for their identities to remain protected”.'
Counsel for the three judges said the third judge, who is a sitting family court judge, did not feel s/he
should express a view on the issue.

Should judges be named?

Court of Appeal reserves judgment after two judges seek anonymity

rozenberg.substack.com

The court yesterday appointed an 'advocate to the court' to raise any issues that might have been missed by the two sides, and he talked of balancing the judges' rights under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act against those of the media under Article 10.

There won't be a decision for some time - 'more than a few days' according to Sir Geoffrey Vos, the Master of the Rolls, who led the panel of three judges.

 

[Moll]

I should have said, in the post above, Articles 8 and 10 of the Human Rights Convention.

 

[Moll]

Is it possible Sharif wants to protect the judge because the judge is a Muslim and it would show that the judge was biased in his favour?

Possible, but even if the judge were a Muslim,that wouldn't show bias and whatever happened then does not affect Sharif's current position as a convicted murderer. But I can't even imagine him caring about this.

The barrister acting for him in this case, Cyrus Larizadeh KC, is doing so pro bono, i.e. free of charge. I see on looking him up that he specialises in family court work and has been involved for years with the Wellbeing at the Bar group - sounds as if the concern for the wellbeing of the judges might be more his than Sharif's!

 

[UK Girl]

They are appealing their sentences Sara Sharif: Girl's dad and stepmum to appeal murder sentences

 

[Cherwell]

They are appealing their sentences Sara Sharif: Girl's dad and stepmum to appeal murder sentences

They can try.

 

[UK Girl]

They can try.

They should be given a choice IMO. To serve the sentence they have been awarded or to face the sentence Pakistan wanted to do.

 

[Skigh]

They are appealing their sentences Sara Sharif: Girl's dad and stepmum to appeal murder sentences

What a waste of tax payers' money. The judge bent over backwards to make it absolutely clear the reasoning behind the length of sentences he gave each one of them.

 

[Dotta]

Arthur LH's "father" got
increased sentence after appeal.
I don't think he tried to appeal again

(Although I'm not sure how many times criminals can appeal their sentences).

Well,
"Black magic" could be needed in this case.
U might kick himself now
for trying to ridicule his murderous wife
(or is she a partner?)
during the trial accusing her of witchcraft.

What a spectacle!

JMO