Home

A response to David King

12 May 2005
In a continuing discussion on the merits of the arguments put by David King and Benny Peiser (following comments by Charlie Kronick here), Alexander Bates, who says he is Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of Australia, writes:

I was struck by the fact that Sir David was acting as an advocate, not a dispassionate academic observer. Phrases such as, 'beyond any reasonable doubt' have no place in a paper that purports to be a dispassionate discussion of the evidence. (continues here)

Caspar Henderson

Live discussion: Why is everyone taking the government to court?

There's a pandemic on – so why are openDemocracy, Foxglove and others challenging the British government's health contracts in court? Join us for the inside story on how we're going to extraordinary lengths to force the government to reveal what they're doing with public money and citizens' health records.

Join us for this free event on 4 March at 5pm UK time/12pm EST.

Hear from:

Cori Crider Lawyer Investigator and co-founder of Foxglove, a non-profit that seeks to make the use of technology fair for everyone

Caroline Molloy Editor ourNHS and openDemocracyUK

Chair: Mary Fitzgerald Editor-in-chief, openDemocracy

Had enough of ‘alternative facts’? openDemocracy is different Join the conversation: get our weekly email

Comments

We encourage anyone to comment, please consult the oD commenting guidelines if you have any questions.
Audio available Bookmark Check Language Close Comments Download Facebook Link Email Newsletter Newsletter Play Print Share Twitter Youtube Search Instagram WhatsApp yourData