h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Rumpole's Golden Thread - A1041508
Author: Dr Montague Trout - U188966

Not sure about the law ... not really my bag.

Good article - I understood it all even though I knew nothing about it previously. However it seemed to me to be more about that one case than the 'golden thread' - maybe you should either change the title or add more about the 'innocent until proven guilty' thing, maybe by adding a couple of more case studies or something.

It's only meant to be about one case, so it perhaps needs a bit of rewriting.

DMT

In that case maybe you need to change the title like I suggested, to something that refers to the case more than the 'golden thread' or Rumpole.

Hmmm. I was trying to make the point in the title that Rumpole's Golden Thread is almost an accepted principle of law. You could probably get away with using it in a law essay ... e.g.,

"... and whilst Bush held Bin Laden responsible for the destruction of the WTC towers, it is certain that in law, Bin Laden would need to be deemed innocent (Rumpole's Golden Thread, per Sankey, (1935))."

Do you see?

Maybe you're right, maybe we should see what other people think.

Not a lot, it appears.

Tee hee hee! I wonder why nobody else has said anything? *ponders*

Brilliant!

I'm delighted to see that you've expanded the original small article into an entry proper.
I'm just sorry it took me so long to notice it here in Peer Review - but hootoo has been acting up for the last couple of days (or maybe it's just my connection).

I'm not going to go on about how much I like this article, as I've already stated it, although the added detail makes it even better. I just hope that there may be some way to link to it from the Rumpole article.

Once again, Nice one

Thanks.

Hi, Dr Montague!

I really like this one - it reads very smoothly and makes a very worthwhile point.



Azara

Nice, succinct entry. And also rather timely, in these times of rapidly eroding civil liberties. I can't see any reason why it shouldn't go forward to the Edited Guide.

Here's to Rumpole!

Azara/Ormondroyd.

It feels like you two haven't posted form months and then bang here you are, both. Have you been hibernating?

You *are* joking, aren't you? Hardly a day goes by when I don't post here! I haven't posted to the h2g2 Addiction Clinic for a while, but I probably should!

Yes, Dr Montague, I haven't been around much in the last few months. But I've been back trying to comment in PR again for a week or two now, so the hibernation is over!

I had left this one aside for a few days, since I expected the comment to be easy...


Azara

Your Guide Entry has just been picked from Peer Review by one of our Scouts, and is now heading off into the Editorial Process, which ends with publication in the Edited Guide. We've therefore moved this Review Conversation out of Peer Review and to the entry itself.

If you'd like to know what happens now, check out the page on 'What Happens after your Entry has been Recommended?' at EditedGuide-Process. We hope this explains everything.

Thanks for contributing to the Edited Guide!

About time!.

Congratulations - Well deserved indeed.

Wildman

I may have had something to do with that

Thanks.

for Dr Monatague!

Azara