Nipate
Forum => Kenya Discussion => Topic started by: Omollo on September 20, 2017, 06:51:44 PM
-
While Njoki is shouting here is a comic relief. Note this is going on now as Njoki reads her rubbish:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DKLQE-oXcAEX96X.jpg:large)
-
Omollo - so Njoki's judgement is rubbish 8) you're just another Pundit who thinks the 4 musketeers should be investigated for doing their job.
-
I agree bling-loving DBK is below the Mullah in status.
-
A dissenting opinion is a judges respectful expressing disagreement with the majority opinion. A judge walks us through (in this case) her reasoning and interpretation of the law and how she applied it to the issues, citing precedents and authorities, etc. This is in short an academic exercise in more than one way.
What Ndung'u wrote (to borrow words I just saw) is a diatribe against fellow judges. She used the bench as a platform to lend credence to discredited tribal conspiracy theories; She converted the bench into an ego massage institute offering mass therapy to the most rabid supporters of Uthamaki (which I will henceforth refer to as Usamaki)
Her judgement will go down in history as one of the longest speeches ever made in a court of law in Africa but will not count for anything. It is universally acknowledged that the 2013 judgment was a national shame. The problems created by it have not all been solved even as new ones emerge. We are heading to an impasse in 40 days thanks to that judgment. Yet she sits at the bench still dripping the sperms of Jubilee Party Supremo Murathe - to ask: What happened to the 2013 precedent?
Omollo - so Njoki's judgement is rubbish 8) you're just another Pundit who thinks the 4 musketeers should be investigated for doing their job.
-
Right on point. Poor Njoki, 2 presidential petition and she has never asked even a single question or clarification. .....I guess at some point we all have to justify our keep.
A dissenting opinion is a judges respectful expressing disagreement with the majority opinion. A judge walks us through (in this case) her reasoning and interpretation of the law and how she applied it to the issues, citing precedents and authorities, etc. This is in short an academic exercise in more than one way.
What Ndung'u wrote (to borrow words I just saw) is a diatribe against fellow judges. She used the bench as a platform to lend credence to discredited tribal conspiracy theories; She converted the bench into an ego massage institute offering mass therapy to the most rabid supporters of Uthamaki (which I will henceforth refer to as Usamaki)
Her judgement will go down in history as one of the longest speeches ever made in a court of law in Africa but will not count for anything. It is universally acknowledged that the 2013 judgment was a national shame. The problems created by it have not all been solved even as new ones emerge. We are heading to an impasse in 40 days thanks to that judgment. Yet she sits at the bench still dripping the sperms of Jubilee Party Supremo Murathe - to ask: What happened to the 2013 precedent?
Omollo - so Njoki's judgement is rubbish 8) you're just another Pundit who thinks the 4 musketeers should be investigated for doing their job.