From the code of ethics for members of the Judiciary
http://www.judiciarymalta.gov.mt/file.aspx?f=576

“Members of the Judiciary shall not discuss out of Court cases that are pending in court. In full respect of freedom of expression members of the Judiciary should discourage persons from discussing, in their presence, cases that are sub judice.”

I would be even more upset if I later found out that a reporter witnessed this and didn’t do his job and report it. I would be interested to read what the judges say when given the chance by the reporter to comment on their behaviour.

At the very least, if the reporter was a bit confused about public/private, he could have approached the judges and informed them that if they don’t correct their behaviour then he will be forced to report it. Not good enough I know, but better than sitting there night after night watching and listening to judges and magistrates who are clearly unfit to do their job.

Tip to the reporter: don’t apply for a job outside Malta. Any commercial editor who is running a quality paper will be amazed that you buried a scoop that is clearly in the public interest.

“Conveniently missed the bit” would probably be more apt.

” Please ask your fabulous boss why he considers the secret sex life and attendant tahwide of a police commissioner worth reporting on, but not that of a magistrate. I’m DYING to know the answer”

Yes, Saviour, so are many others here!

Maybe because he was enjoying the show they supposedly put on. Then again, maybe it was all a figment of his imagination.

You are either being disingenuous or you have missed the point of being a reporter. Either way, you’re not exactly a canary in the mine, are you?

Daphne, you have a bad habit of applying your own execrable standards to everyone else. It’s you, not I, who think this sort of thing is important, remember?

[Daphne – No, Raphael, practically the entire country thinks it’s important. If you removed yourself momentarily from your comfort zone, you’d be able to work that out. People don’t care whether a manager at the Roads Department boozes and bleats (though his bosses would and the bleating breaches the Estacode). But they certainly do care very much if those doing the boozing and bleating are the very ones who sit in judgement over them in court.]

But on the subject of expectations – are we seriously expected to believe that you didn’t know about Robert Musumeci’s relationship with Consuelo before some three weeks ago? And that when you found out, you were so morally outraged that you felt you had to do something about it immediately?

[Daphne – Yes, Raphael, I was outraged. I was outraged that the Nationalist Party allowed a cheat to contest the general election in its name. I was outraged when I saw the law report which revealed that the magistrate had presided over her secret lover’s brother’s case. But I kept my outrage to myself for a great variety of reasons and then I changed my mind. This is my prerogative. After all, unlike you I am not a reporter.]

Or were you aware about it a lot longer than that, but chose to keep it up your sleeve until such time as you needed a trump card… and even then, for your own, purely personal reasons?

[Daphne – Stories are always leaked for personal reasons, Raphael. You should know that by now. Nobody is going to telephone your newsroom with information about somebody else for altruistic purposes. They will always have a personal reason. Fortunately, I have a blog and I don’t have to ring a newsroom. Now it’s up to you to pick up the information and run with it….all the way to the Four Seasons Bar.]

Because it’s a little hard to accept the extraordinary coincidence that you only found out about it at a time when it could be conveniently used to deflect attention from that little story you were worried might appear in MaltaToday.

So why don’t you tell us, Daphne: when was it, exactly, that you first found about Consuelo and Robert?

[Daphne – Oh, right at the beginning. That’s why it’s going to be such great fun testifying under oath. And that’s why your Robert can’t pull the wool over my eyes as he did with your James Debono in Malta Today.]

[Daphne – My point exactly, sugar. I could easily have attempted to blackmail the magistrate: she was presiding over a libel suit in which I was involved at a time when I knew she was seeing rather too much of Musumeci’s pecker, as you put it, and others did not – including her spouse and his. It’s the risk of blackmail that’s the problem. But I guess you missed this salient point, just as you appear to have missed the bit where, while her relationship with Musumeci was ‘secret’, she presided over the criminal prosecution hearing of his brother.]