As far as I can see, all that has been presented is a mass of disconnected facts, non-sequiturs, innuendo and snide (to put it mildly) personal invective. All presented in an “Oh God, look at this..” way to create an impression on the impressionable mind.’

Perhaps someone should buy him a pen so that he can connect all the dots.

Or maybe it’s time he read this:
http://www.judiciarymalta.gov.mt/file.aspx?f=576

Raphael who?

Oh, you mean Raphael Vassallo.

No. Fr. Borg did not miss the point. You, however, very evidently did.

In fact there isn’t one single POINT in this whole sordid affair, as there usually – and very often – isn’t. There is the matter of creating a public scandal. There is NO issue, you veritable twat, of a “scandalous intrusion onto a magistrate’s private life”.

The ethics issue, however, is the fact of a member of the judiciary causing a public scandal and, separately, of behaviour bringing the reputation of the office into disrepute. Conduct unbecoming of sorts. Conflict of interest IS another issue, which if it exists, DOES lead de motu proprio to injustice given that it runs counter to the principle, nemo judex in causa propria (sua).

Lil ghalhekk zewg membri tal-gudikatura prezentement jinsabu quddiem il-Kummissjoni dwar l-Amministrazzjoni tal-Gustizzja sabiex jirrispondu ghal fatt li huma presidenti (ossija membri) ta’ assocjazjoni sportivi.

Il-membri huma il-Mag. Antonio Mizzi (President tal-MBA) u l-Imhallef Lino Farrugia Sacco (Chairman tal-MOC)

@H.P. Baxxter

You’re mistaken. It was Fr. Borg who stated that it ws It-Torca when questioned by Bondi. Frankly, I saw nothing gutsy in Lou’s stance yesterday. Sitting on the fence and expecting Fr. Borg to take a line.

For the rest of you:

In my opinion, for what its worth, Fr. Borg acted wisely and was cautious in his replies. This would serve him not being misquoted or misinterpreted further down the line.

The issue is rather delicate and demands to be treated with respect. Throwing caution to the wind and barging around this affair with all the grace of a bull in your proverbial china shop is an attitude which one would, and very potentially could, later live to regret.

It’s very easy for some of you talking heads to go on shooting your mouths off and criticising Borg for his performance. Why don’t you do something yourselves? Get yourselves invited on Bondi+ and illuminate us, why don’t you. I’m sure you’ll have no problem convincing Lou, what with all this distilled and calculated logic, and lest we forget, your sharp wit to boot.

And by the way, I have never attended any of the said magistrate’s private functions.

Actually, La Redoute, I did give an opinion. Let me rephrase it, this time without being judgemental on the cens… er… moderator.

The reasoning behind a ‘cheating magistrate’ is sound, even if marital cheating is nowadays condemned less. Moreover, enough time has elapsed to render any questions of when and what exactly happened subject to speculation.

The ‘in flagrante’ aspect is lost.

I also believe there was an overkill here of the sort that turns perpetrators into victims. And the flippant nature of some of the posts, although entertaining to many, did not help either.

Ironically, it was the Magistrate’s police report that shot this story to the mainstream media.

Braminu, those were Malta Today’s unfortunate choice of words. The truth is very different.

Do we trust Kev the former policeman who might know what policemen get up to on magisterial ‘inkjesti’?

Oh, we all know Kev was having a ball in a mask. I was just being disingenuous. He has vested interests. He’ll sweep in here to take a swipe at everyone except the two people at the centre of the storm.

Maybe they bought him a new sex toy for Valentine’s day.