Ian Bailey case judge should have intervened

My dealings with the legal profession have been most satisfactory, so I have no axe to grind. That said, is it not time that we, the citizens, through our elected representatives, insisted on intervening — not interfering, but intervening — in the cosy game that is played out in our courts?

I say ‘game’, because the judge behaves just like a football referee who thinks “if the Cork selectors had any sense, they would take Joe Bloggs off and bring on John Doe, but it is none of my business, tactics are up to them.”

Fine in a football match, but in a court case?

Surely, the judge in the Bailey case knew, from the start, that aspects of Bailey’s claim against the Gardai were statute-barred.

Should he not have so ruled from the beginning, thus saving time, jury stress and millions of taxpayers’ euros?

A judge is required to be objective, but not reactive. A judge can intervene without interfering.

Brendan Casserly,

Benvoirlich Estate,

Bishopstown,

Cork