The Times today sets out a somewhat light touch and sanitised run down of Starmer’s complex and revealing legal career – during which Sir Keir frequently blurred the line between representation and political campaigning. It includes tough material such as interviews with his best friends at the bar. Guido brings you the full goods…
Let’s begin with his role in a 2004 case which involved the attempted sabotage of NATO jets at an RAF base on the eve of the invasion of Iraq. Starmer acted for one of the defendants:
“The defendant was discovered at 0210hrs on the 18th March 2003 just outside the perimeter fence of RAF Fairford close to where a section of the perimeter fence had recently been cut. He was in possession of a rucksack in which petrol and washing-up liquid was found mixed together, which he said were intended to set fire to the wheels of a bomber. He stated that he had intended to take this action in order to stop a crime in that the bombers were taking part in an illegal war.”
Starmer acted for the saboteur during his appeal, mounting an argument that the Iraq War was potentially justiciable in UK courts – therefore claiming those accused of criminal damage could rely on domestic defences such as necessity. It’s an example of the human rights sophistry which is about to dominate British public debate…
A Labour spokesman is saying of Starmer’s legal record: “In this country, everyone is entitled to a defence. A lawyer can no sooner choose who they represent than a doctor can choose their patients.” If you have cancer you go to an oncologist, if you have a bad heart you go to a cardiologist, if you’re an anti-NATO direct action group you go to Sir Keir Starmer…
