The decision to abandon wigs has dismayed traditionalists who argue that they give judges an air of authority and impartiality. The degree of anonymity that wigs provided could also protect them from angry members of the public. John Mortimer, the barrister and author of the Rumpole of the Bailey books, opposed the changes. The ideas ridiculous! A barrister without his wig would be like a doctor without a stethoscope, he wrote in a newspaper article when the changes were first proposed.
抛弃假发的决定令传统人士十分沮丧,他们坚称假发使法官显得权威而公正,而且掩盖了法官外表上的个性特征,以免受某些愤怒群众的骚扰。法庭上的鲁波尔系列图书的作者、律师约翰莫蒂默反对这些改变。当这些改变首次被提出时,他在报纸上撰文写道,这主意简直荒谬!不戴假发的律师就如同不戴听诊器的医生。
However, modernists argue that wigs are a hangover from the past that could intimidate people in court. In a newspaper interview, Lord Phillips described wigs as an anachronism that gave the public a false impression of judges.
然而,现代主义者认为假发是过去的遗留,是用来恫吓出庭人的。在接受某报采访时,菲利普斯勋爵说,假发是件不合时宜之物并导致公众对法官形成错误的印象。
A Ministry of Justice survey last year found 70 percent of court workers wanted to keep wigs, compared to 42 percent of the public.
【法官的假发就是用来吓人的】相关文章:
最新
2016-10-18
2016-10-11
2016-10-11
2016-10-08
2016-09-30
2016-09-30