Brits obsession with the Royals ... Staffers in the frame for attempted theft of Princess Kate's medical records ... Bitcoin liberated from false claims by Satoshi Nakamoto ... Struck off for inflated time records ... Rwanda - plain sailing ahead ... From our correspondent in Blighty Floyd Alexander-Hunt
Spring has sprung - but I'm still wearing a scarf and beanie. Aside from the (ever so) slight reprieve in the miserable weather, my understanding of spring rituals in the UK include the following:
- A renewed obsession with what time the sun is rising and setting and the date of daylight savings;
- Making small talk about the daffodils blooming in Hyde Park;
- Turning your radiator down from a 5/5 to a 3/5;
- Collaborating on conspiracy theories about the location of members of the royal family ...
KateGate
This month, KateGate went from crazed conspiracies about cosmetic surgeries and affairs, to immense regret after the Princess of Wales revealed she was battling cancer.
People rushed to social media to express their sympathy and remove insensitive posts. Thank goodness, I wrote this column after learning the news. My first draft included theories she was preparing to go on the Masked Singer.
How embarrassing would that have been? Well, probably not as embarrassing as the Palace clumsily blaming an ill Kate for their own Mother's Day photoshop fail. Somebody needs to decapitate the media team, or at least give them a thump over the head.
The Princess of Wales underwent "planned abdominal surgery" at the London Clinic in January 2024. Kensington Palace refused to provide further details about her condition, however speculation online was predictably gruesome.
The UK Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) is currently investigating the London Clinic, a private hospital in Marylebone, after three staff members allegedly attempted to gain access to Kate Middleton's medical records.
A spokesperson for the ICO said, "we can confirm that we have received a breach report and are assessing the information provided".
King Charles also received medical care at the London Clinic in January 2024, however his medical records have not been breached. Turns out the media are less interested in his very public enlarged prostate.
Bit-con-artist
Satoshi Nakamoto: intimidated developers in bitcoin world
The UK High Court held that Dr Craig Wright is not the operator of the pseudonym 'Satoshi Nakamoto' nor the inventor of Bitcoin.
While many of us may have lied a little on our LinkedIn – for example, mine says I speak French, when in reality all I can say is pass the baguette – this is another level.
Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA) brought the case in an attempt to stop Wright's string of intimidatory lawsuits against anyone questioning his identity.
Counsel for the claimants, Johnathan Hough KC, asserted:
"Dr Wright has committed serious fraud on this court in defending this claim. Dr Wright has lied and lied and lied."
The last part sounds like an angsty teen anthem written by a Disney star ... oh wait, that's because it is! Siri play Lie Lie Lie by Joshua Bassett.
Anyway, back to Hough:
"This is not some private matter in which a person produced a false will or invoice to gain a financial advantage.
"It is the deliberate production of false documents to support false claims and use the courts as a vehicle for fraud."
A spokesmuffin for COPA also weighed in:
"This decision is a win for developers, for the entire open source community and for the truth. For over eight years, Dr. Wright and his financial backers have lied about his identity as Satoshi Nakamoto and used that lie to bully and intimidate developers in the bitcoin community. That ends today with the court's ruling that Craig Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto."
Lost track of time
A solicitor found guilty of creating 'inaccurate' and 'misleading' time records has been struck off the jam roll. Matthew Nester admitted to breaching Principles 2 and 5 but denied dishonest conduct.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal disagreed and determined that the actions, involving inflating time records beyond the work done, was dishonest and misleading.
Nester's firm, Hugh James Solicitors, uncovered the discrepancy and reported the solicitor to the Solicitors Regulation Authority. The Tribunal emphasised that fabricating time records for administrative tasks not chargeable to clients was unacceptable.
Doesn't the solicitor know the vaguer the lie, the less believable it is? By the way, this column was late because my best friend's sister's German Short-Haired Pointer got lost in the south end of Wandsworth and was found wrestling the fox featured in the season two finale of Fleabag.
Rwanda Deportation Bill
Tomlinson-Mynors: Rwanda couldn't be safer
Proposed amendments to Rishi Sunak's Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill have been thrown out, ultimately bolstering the PM's plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda.
The Bill is designed to get around the Supreme Court's rejection of the Rwanda scheme in November 2023. Sunak stated he is committed to the original timeline and "to get a flight off in the Spring".
Indeed, the Tories' favourite series "I'm A Refugee, Get Me Out of Here!" has edged closer to reality as sensible amendments were voted down by MPs in support of the PM.
These amendments included enforcing ministers' adherence to domestic and international law; precluding the government from declaring Rwanda a safe country prior to implementing safeguards; and exempting those who have worked with the British armed forces overseas from being sent to Rwanda.
Minister for Illegal Migration, Michael Tomlinson-Mynors KC, made the usual noises:
"This Bill is an essential element of our wider strategy to protect our borders and to stop the boats, to prevent the tragic loss of lives at sea caused by dangerous, illegal and unnecessary crossings across the Channel.
"I don't accept that the provisions of the Bill undermine the rule of law, and the government takes its responsibilities and its international obligations incredibly seriously. There's nothing in the Bill that requires any act or omission which conflicts with our international obligations."
Ah yes, nothing screams adherence to international law like refusing to include an amendment saying you will adhere to international law.