Judge Employs Emojis And Simple Language In Opinion And It's Terrific

The reason behind this is dead-on right.

Emoji-sunglasses-face-free-printable-4An unusual decision has come to light over the past week, and while it may have William Blackstone rolling over in his grave, this opinion from the British High Court demonstrates a sense of compassion and public service that a lot of judges wouldn’t embrace out of inertia, pomposity, or a little bit of both.

Mr. Justice Peter Jackson, most decidedly not the Hobbit, wrote his simple, emoji-laden opinion to better express his ruling in a family law matter to the young children involved. As covered by Legal Cheek:

The case in question involved a British Muslim convert, who allegedly tried to take four children — a brother and sister plus two younger children of whom he is the biological father — to Syria. The family, who are originally from Lancashire, were eventually stopped by authorities in Istanbul, Turkey.

Jackson, avoiding complex legalese, explained to two of the children, aged 10 and 12, why they would have only limited contact with their father going forward. Referred to only as “Mr A” in the judgment for legal reasons, the father is currently serving an 18-year prison sentence after being found guilty of firearms offences earlier this summer.

Now, most judges, even those in family-court settings, might not have deigned to employ something as foreign to anyone over 25 as emoji, but Justice Jackson put that discomfort aside to best connect to the parties before him. His advice for the childrens’ mother is plain and straightforward, as is his explanation to the kids for why they would no longer be seeing their dad on a regular basis.

Not that they’d ever want to again… he promised to take them to EuroDisney and then tried to take them to Syria! It’s hard to imagine a place farther removed from the Disney experience than Syria in 2016.

As Legal Cheek notes, Justice Jackson is receiving social media plaudits for his approach from family law practitioners. Perhaps this will start a new revolution in forging more accessibility in family law.

Maybe we’ll have Snapchat opinions! Alright, maybe not that, but more judges recognizing that their opinions are, at least partially, meant for the children can only improve a system that gets its fair share of criticism.

Sponsored

(The full opinion — regrettably without the emoji that couldn’t translate to the online version — is available on the next page.)

Sponsored