Sir, - I refer to Mr D. K. Henderson's letter of October 26th. I do not find it curious that a judge should want to preserve the quiet and relatively calm environment of his court. Neither do I find it curious that the judge should threaten the use of the powers at his disposal to maintain that environment.
A courtroom should be a place where people (some of whom may have been waiting years) can get a chance to make their case in a reasoned and clear fashion. The screeching din of an angle-grinder is in no way conducive to the atmosphere required for this. If a group of people were making distracting noises which were encroaching on the court's ability to function, they would in all likelihood be held in contempt of court. I am not aware of any exemption for the noise caused by angle-grinders or cement-mixers.
Judge Carroll's desire that justice should be done, and seen to be done and heard to be done, seems to me to be eminently reasonable. Think of the possible implications of some of a witness's vital testimony being misheard, and therefore ignored.
I worked in construction in New York city for two years. Some of our clients were Wall Street bankers and stockbrokers. Under no circumstances were we permitted to work in an occupied space the "Yuppies" would not tolerate it, and rightly so. We had to work at weekends or late at night. I think the judge's work of dispensing justice is at least of qua importance as the generating of capital. It is important that he and everyone else in the courtroom are accorded an amount of respect and courtesy, to facilitate them in carrying out their business effectively.
I will not try to refute Mr Henderson's irrefutable fact that you cannot make an omelette without breaking some eggs. But the eggs can just as easily be broken, and he omelette made, outside office hours. - Yours. etc..
Foylesprings, Derry.