The Piers Corbyn cases continue to throw up awkward questions for those trying to prosecute alleged lockdown breakers, not least why defendant keep being charged using the wrong laws.... https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/piers-corbyn-coronavirus-lockdown-leicester-square-protest-covid19-b79322.html

Corbyn's latest charge is over a protest on Nov 5, the day Lockdown 2.0 began

Problem is he's accused of flouting the Tiers system which had ended the day before.

Also, he's accused of breaking Tier 3 rules, in Leicester Sq, which was in Tier 2 with the rest of London

Added into the mix is that Corbyn's been charged using two different laws - the one in effect on Nov 4 and the one that replaced it on Nov 5.

It seems to typify the way that lockdown laws have been utilised, confused and lacking in consistency.

On an #OpenJustice point, this new case is due in court tomorrow for its fourth listing. Yet it's the first time we've heard of it.

Three separate listings that never made it on to a court list, including a plea hearing on Nov 9.

The use of lockdown laws is raising difficult questions for authorities. If they cannot be applied properly, should they be used at all?
Case after case being mishandled undermines faith in the whole system.
It's also meant those who deserve punishment sometimes get away with it.