The horse did not say what you thought it did. Look it up. Sub judice does not refer to injunctions. There is no process here, and sub judice can refer only to a process. Maybe I don't read enough papers, etc., but I haven't seen much reference to sub judice anywhere else except by a couple of you on this forum. You may not like what Hain did, and I could, in theory, respect that, but fabricating stuff about subverting the rule of law or "sub judice" is totally inappropriate. We realise how much you want to defend Sir Phil and attack his critics at all costs, especially non-Tory ones, but it would be rather nice if we occasionally heard from you about the victims of his abuses. The fact that we never do hear that speaks volumes about your mindset. I should get it adjusted if I were you. Read up on Sir Phil and his workplace shenanigans, and make sure that you don't connive in his rampant bullying and rampant misogyny. That's what your posts plainly suggest.