This is not a weather report

As soon as Magistrate Consuelo Scerri Herrera withdrew her criminal libel and defamation case against Daphne Caruana Galizia, I blogged that there is no other course of action but impeachment. It is only through an act of parliament that a member of the judiciary can be taken off the bench.
 
My reasoning was simple. By the magistrate's own choice, the blogger's cataclysmically damning words against her now stand, loud and clear. I do not see how, in these circumstances, Magistrate Consuelo Scerri Herrera can wake up every morning, slip into her toga and judge innocence and guilt in open court.

By way of withdrawing her case, the magistrate claimed that the blogger had withdrawn the substance of her allegations under oath. This is the subject of this post.

Daphne Caruana Galizia's response to this claim was immediate and typically devastating. Not only did she write that she had not withdrawn a comma of her deluge of words but went on to call Magistrate Consuelo Scerri Herrera a liar for making such a claim.

So now the magistrate has yet another ball in her court, as it were. Apart from all the other, now uncontested, words that the blogger threw at her, there is this one.

Magistrate Consuelo Scerri Herrera is a liar.

Unless the magistrate takes the blogger to court again, I do not see how she can continue to preside over her court, ask people to swear to tell the truth and proceed to judge them.

This country cannot have a magistrate being called a liar and life goes on in the land as if we just heard tomorrow's weather report.