Did The Sun make a mistake today in its report on Sharon Shoesmith's appeal against her dismissal as head of children's services at Haringey council in north London?
And did it then compound that error in its editorial by calling Shoesmith's barrister, James Maurici, "an arrogant buffoon"?
I ask because the report on the court of appeal hearing states that Maurici "poured scorn on the views of our readers" (who signed a petition calling for Shoesmith's head in the wake of the Baby P case) as "worthless and uninformed".
But The Guardian's report makes it clear that it was a previous judge who described the petition in such terms. Maurici was merely referring to the judicial remark in presenting his case.
Who, in such circumstances, is the buffoon?
