Guess what, a journaist scoop.

The Mail online, becoming even more of a tabloid. They have obviously got a student in on work experience. The article screams "archive files", poor literary content and no knowledge of the legal profession whatsoever.

In particular, partly because it is bank holiday and I'm idle, and partly because poor newspaper writing irritates me;

She was writing to congratulate the women on their promotion to Queen’s Counsel – one of the most senior positions in the judiciary.

Being appointed QC is NOT to be appointed to the Judiciary. Wiki will tell you that for @*!&@#'s sake.

While one woman QC was ‘very surprised’ Mrs Blair did not pay for a stamp, another questioned the choice of notepaper.

Was she really? Or did her secretary/PA/clerk/skivvy point this out and when it emerged the letter was from the "honorable" Mrs Blair the elite decided to get a few more pennies for the estate by calling the paper?

One woman lawyer,

And lastly... how foolish of me to consider that the UK has two separate types of legal professional, plus a miscellany of impressionists such as paralegals, executives and moonlighting law students. All collectively referred to as "lawyers".
Is the journalist actually an ignorant child? Or is the role of the unidentified caller so dodgy that no one knows quite who it is? Perhaps I am being too harsh, but even I credit the public with more intelligence than this. Given that CB wrote to female barristers appointed to the Queen's Council, I would assume the woman referred to is a BARRISTER. But the article is sloppy and the writer appears to have used MS Thesaurus.

What is worth noting is;

however, took umbrage over the notes. She said: ‘Why has Cherie Blair appointed herself as a feminist guru and leader of female lawyers?’

I do concur. I have always felt Cherie's legal career was under played when she may have made a reasonable female model for the public. Instead she embraced the smug and supercilious attitude we tend to see in all female professionals in a male dominated atmosphere, as well as an arrogant and regally patronising nature taken by all "wives" in the public eye.

(On a personal note, having moved from the commendable area of employment law, she transferred into the more dubious and pro euro Human Rights carrion hunters and lost much respect I had for her) Bring on Helena Kennedy for Prime Minister, at least she

I still think it is abominable that women still have to congratulate each other on achieving something in a male dominated field.