to turn from the vagaries of information literacy as it is practiced in a library to how it can be applied in this specific instance, we have two people with varying opinions on this case. the first, you, insists that this case is setting some sort of precedent. the second, the secret barrister, claims that it is not setting some sort of precedent. in common law legal systems, a precedent is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case which is either binding on or persuasive for a court when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts. on the one hand we have your claim, based on no obvious legal background, on the other hand we have someone who no one has denied is a legal professional who works in courts. if you want to contradict his view, you should do so with some evidence or argument about *why* he is wrong, not simply say 'he's wrong'. being as he has some experience of working in the legal system, it's not a great leap to say that his view is far more likely to be worth listening to on this point than yours. so unless you're going to say 'but this bit in the appeal court judgement sets a nasty precedent because...' perhaps you should shut up on this point. there are, as has been widely reported, some exceptions to the general prohibition on the use of a complainant's sexual history. i would be grateful if, if you believe what you're saying, you could say why you feel this is a precedent, as opposed to the law taking its course. in what way did this allow a new interpretation of the relevant statute?
