Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Back to forum list |
Back to The Lounge |
Jump to newest |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For better pay and conditions?" Yes. Well, to protest against the changes to Legal Aid. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Erm ... Wtf?" Quite! It has never happened before. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Grossly over primdonna's with their heads so far up their own arses they've forgotten what daylight and real life is like" None of the criminal barristers I know would fit that description. Should we stop defending against criminal charges now and go straight to guilty if accused? | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Grossly over primdonna's with their heads so far up their own arses they've forgotten what daylight and real life is like" If they are protesting about legal aid changes that could actually help the "little people". It's not like a barrister would ever get legal aid and criminal defence is going to be required regardless. I haven't actually heard what it's all about but it sounds like it might be trying to prevent changes that will make life more difficult for the less well off. None of the barristers I know have their heads up their arses. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Grossly over primdonna's with their heads so far up their own arses they've forgotten what daylight and real life is like None of the criminal barristers I know would fit that description. Should we stop defending against criminal charges now and go straight to guilty if accused?" No, no but they shouldn't be paid. They should do it for the love of the job. Never mind the years of study, the training on minimal pay, the exams and the constant need to keep up with new legislation and case law. It's not like the greedy, over-paid primadonnas do anything to earn their pay. Obviously. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Grossly over primdonna's with their heads so far up their own arses they've forgotten what daylight and real life is like" That's not my experience at all...generally a funny (ha ha,not peculiar) bunch that recognise both the absurdities of the law at times but also that we have the best legal system in the world. And the fact that they're not striking for themselves, speaks volumes! | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"until you mentioned it no one knew, just shows how little they will be missed." I bet criminals and those accused knew... | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"until you mentioned it no one knew, just shows how little they will be missed." It is on the national news. I didn't post that they were planning to strike last month or last week because I didn't expect anyone to know about it then. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Difficult one. Most public sector roles have faced huge reform, but this profession has managed to avoid much? ( stand to be corrected ). No doubt their wages and lifestyles will be grossly over exaggerated by media, but should they not have to tighten their belts too ? There will be much prejudice on this one I think. " It is not really about tightening their belts but the restrictions being placed on Legal Aid. Whether it is a simple case or complex case they are now being treated as a flat rate. The client is the one who loses. Then if there is a miscarriage of justice the person is turned out of prison with no support and less than £40 in their pocket. Serco and G4S aren't experiencing a huge cut in their bit of the criminal justice system. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Difficult one. Most public sector roles have faced huge reform, but this profession has managed to avoid much? ( stand to be corrected ). No doubt their wages and lifestyles will be grossly over exaggerated by media, but should they not have to tighten their belts too ? There will be much prejudice on this one I think. It is not really about tightening their belts but the restrictions being placed on Legal Aid. Whether it is a simple case or complex case they are now being treated as a flat rate. The client is the one who loses. Then if there is a miscarriage of justice the person is turned out of prison with no support and less than £40 in their pocket. Serco and G4S aren't experiencing a huge cut in their bit of the criminal justice system." True re G4s etc...but that's another story re private companies and the criminal justice system....a bad on in my opinion. You're far more informed than I on this but I seem to recall a figure of 212 million is the cost for the legal aid annually? Peanuts in thegrand sscheme of things although sadly there will be evidence of it being abused. I hesitate to debate any further as I'm ill informed, but its an important aspect of modern democracy, even when they represent the guilty. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Difficult one. Most public sector roles have faced huge reform, but this profession has managed to avoid much? ( stand to be corrected ). No doubt their wages and lifestyles will be grossly over exaggerated by media, but should they not have to tighten their belts too ? There will be much prejudice on this one I think. It is not really about tightening their belts but the restrictions being placed on Legal Aid. Whether it is a simple case or complex case they are now being treated as a flat rate. The client is the one who loses. Then if there is a miscarriage of justice the person is turned out of prison with no support and less than £40 in their pocket. Serco and G4S aren't experiencing a huge cut in their bit of the criminal justice system. True re G4s etc...but that's another story re private companies and the criminal justice system....a bad on in my opinion. You're far more informed than I on this but I seem to recall a figure of 212 million is the cost for the legal aid annually? Peanuts in thegrand sscheme of things although sadly there will be evidence of it being abused. I hesitate to debate any further as I'm ill informed, but its an important aspect of modern democracy, even when they represent the guilty. " That is the point - disabling and dismantling the defence side of criminal justice dismantles he justice system and democracy. All but one of the 18 Old Bailey courts is closed. I am trying to find out what's happening in the one that is operating. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Legal aid still exists? With any more changes it surely won't " Legal Aid should always exist but having been in legal wranglings recently i do think the system is open to abuse and needs to be controlled better. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Barristers on strike ? The one in the costa I'm sat in just made me a lovely coffee! " Boom boom! Good to see you are back to work today. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In an unexpected turn of events, it transpires attendances in the House of Commons are up this morning as barristers take advantage of a morning off to go to the 'other' job." So many Barristers have entered the Labour party too...Blair...Brown.... | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In an unexpected turn of events, it transpires attendances in the House of Commons are up this morning as barristers take advantage of a morning off to go to the 'other' job. So many Barristers have entered the Labour party too...Blair...Brown...." Gordon Brown was called to the English Bar? That'll come as a shock to his biographers. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In an unexpected turn of events, it transpires attendances in the House of Commons are up this morning as barristers take advantage of a morning off to go to the 'other' job. So many Barristers have entered the Labour party too...Blair...Brown.... Gordon Brown was called to the English Bar? That'll come as a shock to his biographers." | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Barristers on strike ? The one in the costa I'm sat in just made me a lovely coffee! Boom boom! Good to see you are back to work today." I'm always working! (Just not always that hard!! ) | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Barristers on strike ? The one in the costa I'm sat in just made me a lovely coffee! Boom boom! Good to see you are back to work today. I'm always working! (Just not always that hard!! )" I imagine being you is work. Now back to the barristers. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I heard the Chancellor say that barristers shouldn't think that they are exempt from cuts in these austere times. Just like the MPs with their 11% pay rise. Fuckers! " It's not cuts to barristers as such but the one size, cut price, everyone is guilty anyway attitude to criminal justice that is sickening. We have such a complex legal system and need trained lawyers and not just trainee solicitors and pupil barristers on cases. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I heard the Chancellor say that barristers shouldn't think that they are exempt from cuts in these austere times. Just like the MPs with their 11% pay rise. Fuckers! " Not that I agree with any pay rise they get (I'm a public sector worker) but that rise is in place of the rediculous amount they can claim on expenses. No wonder the big names have publicly announced they don't want it! | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I heard the Chancellor say that barristers shouldn't think that they are exempt from cuts in these austere times. Just like the MPs with their 11% pay rise. Fuckers! Not that I agree with any pay rise they get (I'm a public sector worker) but that rise is in place of the rediculous amount they can claim on expenses. No wonder the big names have publicly announced they don't want it!" How is the rise 'in place' of expenses? I thought there was something about 'tightening up' some expenses, not replacing them. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I heard the Chancellor say that barristers shouldn't think that they are exempt from cuts in these austere times. Just like the MPs with their 11% pay rise. Fuckers! Not that I agree with any pay rise they get (I'm a public sector worker) but that rise is in place of the rediculous amount they can claim on expenses. No wonder the big names have publicly announced they don't want it! How is the rise 'in place' of expenses? I thought there was something about 'tightening up' some expenses, not replacing them." You're right. I should not have said 'in place'. What they can claim for now is within a rigid framework. Most will loose out. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ps Good on the barristers for standing up for legal aid, everyone should have access to legal representation, even the poorest in society." It started with the Poor Mans Lawyer/community law movement and I suspect that is what we are heading back to. We can't ship the convicted to Australia anymore though so the privatisation of and profit making prisons will have to return too. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ps Good on the barristers for standing up for legal aid, everyone should have access to legal representation, even the poorest in society. It started with the Poor Mans Lawyer/community law movement and I suspect that is what we are heading back to. We can't ship the convicted to Australia anymore though so the privatisation of and profit making prisons will have to return too." And that's what this goverment want to do, privatise everything, because privatising public services has been so successful so far hasn't it? It's a disgrace, peoples rights are slowly being eroded and most people cannot see it because the politicians and media are feeding them this bs about the welfare state/immigration etc. Ive seen parts of oublic services privatised at the expense of it's workers a d the standard of service, I dread to think of prisons being privatised. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ps Good on the barristers for standing up for legal aid, everyone should have access to legal representation, even the poorest in society. It started with the Poor Mans Lawyer/community law movement and I suspect that is what we are heading back to. We can't ship the convicted to Australia anymore though so the privatisation of and profit making prisons will have to return too. And that's what this goverment want to do, privatise everything, because privatising public services has been so successful so far hasn't it? It's a disgrace, peoples rights are slowly being eroded and most people cannot see it because the politicians and media are feeding them this bs about the welfare state/immigration etc. Ive seen parts of oublic services privatised at the expense of it's workers a d the standard of service, I dread to think of prisons being privatised. " Some have been in all but name. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Completely unprecedented but criminal barristers and solicitors are on strike today. Any thoughts?" They wont loose a day's pay will they. They are just refusing to attend any court cases. Contempt of court should be thrown at them. They object to the legal aid being changed, so they will have less time on the golf course. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not that goin on strike is likely to achieve much more than to piss off the people it will inconvenience because they aren't doing their job" I always found the world runs better with out the lawyers anyway at least on this side of the pond. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Grossly over primdonna's with their heads so far up their own arses they've forgotten what daylight and real life is like That's not my experience at all...generally a funny (ha ha,not peculiar) bunch that recognise both the absurdities of the law at times but also that we have the best legal system in the world. And the fact that they're not striking for themselves, speaks volumes!" They are- they want more money from the Legal Aid system | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If we don't pay barristers doing criminal work on Legal Aid a decent brief and refreshers, the good ones will concentrate on civil work where the money will be more lucrative." Exactly! We will be left with the muddle through brigade and trainees. Of course no one is ever falsely accused though so it doesn't matter. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not that goin on strike is likely to achieve much more than to piss off the people it will inconvenience because they aren't doing their job I always found the world runs better with out the lawyers anyway at least on this side of the pond." Everyone thinks the world could do without lawyers till they need one. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ps Good on the barristers for standing up for legal aid, everyone should have access to legal representation, even the poorest in society." Agreed... We are going back in time with the have and havenots... | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmm quite a hard one really . For the first time in history The Lord chancellor has no legal training and simply does not understand the legal system , if you look at all the press and radio tv interviews he's not in any of them, because if he was to go up against of the barristers he would loose hands down ,, so he sits in his tower sending out his pawns to defend his cuts , this is the first of many strikes to raise public a weariness , what people seem to forget that barristers are self unplloyed. And take instructions from layers, so they only get paid when the layers get paid . " Yes! The Lord Chancellor appointment Two barristers I know have had to put their homes up for sale and move out of London as the cash flow meant they were owed so much with nothing coming in. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If we don't pay barristers doing criminal work on Legal Aid a decent brief and refreshers, the good ones will concentrate on civil work where the money will be more lucrative. Exactly! We will be left with the muddle through brigade and trainees. Of course no one is ever falsely accused though so it doesn't matter. " Falsely or mistakenly ? | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If we don't pay barristers doing criminal work on Legal Aid a decent brief and refreshers, the good ones will concentrate on civil work where the money will be more lucrative. Exactly! We will be left with the muddle through brigade and trainees. Of course no one is ever falsely accused though so it doesn't matter. Falsely or mistakenly ?" Oooooooooooo! Nice one. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If we don't pay barristers doing criminal work on Legal Aid a decent brief and refreshers, the good ones will concentrate on civil work where the money will be more lucrative. Exactly! We will be left with the muddle through brigade and trainees. Of course no one is ever falsely accused though so it doesn't matter. Falsely or mistakenly ? Oooooooooooo! Nice one." But irrelevant if you can't afford to defend yourself, as the outcome will be the same. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If we don't pay barristers doing criminal work on Legal Aid a decent brief and refreshers, the good ones will concentrate on civil work where the money will be more lucrative. Exactly! We will be left with the muddle through brigade and trainees. Of course no one is ever falsely accused though so it doesn't matter. Falsely or mistakenly ? Oooooooooooo! Nice one. But irrelevant if you can't afford to defend yourself, as the outcome will be the same." Very true, I was trying to clarify a very pertinent point though. Juxtaposing here....if we invested more heavily in the prosecution system, maybe they wouldn't make mistakes, and defence lawyers wouldn't be needed as all convictions are safe......humour me on this one ? Its been highlighted that if they aren't paid well enough the barristers will leave criminal law for civil law ? Are the cps lawyer's paid comparative rates, why do they do it ? Genuine question. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If we don't pay barristers doing criminal work on Legal Aid a decent brief and refreshers, the good ones will concentrate on civil work where the money will be more lucrative. Exactly! We will be left with the muddle through brigade and trainees. Of course no one is ever falsely accused though so it doesn't matter. Falsely or mistakenly ? Oooooooooooo! Nice one. But irrelevant if you can't afford to defend yourself, as the outcome will be the same." Albert Haddock managed quite well | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If we don't pay barristers doing criminal work on Legal Aid a decent brief and refreshers, the good ones will concentrate on civil work where the money will be more lucrative. Exactly! We will be left with the muddle through brigade and trainees. Of course no one is ever falsely accused though so it doesn't matter. Falsely or mistakenly ? Oooooooooooo! Nice one. But irrelevant if you can't afford to defend yourself, as the outcome will be the same. Albert Haddock managed quite well " I admit I had to Google him ! | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" What about paying everyone's legal costs to be defended, then if they are found guilty after fighting a case then they have to repay it on top of court costs and fines ?" Repay it with what? As for your other question, as far as I'm aware, the pecking order if you want to earn serious dough is: Civil, Defence, CPS, in that order. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" What about paying everyone's legal costs to be defended, then if they are found guilty after fighting a case then they have to repay it on top of court costs and fines ? Repay it with what? As for your other question, as far as I'm aware, the pecking order if you want to earn serious dough is: Civil, Defence, CPS, in that order." Repay it by whatever means. We fine people in courts now when there are no apparent means for them to honour it. Yes I believe its "means" tested with respect to how much they pay at a time. We digress....I'm playing devils advocate......make those found guilty after pleading not guilty, contribute into the legal advice fund ? Why should tax payers fund people who are obviously guilty, in getting legal representation? Many in court know they're guilty but refuse to face up to their actions and fight cases knowing their guilt. Those genuinely innocent will be happy to fight a case, whilst the guilty will think again due to the added financial penalty? | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" What about paying everyone's legal costs to be defended, then if they are found guilty after fighting a case then they have to repay it on top of court costs and fines ? Repay it with what? As for your other question, as far as I'm aware, the pecking order if you want to earn serious dough is: Civil, Defence, CPS, in that order. Repay it by whatever means. We fine people in courts now when there are no apparent means for them to honour it. Yes I believe its "means" tested with respect to how much they pay at a time. We digress....I'm playing devils advocate......make those found guilty after pleading not guilty, contribute into the legal advice fund ? Why should tax payers fund people who are obviously guilty, in getting legal representation? Many in court know they're guilty but refuse to face up to their actions and fight cases knowing their guilt. Those genuinely innocent will be happy to fight a case, whilst the guilty will think again due to the added financial penalty? " Because one of the joys of trial by jury and expensive defence barristers with far more of an invested interest than their CPS adversaries, is that even if you're guilty as sin, you might just get away with it! I've sat on juries 3 times and on 2 of those occasions it was a miracle how they ever came to trial so the poor fuckers had to plead not guilty in the first place! On the other occasion it was attempted murder and I knew the guy and I knew he'd done it (it happened in the flat over the butchers shop my ex in-laws owned), so I had to declare it and leave the jury | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" What about paying everyone's legal costs to be defended, then if they are found guilty after fighting a case then they have to repay it on top of court costs and fines ? Repay it with what? As for your other question, as far as I'm aware, the pecking order if you want to earn serious dough is: Civil, Defence, CPS, in that order. Repay it by whatever means. We fine people in courts now when there are no apparent means for them to honour it. Yes I believe its "means" tested with respect to how much they pay at a time. We digress....I'm playing devils advocate......make those found guilty after pleading not guilty, contribute into the legal advice fund ? Why should tax payers fund people who are obviously guilty, in getting legal representation? Many in court know they're guilty but refuse to face up to their actions and fight cases knowing their guilt. Those genuinely innocent will be happy to fight a case, whilst the guilty will think again due to the added financial penalty? Because one of the joys of trial by jury and expensive defence barristers with far more of an invested interest than their CPS adversaries, is that even if you're guilty as sin, you might just get away with it! I've sat on juries 3 times and on 2 of those occasions it was a miracle how they ever came to trial so the poor fuckers had to plead not guilty in the first place! On the other occasion it was attempted murder and I knew the guy and I knew he'd done it (it happened in the flat over the butchers shop my ex in-laws owned), so I had to declare it and leave the jury " True, and interesting point....and anecdote. I've also seen cases dismissed where a defendant was blatantly guilty but CPS didn't wish to run it. It is what it is and until there's a better option the system works hard to get it right....both sides do. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" What about paying everyone's legal costs to be defended, then if they are found guilty after fighting a case then they have to repay it on top of court costs and fines ? Repay it with what? As for your other question, as far as I'm aware, the pecking order if you want to earn serious dough is: Civil, Defence, CPS, in that order. Repay it by whatever means. We fine people in courts now when there are no apparent means for them to honour it. Yes I believe its "means" tested with respect to how much they pay at a time. We digress....I'm playing devils advocate......make those found guilty after pleading not guilty, contribute into the legal advice fund ? Why should tax payers fund people who are obviously guilty, in getting legal representation? Many in court know they're guilty but refuse to face up to their actions and fight cases knowing their guilt. Those genuinely innocent will be happy to fight a case, whilst the guilty will think again due to the added financial penalty? Because one of the joys of trial by jury and expensive defence barristers with far more of an invested interest than their CPS adversaries, is that even if you're guilty as sin, you might just get away with it! I've sat on juries 3 times and on 2 of those occasions it was a miracle how they ever came to trial so the poor fuckers had to plead not guilty in the first place! On the other occasion it was attempted murder and I knew the guy and I knew he'd done it (it happened in the flat over the butchers shop my ex in-laws owned), so I had to declare it and leave the jury True, and interesting point....and anecdote. I've also seen cases dismissed where a defendant was blatantly guilty but CPS didn't wish to run it. It is what it is and until there's a better option the system works hard to get it right....both sides do." Precisely, which is why, for all it's faults and the lynch mob mentality you tend to find on pretty much any forum you go on, it's the best judicial system in the world. The lynch mobs love the American system because emotions are allowed to be bought into play (hence the Jackson's being able to try and sue his promotors...it wouldn't have even got to court in this country as it was obvious that in their eyes, the doctor they had hired was competent, hence no grounds for a negligence claim), whereas here, the law is the law. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"until you mentioned it no one knew, just shows how little they will be missed. It is on the national news. I didn't post that they were planning to strike last month or last week because I didn't expect anyone to know about it then." Never had a TV or Radio, and certainly don't buy papers. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If we don't pay barristers doing criminal work on Legal Aid a decent brief and refreshers, the good ones will concentrate on civil work where the money will be more lucrative. Exactly! We will be left with the muddle through brigade and trainees. Of course no one is ever falsely accused though so it doesn't matter. Falsely or mistakenly ?" A nice point. I like it. As to your paying if found guilty, the onus is still on proving guilt and the payment could well be prison. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In one sense I think it's crazy to reduce spend on legal aid. It'll definitely come back to bite us. In another sense, any business or industry whose entire income depends on the whim of government is eventually going to get bitten." As we see with the NHS, prisons, social services... | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Post new Message to Thread |
back to top |