cartoon

















IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.





Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Forums
Messageboards
Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?
Your Views Messageboard
Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"
Name:
Subject:
Boardcode:
B I U S Sub Sup Size Color Spoiler Hide ul ol li left center right Quote Code Img URL  
Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons
B) :( :) :laugh:
:cheer: ;) :P :angry:
:unsure: :ohmy: :huh: :dry:
:lol: :silly: :blink: :blush:
:kiss: :woohoo: :side: :S
More Smilies
 Enter code here   

Topic History of: Brilliant open letter by 4000 criminal barristers
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
Author Message
JK2006 I tend to be so delighted when anybody agrees that the system is broken that I don't worry if they may not be seeing all the reasons. The cuts in Legal Aid is clearly one of many reasons. It is not for Barristers to highlight that the law needs changing (one person's word being sufficient "evidence" - a disgrace). Nor that police behaviour has stretched beyond legal assistance into possibly criminal conspiracy. Nor that the CPS needs a massive overhaul (as indeed does the CCRC). But at least one other serious problem - the inaffordability of legal help, as illustrated by the Kato Harris decision - is raised by a very credible association.
John Marsh Randall has made an apt observation. I hope along with others including pete and JK that this pitiful exercise will prompt a positive reaction in spite of the usual money motivation.

Moreover, the article is "evidence" of what I have observed that 4000 barristers, highly trained, with bookselves full of nicely bound books are nonetheless useless. As there is no substance to the real "legal" and "justice" issues apart from the barristers getting more money to spend more time been useless. (There are exceptions of course like Barbara Hewson)
The article confirms to me why I constantly read about useless defenses that do not ask the right questions and challenge the system where they are prevented from doing so.
Randall pete wrote:

I find I'm rather more inclined to agree with Randall.


Always a sound strategy.
MWTW Started by Mark Willy John Thomas. Setting up profiles of under 16s to lure in the weak taken on by the MET with dedicated teams of officers spending days laying in wait for the pervert talking to the 14 year old police officer and now left to the vigilantes to finish it off the end being deaths from wrongly accused to one of the vigilantie getting knifed etc by said pervert.

The man banged up for images the same images that the guy in the next cell is banged up for and the next and half the wing so get rid of the images where they are hosted and that will stop the downloaders.

Wandsworth VPU held 360 mostly sex offenders at any one time the Sex offender Register is soon to top 100 and the ppu officers looking after them are being cut but lucky for the police forces they do not have to look after a
Murderer register
Arsonist register
Mugger register
Burglers register
Fraudsters register
Drink driving register
I guess there could be more and many on the SOR have been falsely imprisoned.
Wake up the bogie man is not in the house.
pete I hope you're right about the implication, JH, but I could detect not the slightest hint of healthy scepticism about the UK's latest, prolonged sex panic.

I find I'm rather more inclined to agree with Randall. I do, however, support the reversal of the brutal cuts to legal aid brought in by that vandal Chris Grayling when he was "Justice Minister."

There wasn't the merest hint of support for the crucial points raised by Randall:

... what about the other factors in law, practice and procedure that aim to hamstring defences and rubber-stamp prosecutions? Not a peep about any of those.