Page 1 of Lefty Do good lawyers

General Forum

Lefty Do good lawyers

Snaps (Elite) posted this on Wednesday, 7th October 2020, 10:11

After Johnson's latest headline grabbing attempt I'd suggest taking a few minutes to read this twitter thread from The Secret Barrister

Snaps



My new Flash Fiction blog. All my own work
500ish




I am not young enough to know everything.

RE: Lefty Do good lawyers

alfie noakes (Elite) posted this on Wednesday, 7th October 2020, 11:05

Yes, as Johnson and his government of None of the Talents are failing miserably in the real world, he relies on invoking his culture-war army to fight the imaginary war against, well, anything that might be a barrier to whatever it is he's trying to achieve (any ideas anyone?).

Attack the media, attack the deliberately underfunded judiciary and set 'the will of the people' on them to give yourself fake legitimacy. Every despotic regime in history has done exactly this.

RE: Lefty Do good lawyers

Si Wooldridge (Reviewer) posted this on Wednesday, 7th October 2020, 11:17

This is a difficult one for me as I can see both sides of the argument, which is essentially what lawyers do.

There are certainly activist lawyers out there and unscrupulous ones that are just out to make a quick buck, see the now defunct Public Interest Lawyers and Phil Shiner.

That said, I also strongly believe in the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, a concept that appears to be on the wane in social media circles.

Both sides have a point, but I think the truth is somewhere in the middle...

---------

Si Wooldridge
Reviewer

http://synth.myreviewer.com

RE: Lefty Do good lawyers

Snaps (Elite) posted this on Wednesday, 7th October 2020, 12:27

Quote:
Si Wooldridge says...
"Both sides have a point, but I think the truth is somewhere in the middle..."

Regardless of sides you have to agree that denying justice for up to 4 years and leaving the system as it is represents failure on a massive scale.


Snaps



My new Flash Fiction blog. All my own work
500ish




I am not young enough to know everything.

RE: Lefty Do good lawyers

Si Wooldridge (Reviewer) posted this on Wednesday, 7th October 2020, 16:32

Quote:
Snaps says...
"Regardless of sides you have to agree that denying justice for up to 4 years and leaving the system as it is represents failure on a massive scale."

I would agree, but as it's a trial there's also a possibility that the accused will be acquitted.

Regardless I agree that backlogs in cases are a failure, but a failure for who?  Read some of the comments on this article:

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/new-figures-show-criminal-court-backlog-has-surged-past-500000/5105614.article

HMCTS has a track record of being technologically incompetent and badly organised, I know this from my experiences in applying to be a Magistrate (including court observations) and from talking to others who are serving Magistrates.

This doesn't excuse HM Government at all, by the way, but we also know how bad MoJ is perceived to be - wasn't it Jack Straw who said many years ago that it was unfit for purpose?

---------

Si Wooldridge
Reviewer

http://synth.myreviewer.com

RE: Lefty Do good lawyers

Robee J Shepherd (undefined) posted this on Wednesday, 7th October 2020, 22:00

If something isn't fit for purpose, starving it of money doesn't fix it. Populist governments appeal purely to what the people want, but people are idiots.

This is just a typical cycle we are in, where government starves something they are responsible of cash for year after year, and then when it's crumbling jump in and increase the spending to what it was before they cut it, then claim they are making a major investment.

The trouble is this ends up costing the public purse more than if they had just maintained spending in the first place.


Editor
MYREVIEWER.COM

My Flickr Photostream

RE: Lefty Do good lawyers

Si Wooldridge (Reviewer) posted this on Thursday, 8th October 2020, 07:01

Quote:
Robee J Shepherd says...
"If something isn't fit for purpose, starving it of money doesn't fix it. Populist governments appeal purely to what the people want, but people are idiots."

Whilst this is true, I'm not sure that 'people' have said they want the courts starved of money.  If anything they want people locked up for longer to keep their communities safe for offences they consider heinous whilst not locking people up for things like non-payment of the TV licence.

That being said, the answer isn't always more cash, it's about how that cash is spent.  I suspect the majority of the issues with the courts stems back to ending of legal aid for all, which was one of those things that was brought in to stop frivolous lawsuits and clogging up the courts.

The law of unintended consequences, my favourite saying, has meant more than that was affected.

I agree that the courts, the bedrock of our societal approach to justice, need funding properly but they also need to both reform and follow sentencing guidelines that reflect societal thinking.




---------

Si Wooldridge
Reviewer

http://synth.myreviewer.com

RE: Lefty Do good lawyers

Jitendar Canth (Reviewer) posted this on Thursday, 8th October 2020, 07:55

I’d rather the courts reflect the law and justice than the fickle whims of society. That ways lies miscarriage of justice.

===========================
Jitendar Canth

Quote:
"I thought what I`d do was, I`d pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes."


Site Reviewer at DVD Reviewer & MyReviewer

Carving out a niche with a pneumatic drill at Anime @ MyReviewer.com

RE: Lefty Do good lawyers

Si Wooldridge (Reviewer) posted this on Friday, 9th October 2020, 05:31

Quote:
Jitendar Canth says...
"I’d rather the courts reflect the law and justice than the fickle whims of society. That ways lies miscarriage of justice."

I think we can agree on that.

For me it's about ensuring that those who are accused of breaking the law are proven beyond reasonable doubt to be guilty and that their sentence reflects the seriousness of the crime.  It's this latter, I think, where the Judiciary are letting themselves down in some cases - you only have to look at the outcome of the Andrew Harper case to see this, although as with everything in law it's about interpretation and argument.

I don't believe in detention without charge.  Remember the Blair government's attempt to increase to 42 days for terror offences?  The original intention was 90 days, leading to his first bloody nose in the form of a Parliamentary defeat in 2005.  That's wrong in my book.  You want to detain someone, you charge them.  Leaving them in limbo is not justice in my book.

I don't believe in the death penalty either.

---------

Si Wooldridge
Reviewer

http://synth.myreviewer.com

Go back to General Forum threads, or All Forum threads