I agree that in some cases lawyers are losing out on legal aid costs that were taken as a 'given' many years ago(it's not the only industry/business that is subject to cost cutting/streamlining measures).But generally when a case gets underway then fees can and will be charged.I wouldn't imagine for 1 minute that the Q.C representing this somewhat dangerous miscreant will be anywhere near out of pocket come the end of this trial?
fair enough. I'll take your word for it. Maybe the justice system might just work for 99% of the population and not the 1.
The criteria for legal aid has changed vastly in recent years.Years ago it was more or less assumed you'd be awarded,nowadays you're more than likely to be rejected based on income etc.. One of the biggest bug bears that I am aware of (certainly up here) is when a solicitor/lawyer turns up to represent you(on legal aid) and the case is put back to another date due to the court not being able to cope(Glasgow Sheriff Court being a prime example).The solicitor/lawyer can't claim anything!!!I personally know of a case,nothing serious,that was put back 7 times.
Can't disagree with any of that I'm just responding to Barca's original claim viz '...and shyster lawyers getting,rich on legal aid.'
We're becoming poorer (and not just monetarily) as a nation year on year - very soon we'll all get the justice that we can afford.
I wasn't referring to all lawyers, just the ones who rake in a fortune off legal aid defending rapists, terrorists, drug peddlers and murderers who should be kicked out instead of having hundreds of thousands spent on them when deserving cases don't.
Well, if that's not judgemental... I'm sure you meant to say alleged rapists, drug peddlers and murderers. And where would, for example, a Hull born and bred alleged criminal be kicked out to? Brid? And what about the supposed 'deserving' cases who turn out to be guilty?
Or the ones who ‘should be strung up’ who turn out to be innocent? Whatever penalty might be appropriate to punish people convicted of serious crimes that we all find abhorrent, suggesting that people accused of those crimes don’t deserve legal representation is a step onto a very slippery slope. The system is a long way from perfect, but the ‘deserving cases’ are the innocent ones, and you only decide that after going through a fair trial.
Prosecution really gone at him today. He’s emphasising his clean record prior to these offences too, must be a good defence tactic. Cos usually it comes out afterwards about past offending. Planting that seed in the jury’s mind. He’s got a fetish and needs help!!! Hmmmm Again it comes back to the coppers tho They shoulda been flooding the area Openly masturbating in Alexandra rd ffs it’s just across road from where he lived!
On their own, in their car? Mostly johns and rapists. I think by this guy's own words he is a rapist at the very least. If she was too drunk to barely walk, she was too drunk to consent. Even if he didn't kill her, he took advantage of her, raped her and left her on her own.
A few odd comments in this thread about defence solicitors. Everyone should have access to a competent defence. Police often do a very half arsed job, as do the prosecution, so it is vital everyone has a defence in order to keep system on its toes. If you just start throwing people in jail who “probably did it” the amount of innocent people going to prison will increase rapidly and the standard of policing and the courts will go rapidly downhill.