Comments on: Deterred from justice: The criminal bar’s darkest hour

By: And How Many Are Born In NHS Hospitals?

And How Many Are Born In NHS Hospitals? — Thu, 22 Sep 2022 09:30:29 +0000

In reply to LOL. Acting on emotion because you want barristers who are your friends/partner to like you more is not a reason for the public to support a 25% pay rise.

By: LOL

LOL — Thu, 22 Sep 2022 00:47:06 +0000

In reply to Anon.

Congratulations, Anon, you’ve reached the pinnacle of being a troll. Whilst I generally cannot be bothered spending more than 2 minutes looking at various statistics for you; some of these suggest that about a third of the population has a criminal record. Now if you take into consideration the ever-decreasing police force, the increase in the seriousness of youth offending, delays in reporting, and a bunch of other factors – I’m sure the number of people that DO eventually require a criminal barrister increase significantly. There are no projections in sight to say that all crime will soon be eliminated.
As for your nonsensical comment re how barristers think they are better than everyone else – do I sense a grudge for never getting pupilage there? Just so I’m clear, you’re saying that because barristers are “professional debaters” means that everything they say must be a lie? Wouldn’t that apply to every legal professional then?

By: SourLemon

SourLemon — Wed, 21 Sep 2022 23:30:25 +0000

@Stuck in a long queue, tell me you’ve no idea how the criminal justice system actually works without telling me you’ve no idea how the system works. Speak to anyone at all who prosecutes or defends and then tell me how things take too long.. Daily trial listings are reaching ridiculous levels at some of the bigger courts. Everything is being rushed, there’s less and less leeway given to either side to try and resolve any issues, the justice system is just a massive conveyor belt as is, getting worse day by day.
You say the system needs streamlining to reduce the no. of publicly funded counsel? How exactly would you achieve that? By reducing crime rates? Brilliant-send your ideas to the gov., I’m sure they’d love to hear from you. Or do you think solicitors should take over advocacy as well as doing all the paperwork, managing daily caseloads, answering calls/emails, attending police stations, managing targets etc?
As for your argument regarding “lower income only in the first 3 years of tenancy”-where are you getting this from? Even if that was the case (which it absolutely isn’t), why should any professional agree or be content with working all hours of the day, completely foregoing any right to a personal life, being continuously stressed and then being barely able to survive on that income?

By: Anon

Anon — Tue, 20 Sep 2022 10:53:27 +0000

In reply to Henry.

You are completely right.

When they claim “B-b-but, but you MAY need access to a criminal lawyer one day!!!”, they omit the fact that the vast majority of people or their families won’t in fact ever need a CRIMINAL lawyer. Most people in the UK aren’t involved in crime and don’t find themselves becoming accidentally involved in it.

In contrast, how many people reading this and their families WILL need or have extensively needed NHS help?? When have criminal barristers ever supported life-saving , educated nurses to get an increase in pay? They couldn’t care less because they really do think they are ‘better’ than people working within other professions.

You are dealing with people who are literally professional debaters. But that doesn’t mean that their complaints are true.

By: Henry

Henry — Mon, 19 Sep 2022 12:48:47 +0000

For my part, for what it’s worth, I understand completely and agree with the big picture effect on the system etc., but like, I imagine, the vast majority of people, it’s hard to sympathise too much with this dispute, set in the context of the plight of others and the state of the country generally. Compared to bin men, railway workers, health workers and so many others, who could care about barristers? In how many disputes of the past have they been out in force in support of other workers? Sure, the system in which they work, in part, has its downside but what about the privileges, the access to the media, those people in high places supporting them, their positioning at the core of the Establishment, with powerful families and contacts often on their side? Of course, the younger ones have to struggle like everyone else but why should they be more privileged or advantaged and be able to buy property and suchlike any more than others when, over time, unlike many others, rewards may well come to them, particular, especially the minority who are already rich from having done nothing? The published data bear this out. The younger ones, over the past 20 years, have gone in with their eyes open. They could have become binmen but calculated that they could do better, which they probably will. They could even have chosen other branches of law. I don’t believe that they are all societal heroes and protectors of the poor but rather they have placed their bets, perhaps unwisely, in the expectation of rewards. I think we should hope for a fair outcome for them, no better or worse than for others, and if so, hope that they will be on the barricades for others in future. I am not optimistic, though. As the government for which many of them will have voted reminds us constantly, these are most difficult times, and we have to prioritise. I hope they find their rightful place on the ladder.

By: Grump

Grump — Fri, 16 Sep 2022 15:56:17 +0000

In reply to Sneez.

Because it’s not representative of the normal everyday workings of the criminal justice system! Do you actually think most domestic abuse cases take up three weeks of court time?

If your point is “judges allow too much time for cases in general” then provide some proper evidence of this from across the court system, not the Daily Mail-level observation of “that bloke from the footy’s case took ages, that’s what wrong with this country”

By: Sneez

Sneez — Fri, 16 Sep 2022 15:01:04 +0000

In reply to Grump. No, you tell us why 3 weeks for matters like the footballer's trial isn't.

By: Grump

Grump — Fri, 16 Sep 2022 14:09:55 +0000

In reply to Stuck in a long queue. You spend a day in the public gallery at your local magistrate’s court and tell me the process is “indulgent”

By: Stuck in a long queue

Stuck in a long queue — Fri, 16 Sep 2022 12:03:13 +0000

The data sets used as PR spin for this alleged “crisis” are skewed by only referring to the first three years when after that increased and continued payments for concluded payments result in a higher income stream.

The criminal justice system needs streamlining as trials simply take far too long and are too indulgent. One relatively minor domestic abuse trial involving a celebrity went on for three weeks recently, which shows the problem. Creating a 21st century system would free up courts and reduce the numbers of barristers that need to be funded publicly.

By: FFS

FFS — Fri, 16 Sep 2022 11:39:34 +0000

I can find articles in online archive of ‘The Times’ that predicted the demise of the criminal bar 20 years ago, but evidently it’s still around. How many applicants apply for each pupillage and tenancy place again?

Remember kids – a barrister’s job is to persuade. It is of course within their interests to claim that they live in ‘poverty’ and that anyone who challenges these claims is a ‘hater’.

By: Anonn

Anonn — Fri, 16 Sep 2022 10:34:13 +0000

Add Criminal Solicitors to the article.

Serious lack of junior talent qualifying into general crime work.

By: Anon

Anon — Fri, 16 Sep 2022 08:45:11 +0000

I’m skeptical of there being a recruitment crisis. I’d welcome the views from the bar, but I still expect it’s incredibly competitive. Were hardly talking about thousands of nursing positions that are left unfilled.

By: Anon

Anon — Fri, 16 Sep 2022 08:37:11 +0000

I’d be interested to hear from criminal barristers involved in recruiting pupils. Have application numbers dropped? Are pupillages being left unfilled? And who is taking them: people who are financially independent, or are ordinary people still applying?