The Good News Only - thread...

[icowden]

Having said that, I rarely read his stuff because the first few times I did, I knew it was rubbish.

Good to see that you have studied the Secret Barrister in depth before forming an opinion and not just tossed off your usual prejudiced guff. Remind me again how writing for Murdoch qualifies you to know anything at all about the law and how it is broken (unless of course it is how to break it)?

If you actually took some time to read Nothing but the Truth: The Memoir of an Unlikely Lawyer, you would have realised for example that the Secret Barrister is most likely a woman. It may surprise you to learn that women can be Solicitors and Barristers too!

In that book she gives a lot of detail about her experience becoming a Barrister, the prejudice she has experienced and how her opinions were changed as a result of the people she has encountered.

 

[icowden]

Still, he's not the first person to establish a constituency by posting crap on the internet.

Indeed. In that field, we must bow to your expertise.

 

[Pale Rider]

and not just tossed off your usual prejudiced guff.

It was a case of the 'Secret Barrister', who probably doesn't know where Teesside Crown Court is, v two experienced barristers who handled the case.

Which would you take?

The answer is not the one you like the best, it's the one most likely to understand the matter.

Then there's me, like it or not I spent 30 odd years knocking around the courts, I sat through the case, and I also thought the SB was full of crap.

So, honestly, what is likely to be the correct position?

Your usual unpleasant remarks about journalism are just that, sour and a complete waste of space.

What on earth has your tired, hackneyed opinions on The Sun got to do with the SB?

Similarly, your snippy remarks about me and women are just moronic.

Yeah, I never knew there were male and female barristers.

SB lost the right to be referred to by she/he/its correct gender when she/he/it went down the anonymous route.

Could be half man/half biscuit for all I care.

That column is largely derided/ignored by the hack barristers with decades of experience.

Which should tell you something, but you've already decided from your position of ignorance it must be spot on.

Indeed. In that field, we must bow to your expertise.

Hardly, the SB has managed to build a following and, probably, a small income.

I just do this for the fun of it.

 

[newfhouse]

Could be half man/half biscuit for all I care.

Please stop it.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Not in very words, and it's likely only you would be interested.

As a brief example, there was a case at Teesside Crown with a few legal issues which the secret barrister commented on.

Me, who sat through most of the case, and the two opposing barristers who sat through all of it, all thought the comments were a load of cobblers.

They were clearly made by someone with little knowledge of the trial process, the law, and how barristers work in the real world.

But other than that, it was an expert analysis.

Very few of his general remarks on the criminal justice system make much sense to those involved in it, or me as a long term observer.

Having said that, I rarely read his stuff because the first few times I did, I knew it was rubbish.

Link to the piece in his blog/book?

 

[Pale Rider]

Link to the piece in his blog/book?

No chance, it was a few years ago, I can hardly remember the case, let alone exactly what SB's take on it was.

At the time, it was a bit of a novelty to have one of your cases commented on by SB.

But it was dismissed very quickly by the barristers so there was no in depth analysis - not worth it as the comments were so obviously off-beam.

Which is not to say the quality of the commentary has not improved in recent years, but it is true to say SB got off to a very poor start with members of the Bar generally.

 

[icowden]

It was a case of the 'Secret Barrister', who probably doesn't know where Teesside Crown Court is, v two experienced barristers who handled the case.

so your assertion is that the Secret Barrister commented on a case which wasn't public, held in a court that they couldn't find?

The answer is not the one you like the best, it's the one most likely to understand the matter.

The answer is that basing knowledge of a Barrister on a single commentary presumably in a tweet, is possibly a bit sweeping and fails to recognise that many Barristers disagree with each other. SecretBarrister is followed and retweeted by some fairly eminent Barristers and Legal Experts however (Jessica Simor KC, Adam Wagner, Steve Peers (Professor of EU Law and Human Rights) , David Muttering KC , Chris Daw, @CrimeGirl, etc so they must be doing something right.

Your usual unpleasant remarks about journalism are just that, sour and a complete waste of space.

I wasn't remarking about journalism in general, just your seeming approach to it.

Similarly, your snippy remarks about me and women are just moronic.

And yet your first thought is that the Secret Barrister must be a man

Yeah, I never knew there were male and female barristers.

Happy to enlighten you.

That column is largely derided/ignored by the hack barristers with decades of experience.

And you know all of them and have conducted a poll?

Which should tell you something, but you've already decided from your position of ignorance it must be spot on.

Well, I worked for a Solicitor as a paralegal for 5 years and have read all three of the Secret Barristers books and follow them on twitter.
I feel like I'm not entirely ignorant.

Hardly, the SB has managed to build a following and, probably, a small income.

They have half a million followers and have published 3 books, one of which was a Sunday Times Best Seller and remained in the top ten best sellers for more than a year won an award and was shortlisted for two more. People prepared to post positive public reviews of that book include the Daily Mail, Sunday Times, The Times, The Guardian, Geoffrey Robertson QC, The Criminal Bar Association and several MPs. The Secret Barrister has been named independent blogger of the year twice.

I just do this for the fun of it.

We can tell from the level of in depth research you do.

 

[Pale Rider]

so your assertion is that the Secret Barrister commented on a case which wasn't public, held in a court that they couldn't find?

WTF are you on about now?

It was a routine case at Teesside Crown, albeit one that attracted some attention at the time.

They have half a million followers and have published 3 books, one of which was a Sunday Times Best Seller and remained in the top ten best sellers for more than a year won an award and was shortlisted for two more. People prepared to post positive public reviews of that book include the Daily Mail, Sunday Times, The Times, The Guardian, Geoffrey Robertson QC, The Criminal Bar Association and several MPs. The Secret Barrister has been named independent blogger of the year twice.

OK, OK, he has managed to garner a large income from posting cobblers on the internet.

That only raises my grim admiration for him.

None of which changes the fact that those inside the tent have little regard for SB.

Of course, his stuff is expressly aimed at people who know nothing about the criminal justice system.

Make of that what you will.

But it's just the same as when I see commentary on journalism.

I can instantly tell those who know what they are talking about from those who don't.

 

[icowden]

OK, OK, he has managed to garner a large income from posting cobblers on the internet.
That only raises my grim admiration for him.

Her. She is most likely a woman. CLues in the actual books from other people referring to the writer as "her" and that the image on thebook shows a woman's colarette. Also in depth knowledge of the way that women are treated as second class citizens by chambers.

None of which changes the fact that those inside the tent have little regard for SB.

As I asked - just how many people have you interviewed?

Of course, his stuff is expressly aimed at people who know nothing about the criminal justice system.

Yes, to educate them about the Criminal Justice System by providing information about the Criminal Justice System in which they work.

 

[Deleted member 49]

Great win...

View: https://twitter.com/EveryonesStars/status/1686001939450920962?t=dE4_CWpRpPtfSVg3J8CrgQ&s=19

 

[mudsticks]

Great win...

View: https://twitter.com/EveryonesStars/status/1686001939450920962?t=dE4_CWpRpPtfSVg3J8CrgQ&s=19

This has made a lot of people I know (including me) very happy.

A bit like the equivalent of your team winning at the football, or summat like that I guess.

A victory for common sense , and 'outdoor recreation' too 🍀💃🌳🏕️

 

[Deleted member 159]

Three legal practices conducting allegedly illegal actions with asylum applications have had all their paperwork seized aswell as all the clients bank accounts.

Effectively shutting them down

Now that is good news-'well done the Daily Mail for lifting the lid on the network of cesspit lawyers

I bet there arre many more facilitating illegal immigrants access into the UK

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...hree-solicitors-firms-accused-in-asylum-sting

 

[newfhouse]

Three legal practices conducting allegedly illegal actions with asylum applications have had all their paperwork seized aswell as all the clients bank accounts.

Nobody supports fraud.

Now that is good news-'well done the Daily Mail for lifting the lid on the network of cesspit lawyers

You’re going to be shocked when you discover what lawyers will do for billionaires.

 

[Deleted member 159]

Nobody supports fraud.


You’re going to be shocked when you discover what lawyers will do for billionaires.

I know what they do, that needs to be tackled also. I knew a Russian fella who worked arranging the affairs of billionaires from Russia to relocate to UK, (talking 5 years back). He left due to the vast amounts of illegal requests from these people.

 

[Deleted member 159]

Nobody supports fraud.

I'm awaiting the defensive posts ,'oh they're poor helpless people fleeing oppression'.

When in reality almost all of them are illegal economic immigrants