Shamima Begum. Should she get legal aid from Britain ? Watch

Blue_Cow
  • Volunteer Team
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#41
Report 6 days ago
#41
(Original post by CoolCavy)
What boggles my mind is that there are solicitors and lawyers willing to defend people like her, like on 24 hours in police custardy where they have people defending murderers and pedophiles. Very unscrupulous, imagine having to come up with some legitimate argument for what these people do
For barristers anyway, there's a principle called the cab rank rule. It would be deeply irresponsible and downright dangerous to criticise whoever gets appointed as the advocate for Shamima Begum.

Everyone deserves legal representation, regardless of the crime they are accused of committing.

Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat.
2
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#42
Report 6 days ago
#42
(Original post by LeapingLucy)
Everyone has the right to legal representation. When you start withdrawing it from certain people based on the offences they are *alleged* to have committed, you'll find yourself on an extremely slippery slope. From withdrawing legal representation for murder, it's only one step to attempted murder, then only another to grievous bodily harm, then to a less serious assault. These rights have to be universal. Once you withdraw it from one person, then everybody is vulnerable, because categories can be changed.

Besides, these people *have not yet been found guilty*. We live in a country where you are innocent until proven guilty. If you say that somebody can't have a lawyer because of the offence they are alleged to have committed, you are effectively finding them guilty without a trial. That's illegal under international law.
CoolCavy was only expressing her opinion of the criminal defence lawyers who choose to undertake criminal defence work for the most heinous of clients.
She was not disputing the right of all persons to instruct a lawyer or put their defence before the courts, merely criticizing some defence lawyers who choose to make a career out of representing the most horrifying and high profile of individuals.
0
reply
Callicious
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#43
Report 6 days ago
#43
As much as I hate the woman for what she seems to have done, it's a fact that everyone should be able to be put up against the law, regardless of what they have or haven't done. If they can't fight for themselves, legally speaking, then a lawyer or some representative of some sort should be provided to fight for them.

If her parents are glad to pay, then kudos. If not, then someone should be assigned to help them.
1
reply
Andrew97
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#44
Report 6 days ago
#44
(Original post by CoolCavy)
What boggles my mind is that there are solicitors and lawyers willing to defend people like her, like on 24 hours in police custardy where they have people defending murderers and pedophiles. Very unscrupulous, imagine having to come up with some legitimate argument for what these people do
Insert joke about lawyers and money.
1
reply
LeapingLucy
  • Forum Helper
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#45
Report 6 days ago
#45
(Original post by Andrew97)
Doesn’t her family already have a lawyer?
I presume they have a solicitor - maybe the legal aid is to pay for a barrister/barristers?
0
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#46
Report 6 days ago
#46
(Original post by Blue_Cow)
For barristers anyway, there's a principle called the cab rank rule. It would be deeply irresponsible and downright dangerous to criticise whoever gets appointed as the advocate for Shamima Begum.

Everyone deserves legal representation, regardless of the crime they are accused of committing.

Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat.
The solicitors acting for isis-wife's parents are getting plenty of criticism and the firm is on the receiving side of quite a bit of hostility within legal circles.
The defence barrister who appeared behalf of the finsbury park terrorist murderer at trial was subjected to widespread public ridicule after her line of questioning. Even fellow barristers who had some sympathy with her predicament made jokes about her instruction being a poisoned chalice.
0
reply
LeapingLucy
  • Forum Helper
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#47
Report 6 days ago
#47
(Original post by londonmyst)
CoolCavy was only expressing her opinion of the criminal defence lawyers who choose to undertake criminal defence work for the most heinous of clients.
She was not disputing the right of all persons to instruct a lawyer or put their defence before the courts, merely criticizing some defence lawyers who choose to make a career out of representing the most horrifying and high profile of individuals.
I am aware of that, but by criticising the lawyers who represent these people you are implicitly saying that you do not believe they have the right to legal representation.

I have family friends who are defence lawyers. They do not seek to excuse the crimes their clients are alleged to have committed - their responsibility is to help their client navigate the complexities of our legal system and often that will involve trying to persuade their client to plead guilty.

Without defence lawyers, we have no justice system. They're doing an extremely difficult job, and criticism of their own morals is wrong.
Last edited by LeapingLucy; 6 days ago
0
reply
The RAR
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#48
Report 6 days ago
#48
(Original post by LeapingLucy)
I am aware of that, but by criticising the lawyers who represent these people you are implicitly saying that you do not believe they have the right to legal representation.

I have family friends who are defence lawyers. They do not seek to excuse the crimes their clients are alleged to have committed - their responsibility is to help their client navigate the complexities of our legal system and often that will involve trying to persuade their client to plead guilty.

Without defence lawyers, we have no justice system. They're doing an extremely difficult job, and criticism of their own morals is wrong.
Precisely why I am so happy I did not choose a career in law, not only is it very hard to become a lawyer these days with so many people doing law degrees but having your name associated with terrorists and paedophiles for the rest of your career is just living in hell.
1
reply
Royal Oak
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#49
Report 6 days ago
#49
(Original post by LeapingLucy)
I am aware of that, but by criticising the lawyers who represent these people you are implicitly saying that you do not believe they have the right to legal representation.

I have family friends who are defence lawyers. They do not seek to excuse the crimes their clients are alleged to have committed - their responsibility is to help their client navigate the complexities of our legal system and often that will involve trying to persuade their client to plead guilty.

Without defence lawyers, we have no justice system. They're doing an extremely difficult job, and criticism of their own morals is wrong.
Being a defence lawyer seems like one of the hardest of jobs
1
reply
CoolCavy
  • Forum Helper
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#50
Report 6 days ago
#50
(Original post by londonmyst)
CoolCavy was only expressing her opinion of the criminal defence lawyers who choose to undertake criminal defence work for the most heinous of clients.
She was not disputing the right of all persons to instruct a lawyer or put their defence before the courts, merely criticizing some defence lawyers who choose to make a career out of representing the most horrifying and high profile of individuals.
Exactly obviously she has the right to having legal aid but defending people like her is not something I could live with myself for. I don't know why we can't criticise people who make up lies and tell murderers etc what to say to avoid being charged. If anyone else did that it would be perverting the course of justice.
People in police interviews on TV tell their clients to say no comment to the questions, if that isn't obstructive I don't know what is. What's worse is when they leave the room with said client and come back with some concocted story.
Last edited by CoolCavy; 6 days ago
0
reply
inconspicuous_x
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#51
Report 6 days ago
#51
Yes, because I believe the country should deal with her actions and not someone else. Stripping her citizenship was not a good decision as it will make the country look silly if they let her in after.
Think of it like this, if a British citizen went to America to commit mass murder, he will be sent back to HIS country so he can deal with the consequences there, same with a rapist, etc.
Therefore I believe Shamima Begum should have been allowed back to serve her sentence.
0
reply
The RAR
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#52
Report 6 days ago
#52
(Original post by Royal Oak)
Being a defence lawyer seems like one of the hardest of jobs
Just imagine having to give up your family time so you can waste your energy and breath in court to defend a paedophile, it is indeed a very demanding and hard job. I must give some bravery to the people doing this job
2
reply
TCA2b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#53
Report 6 days ago
#53
Nah.
0
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#54
Report 6 days ago
#54
(Original post by LeapingLucy)
I am aware of that, but by criticising the lawyers who represent these people you are implicitly saying that you do not believe they have the right to legal representation.

I have family friends who are defence lawyers. They do not seek to excuse the crimes their clients are alleged to have committed - their responsibility is to help their client navigate the complexities of our legal system and often that will involve trying to persuade their client to plead guilty.

Without defence lawyers, we have no justice system. They're doing an extremely difficult job, and criticism of their own morals is wrong.
No, that is not what CoolCavy stated and not the opinion that she holds

I am committed to the provisions of magna carta about denying justice to nobody.
I grew up surrounded by criminal defence/ immigration lawyers, activists and political revolutionaries.
I also have plenty of criticisms of the conduct of specific individual lawyers who I have known since childhood and have much firsthand experience of.

I know plenty of professional people in the legal profession who actively seek out the most controversial and downright horrifying of clients- for ideological reasons, to establish a high profile professional reputation in relation to a specific type of criminal defence caseload or as a stepping stone for a political career.
For example- serial rape cases, paedophile murder cases, alleged abusive spouse murders, human rights challenges to prison conditions/sentences of convicted criminals who acknowledge their guilt.
0
reply
CoolCavy
  • Forum Helper
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#55
Report 6 days ago
#55
(Original post by londonmyst)
No, that is not what CoolCavy stated and not the opinion that she holds

I am committed to the provisions of magna carta about denying justice to nobody.
I grew up surrounded by criminal defence/ immigration lawyers, activists and political revolutionaries.
I also have plenty of criticisms of the conduct of specific individual lawyers who I have known since childhood and have much firsthand experience of.

I know plenty of professional people in the legal profession who actively seek out the most controversial and downright horrifying of clients- for ideological reasons, to establish a high profile professional reputation in relation to a specific type of criminal defence caseload or as a stepping stone for a political career.
For example- serial rape cases, paedophile murder cases, alleged abusive spouse murders, human rights challenges to prison conditions/sentences of convicted criminals who acknowledge their guilt.
Thanks Londonmyst
Admittedly I have no had much exposure to all these things so my opinions are not set in stone obviously but from what I have seen on TV shows and things the defenders of the client just seem to make the lives of the police interviewer more difficult than it already is to get justice for the victim. Doesn't mean they shouldn't have an aider but it's not a career I would feel comfortable doing as I don't think it's morally right to defend these violent individuals.
0
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#56
Report 6 days ago
#56
(Original post by CoolCavy)
Exactly obviously she has the right to having legal aid but defending people like her is not something I could live with myself for. I don't know why we can't criticise people who make up lies and tell murderers etc what to say to avoid being charged. If anyone else did that it would be perverting the course of justice.
People in police interviews on TV tell their clients to say no comment to the questions, if that isn't obstructive I don't know what is. What's worse is when they leave the room with said client and come back with some concocted story.
I agree with a lot of what you say.

There are very strict rules about the services that a lawyer (solicitor or barrister) can provide to criminal defence clients and they are bound to always act in accordance with ethical standards.
Lawyers are not allowed to lie for their clients, tell their clients to lie or present any evidence to the courts that they know is untrue.

If a client admits committing the offence, the lawyer cannot remain acting on that client's behalf if the client wants to plead not guilty.
The law of the UK is that the police & cps must prove that a crime occurred and that the client is the one who committed the crime.
The client is under no legal obligation to confess to breaking the law or answer any police questions.
Nor are victims or witnesses.
1
reply
CoolCavy
  • Forum Helper
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#57
Report 6 days ago
#57
(Original post by londonmyst)
I agree with a lot of what you say.

There are very strict rules about the services that a lawyer (solicitor or barrister) can provide to criminal defence clients and they are bound to always act in accordance with ethical standards.
Lawyers are not allowed to lie for their clients, tell their clients to lie or present any evidence to the courts that they know is untrue.

If a client admits committing the offence, the lawyer cannot remain acting on that client's behalf if the client wants to plead not guilty.
The law of the UK is that the police & cps must prove that a crime occurred and that the client is the one who committed the crime.
The client is under no legal obligation to confess to breaking the law or answer any police questions.
Nor are victims or witnesses.
Thanks Londonmyst that's very interesting, I like learning new things and am always open to new ideas.
It's the no comment advice that gets to me like when they say 'i advise you to answer no comment to that'. It must be so frustrating for the police interviewer to have someone sat there and just refusing to answer the questions. Obviously they have the right to remain silent and all that and I'm hoping the proper court case they do afterwards would weed out the truth but yeh it is a strange process from an outsider's perspective. It's right but wrong at the same time.
0
reply
ashibo
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#58
Report 6 days ago
#58
please stop talking about this dumb girl she just wants attention and youre giving her what she wants
2
reply
AntiMonarchist
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#59
Report 6 days ago
#59
How can she even get legal aid since her citizenship was revoked? By granting her legal aid doesnt that mean we are admitting she is still a citizen? Or can any foreign national claim legal aid in the UK?
0
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#60
Report 6 days ago
#60
(Original post by AntiMonarchist)
How can she even get legal aid since her citizenship was revoked? By granting her legal aid doesnt that mean we are admitting she is still a citizen? Or can any foreign national claim legal aid in the UK?
Yes.
Any foreign citizen or UK national can claim that they cannot afford the costs of legal representation and apply for legal aid.
Many foreign citizens and asylum seekers that entered the UK illegally and want to stay do so.
Whether the legal aid application will be successful is another matter.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (314)
37.74%
No - but I will (64)
7.69%
No - I don't want to (62)
7.45%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (392)
47.12%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise