Irish judge goes on trial: is it time to modernise the legal profession here?

Dionysus

I may have overlooked it but it appears this story has not reached Afterhours:


Judge accused of inducing couple to sign will

Judge to stand trial accused of deceiving elderly couple

Not surprising for a profession which invariably equates the defence of "justice" with the defence of the position (i.e. ridiculously undeserved salaries and unjustified status) of barristers and judges in Irish society. Like the Roman Church, all members of the judiciary in Ireland, and the sycophantic barristers who support them, need to be dragged into the fact that this state is a republic and the old days of wigs, titles and a variety of arse activity that symbolised the pomp and ceremony of British rule are over.

It't time the political class brought the judiciary and barristers in this republic into line with the values of a democratic republic and forced them to abandon their cult dining "tradition", wigs and of course the price fixing, the necessity for a solicitor and junior counsel and much else which is designed to screw the Irish public and enrich barristers and their buddies who have recently been appointed judges in this republic (some judges, like Paul Carney, appear to be oblivious to the fact that this is a democratic republic)

charlemont

It should be done as soon as possible, Our judges are living in wishy washy land.

policarp

Most people know that the judicial system needs a massive overhaul.

mikemac

No, the judiciary and barristers are at the forefront of protecting justice in Ireland

If you have an issue with bills you go to the Taxing Master

Why did the Republic keep all these anarchic traditions?

Dangerous Man

Barristers & Judges are the last defenders of human rights in Ireland. They deserve their power.

Without a doubt.

Chucky the tree

I don't gey why you are linking to the story in the OP and then going off on some unrelated rant.

Monty Burnz

policarp wrote: »

Most people know that the judicial system needs a massive overhaul.

Unfortunately it will be left in the hands of the judiciary and the Law Society in all probability. They are not going to bring in real reform any more than our politicians will seriously reform the Oireachteas (or - say - bring in clear, easily enforced laws on political corruption, and harsh mandatory penalties).

Sticky_Fingers

No, the judiciary and barristers are at the forefront of protecting justice in Ireland

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I don't gey why you are linking to the story in the OP and then going off on some unrelated rant.

Check the third link about the judge who got shirty because defense barristers were not wearing their wigs.

Elohim

We need Robocop.

Dionysus

No, the judiciary and barristers are at the forefront of protecting justice in Ireland

mikemac wrote: »

Why did the Republic keep all these anarchic traditions?

Excellent question which nobody outside the legal profession seems to be able to answer rationally. It seems that the sole reason was because to change them would "threaten democracy" "threaten justice" and other such balderdash - otherwise known as the hangers-on in the judiciary and legal profession preferred to view themselves as an elite and protect their privileges by equating defence of their privileges in Irish society with defence of justice in Irish society. The nascent Irish state, struggling for international respect, didn't feel confident enough to take it on.

Successful so far, but hopefully Irish people in 2011 are learning something about "deference" from the reality of the Roman Church and, moreover, the utterly unacceptable refusal of the judges of this republic to pay their pension levy when an employee of the state on €20,000 must pay it.

Chucky the tree

mikemac wrote: »

Why did the Republic keep all these anarchic traditions?

Because it was a lot easier to keep something you know and understand then to try and drastaically overhaul it in, especially if you are not sure what system to change too.

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

Check the third link about the judge who got shirty because defense barristers were not wearing their wigs.

Are the other two links for decoration purposes? Pretty ridiculous of the OP to conclude that because one person in a proffession committed a crime then it's clearly a sign the whole system is flawed and broken.

Dionysus

No, the judiciary and barristers are at the forefront of protecting justice in Ireland

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Unfortunately it will be left in the hands of the judiciary and the Law Society in all probability. They are not going to bring in real reform any more than our politicians will seriously reform the Oireachteas (or - say - bring in clear, easily enforced laws on political corruption, and harsh mandatory penalties).

Bingo. And that is the problem. This state is allowing the very organisation responsible for protecting the interests of barristers and solictors - the Bar Council and Law Society respectively - to set the rules for members of that profession who operate under the laws of this republic and in the public courtrooms of this republic. It defies belief that in 2011 an Irish person, who in the vast, vast majority of cases will have republican beliefs, can go to the High Court of this republic and they could lose their case because their barristers do not wear British-style wigs and gowns. That's a joke. That's far, far too much power in the hands of unelected people such as Judge Paul Carney. And yet this state refuses to put the judges and barristers of this republic in their place and legislate against this sort of profoundly unrepublican carry-on.

mikemac

No, the judiciary and barristers are at the forefront of protecting justice in Ireland

It was only recently they stopped using my lord or m'lud in courts

Last time I was in court (TV licence, oh the shame ) we were instructed to say Judge, nice and easy

My Lord has no place in a Republic anyway but tradition meant it carried on

In April 2006 new rules were signed into effect changing the way judges in Ireland are addressed in court. In the past, judges in Ireland were referred to as "My Lord", or "His Lordship". Now, they will be addressed as "Judge" or referred to as "The Court". The only exception to this is in the case of the Chief Justice and President of the High Courts, who are addressed by their titles.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/courtroom/judge.html

Seems tradition is extremely powerful and can take decades to change

Chucky the tree

Dionysus wrote: »

Bingo. And that is the problem. This state is allowing the very organisation responsible for protecting the interests of barristers and solictors - the Bar Council and Law Society respectively - to set the rules for members of that profession who operate under the laws of this republic and in the public courtrooms of this republic. It defies belief that in 2011 an Irish person, who in the vast, vast majority of cases will have republican beliefs, can go to the High Court of this republic and they could lose their case because their barristers do not wear British-style wigs and gowns. That's a joke. That's far, far too much power in the hands of unelected people such as Judge Paul Carney. And yet this state refuses to put the judges and barristers of this republic in their place and legislate against this sort of profoundly unrepublican carry-on.

Can you provide a link to wear this has ever happened before?

drkpower

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

Check the third link about the judge who got shirty because defense barristers were not wearing their wigs.

In fairness, the Supreme Court slapped Carney down for his silly comments. The fact that there are a few judges, or barristers, who cling to outdated practices is not an indicator that the system is broke.

There are plenty of issues with the legal system; but the premise of the OP isnt a particularly constructive way of discussing those issues.

mackg

Ah now don't tar them all with the one brush.

Wolfe Tone

No, the judiciary and barristers are at the forefront of protecting justice in Ireland

I couldn't agree more, needs to be modernized very badly.

Dionysus

No, the judiciary and barristers are at the forefront of protecting justice in Ireland

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Are the other two links for decoration purposes? Pretty ridiculous of the OP to conclude that because one person in a proffession committed a crime then it's clearly a sign the whole system is flawed and broken.

Well, it's more to point out that the class in this society which acts as judges is far from perfect and deserves to be fundamentally questioned for the first time since the establishment of an Irish state in December 1922. Whether it's alleged criminal activity, their unjustified pay, their universally-condemned refusal to accept the pension levy and to shamelessly use a constitutional provision to reject paying their fair share, or their refusal to abolish wigs, gowns and titles in courtrooms of this republic in 2011 - the case is building up against them, and for radical reform of the judiciary and legal (particularly barrister) profession in the Republic of Ireland.

It's long, long overdue.

Chucky the tree

Dionysus wrote: »

Well, it's more to point out that the class in this society which acts as judges is far from perfect and deserves to be fundamentally questioned for the first time since the establishment of an Irish state in December 1922. Whether it's alleged criminal activity, their unjustified pay, their universally-condemned refusal to accept the pension levy and to shamelessly use a constitutional provision to reject paying their fair share, or their refusal to abolish wigs, gowns and titles in courtrooms of this republic in 2011 - the case is building up against them, and for radical reform of the judiciary and legal (particularly barrister) profession in the Republic of Ireland.

It's long, long overdue.

lol, do you work for the Herald by any chance? Your bolding of various words every so often is rather amusing. Anyway... So because someone who possibly committed a crime when she wasn't a judge, it should lead to fundamentaily questioning a profession? Right. Do you actually have any valid reasons about from populist nonsense?

Wolfe Tone

No, the judiciary and barristers are at the forefront of protecting justice in Ireland

The only person who voted for the last option (so far) is in fact a barrister himself I believe.


(not having a go btw, just pointing it out)

Dionysus

No, the judiciary and barristers are at the forefront of protecting justice in Ireland

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Can you provide a link to wear this has ever happened before?

As linked in the OP, in 2006 Paul Carney, a judge in the High Court, told two barristers defending their client that they should not appear in front of him, the judge who was going to decide their case, without their wigs and gowns. Now, if that's not a very clear message instructing people in this republic on what they should wear in courtrooms of our republic, I don't know what is.

Here are references for this story:

1. http://www.independent.ie/national-news/judges-get-wigs-in-a-knot-over-headwear-comments-65698.html

2. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2006/1222/1166138332319.html


There was also a detailed account of it in the Sunday Business Post, which I can't locate at the moment.

drkpower

Dionysus wrote: »

Whether it's .......

That the legal profession is in need of reform is fairly clear. But what you use as justifications reallly misses the point. You seem to have 4 key points; almost all are next to irrelevant. Try and actually address the issues and areas that need reform in a more thoughtful and constructive manner


alleged criminal activity: the fact that one (or more) judges are alleged to have engaged in criminal activity is relevant to the reform of the legal system is a reason to reform it? Really?!
their unjustified pay: that is a possible argument, but is really a minor issue in the scheme of legal system reform
their universally-condemned refusal to accept the pension levy and to shamelessly use a constitutional provision to reject paying their fair share: the Government made that decision.
or their refusal to abolish wigs, gowns and titles in courtrooms of this republic in 2011: All of the above is optional

So 1 half-argument out of the 4 you have chosen:D.

Chucky the tree

Dionysus wrote: »

As linked in the OP, in 2006 Paul Carney, a judge in the High Court, told two barristers defending their client that they should not appear in front of him, the judge who was going to decide their case, without their wigs and gowns. Now, if that's not a very clear message instructing people in this republic on what they should wear in courtrooms of our republic, I don't know what is.

Here are references for this story:

1. http://www.independent.ie/national-news/judges-get-wigs-in-a-knot-over-headwear-comments-65698.html

2. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2006/1222/1166138332319.html


There was also a detailed account of it in the Sunday Business Post, which I can't locate at the moment.

So they lost their case because they didn't wear wigs?

drkpower

Dionysus wrote: »

As linked in the OP, in 2006 Paul Carney, a judge in the High Court, told two barristers defending their client that they should not appear in front of him, the judge who was going to decide their case, without their wigs and gowns. Now, if that's not a very clear message instructing people in this republic on what they should wear in courtrooms of our republic, I don't know what is.

Did you miss the bit where the Supreme Court criticised Carney about this, yes?

Dionysus

No, the judiciary and barristers are at the forefront of protecting justice in Ireland

Chucky the tree wrote: »

lol, do you work for the Herald by any chance? Your bolding of various words every so often is rather amusing. Anyway... So because someone who possibly committed a crime when she wasn't a judge, it should lead to fundamentaily questioning a profession? Right. Do you actually have any valid reasons about from populist nonsense?

Listen, son [note patronising tone], when you've spent as much time in a library as I've spent you can come back to me with condescending raiméis like "populist nonsense". At any rate, the very fact that somebody who possibly committed a crime before she became a judge actually became a judge hints at a problem with that procedure for starters. There are, believe it or not, alternative ways for appointing judges such as the French way where a professional class of judges are nurtured and appointed because of their knowledge of the law. That's No. 1.

That you think the current system is beyond repute is, how do I put it - I suppose "disappointing" will have to suffice for now. Wearing wigs and flying titles around the courtrooms of this republic is wholly inappropriate for modern Ireland. I genuinely don't see why you feel the need to defend this backwardness.

Chucky the tree

Dionysus wrote: »

Listen, son [note patronising tone], when you've spent as much time in a library as I've spent you can come back to me with condescending raiméis like "populist nonsense". At any rate, the very fact that somebody who possibly committed a crime before she became a judge actually became a judge hints at a problem with that procedure for starters. There are, believe it or not, alternative ways for appointing judges such as the French way where a professional class of judges are nurtured and appointed because of their knowledge of the law. That's No. 1.

That you think the current system is beyond repute is, how do I put it - I suppose "disappointing" will have to suffice for now. Wearing wigs and flying titles around the courtrooms of this republic is wholly inappropriate for modern Ireland. I genuinely don't see why you feel the need to defend this backwardness.

So you think a flaw of the judicial system is being presumed innocent until your trial starts? Strongly disagree on that one.

If you can find anywhere I said I thought the current system is beyond repute can you please quote it for me? The fact that you haven't come up with any actually benefically reasons to overhaul the judical system doesn't ssay much. Do you think if they don't wear wigs we will get more accurate judgements, better and fairer sentences? If the biggest criticism you have of our current judicial system is that they were wigs then they must be doing there jobs extremely well.

Dionysus

No, the judiciary and barristers are at the forefront of protecting justice in Ireland

drkpower wrote: »

Did you miss the bit where the Supreme Court criticised Carney about this, yes?

Not at all, and most especially I didn't miss the bit where only for two barristers complained against a judge (a very, very rare event for all the obvious reasons) this case like many before it would have been forced into a situation where all barristers would be compelled to genuflect, with full wigs and gowns, in front of a judge of this republic.

This is one of the cases that has been brought to our attention. How do you think those two barristers will fare in Paul Carney's courtroom after this complaint? The legal system should not be left in the hands of judges or barristers. The state should be regulating the culture of public courtrooms in this state - i.e. serving the public - rather than allowing members of the "elite" set a culture which holds them in deference for public courtrooms in this republic. It's so obviously wrong.

galwayrush

Barristers & Judges are the last defenders of human rights in Ireland. They deserve their power.

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

The only person who voted for the last option (so far) is in fact a barrister himself I believe.


(not having a go btw, just pointing it out)

He's looking after his own interests .:pac:

drkpower

Dionysus wrote: »

Not at all, and most especially I didn't miss the bit where only for two barristers complained against a judge (a very, very rare event for all the obvious reasons) this case like many before it would have been forced into a situation where all barristers would be compelled to genuflect, with full wigs and gowns, in front of a judge of this republic.

This is one of the cases that has been brought to our attention. How do you think those two barristers will fare in Paul Carney's courtroom after this complaint? The legal system should not be left in the hands of judges or barristers. The state should be regulating the culture of public courtrooms in this state - i.e. serving the public - rather than allowing members of the "elite" set a culture which holds them in deference for public courtrooms in this republic. It's so obviously wrong.

You are all over the place in your arguments:D!

You use an example where the Supreme Court rightly chastises a judge for his outdated practice as an example of the judiciary gone wrong:D.

You use an example where the legal profession/judiicary themselves reflected on their outdated practices, and brought in new Rules to change them, as an example of the judiciary gone wrong:D.

There are issues with the legal system. But are there any serious contributors, or are we stuck with the OP?

Magic Beans

No, the judiciary and barristers are at the forefront of protecting justice in Ireland

Won't somebody think of the wig-makers?

dermot_sheehan

galwayrush wrote: »

He's looking after his own interests .:pac:

Indeed, always wanted to be the one that said "Nay" in a moleman voice in the middle of an angry lynch mob.

Spread

Barristers & Judges are the last defenders of human rights in Ireland. They deserve their power.

Dionysus wrote: »

I may have overlooked it but it appears this story has not reached Afterhours:


Judge accused of inducing couple to sign will

Judge to stand trial accused of deceiving elderly couple

Not surprising for a profession which invariably equates the defence of "justice" with the defence of the position (i.e. ridiculously undeserved salaries and unjustified status) of barristers and judges in Irish society. Like the Roman Church, all members of the judiciary in Ireland, and the sycophantic barristers who support them, need to be dragged into the fact that this state is a republic and the old days of wigs, titles and a variety of arse activity that symbolised the pomp and ceremony of British rule are over.

It't time the political class brought the judiciary and barristers in this republic into line with the values of a democratic republic and forced them to abandon their cult dining "tradition", wigs and of course the price fixing, the necessity for a solicitor and junior counsel and much else which is designed to screw the Irish public and enrich barristers and their buddies who have recently been appointed judges in this republic (some judges, like Paul Carney, appear to be oblivious to the fact that this is a democratic republic)

Democratic Republic? And you can't get a drink when you're thirsty?

In 1991 he was appointed to the High Court and as presiding judge of the Central Criminal Court. Within a year he was embroiled in controversy, accused of handing down lenient sentences to two rapists, including the perpetrator in the Kilkenny incest case. Soon afterwards he was arrested outside the Shelbourne hotel, in Dublin, in the early hours of a Sunday morning as he tried to get inside for an after-hours drink. He later apologised to hotel staff. Friends suggested the incident was the result of the stress he was suffering.

Perhaps cranium constriction by the headgear

Kevin Duffy

Dionysus wrote: »

Bingo. And that is the problem. This state is allowing the very organisation responsible for protecting the interests of barristers and solictors - the Bar Council and Law Society respectively - to set the rules for members of that profession who operate under the laws of this republic and in the public courtrooms of this republic. It defies belief that in 2011 an Irish person, who in the vast, vast majority of cases will have republican beliefs, can go to the High Court of this republic and they could lose their case because their barristers do not wear British-style wigs and gowns. That's a joke. That's far, far too much power in the hands of unelected people such as Judge Paul Carney. And yet this state refuses to put the judges and barristers of this republic in their place and legislate against this sort of profoundly unrepublican carry-on.

Eh, come again??