Is this normal from a solicitor?

baalad

Hi guys. Just wondering if i should be concerned or not.

Without giving away too many details i basically approached a solicitor before Christmas to represent me in a court case i had coming up in January. I met him for around 5-10 minutes and gave him a brief description of what had happened etc He explained to me that i had nothing to lose by requesting evidence before deciding how to plea so i told him to go ahead and do that. He told me my appearance was therefore not necessary in court on that day.

However, This is where things get very fishy from my perspective. On the day of my case he rang me asking where i was and he said "the guard prosecuting you said your supposed to be here" to which i was so confused that i have cannot actually remember my reply but i should have said "what the hell are you talking about, you specifically told me i did not have to attend because you were just requesting evidence"

I remember him describing things as "chaotic" and then saying "don't worry, ill take care of it" He later called me to say that my case was adjourned (which i expected) but he also said a new charge was being brought against me also.

I have never received ANY summons about this alleged new charge and my solicitor has virtually not contacted me since yet my case is being heard next week.

The only time i heard from him was when the evidence came back, he emailed me the evidence and told me to "consider the evidence" . I replied given my version of events and i highlighted one or two statements made that i believe were not true but i havent heard from him since. I have called him maybe 6/7 times over the past month. One of my calls was returned which i missed but i rang him back and got no answer. I have emailed his secretary and i get no reply. I have texted him personally on whatsapp and i also get no reply despite seeing him online etc

Iam online the past 2 weeks looking for advice and everyone tells me i need to get a solicitor but i already have one lol Is this normal? Should i be concerned or is he just waiting until closer to the court date to contact me about my defence etc ? My court date is next Friday.

Another strange complaint i have is that i told him i was struggling financially and would have to request legal advice initially but he responded saying "don't worry, i won't charge you much" and i just went along with it like an idiot!

Dublin Lad2021

baalad wrote: »

Hi guys. Just wondering if i should be concerned or not.

Without giving away too many details i basically approached a solicitor before Christmas to represent me in a court case i had coming up in January. I met him for around 5-10 minutes and gave him a brief description of what had happened etc He explained to me that i had nothing to lose by requesting evidence before deciding how to plea so i told him to go ahead and do that. He told me my appearance was therefore not necessary in court on that day.

However, This is where things get very fishy from my perspective. On the day of my case he rang me asking where i was and he said "the guard prosecuting you said your supposed to be here" to which i was so confused that i have cannot actually remember my reply but i should have said "what the hell are you talking about, you specifically told me i did not have to attend because you were just requesting evidence"

I remember him describing things as "chaotic" and then saying "don't worry, ill take care of it" He later called me to say that my case was adjourned (which i expected) but he also said a new charge was being brought against me also.

I have never received ANY summons about this alleged new charge and my solicitor has virtually not contacted me since yet my case is being heard next week.

The only time i heard from him was when the evidence came back, he emailed me the evidence and told me to "consider the evidence" . I replied given my version of events and i highlighted one or two statements made that i believe were not true but i havent heard from him since. I have called him maybe 6/7 times over the past month. One of my calls was returned which i missed but i rang him back and got no answer. I have emailed his secretary and i get no reply. I have texted him personally on whatsapp and i also get no reply despite seeing him online etc

Iam online the past 2 weeks looking for advice and everyone tells me i need to get a solicitor but i already have one lol Is this normal? Should i be concerned or is he just waiting until closer to the court date to contact me about my defence etc ? My court date is next Friday.

Another strange complaint i have is that i told him i was struggling financially and would have to request legal advice initially but he responded saying "don't worry, i won't charge you much" and i just went along with it like an idiot!

Doesn't sound normal at all to me, maybe smaller solicitors operate like this. I'm no expert though, love the fact you said I already have one lol in this situation 😂

baalad

Dublin Lad2021 wrote: »

Doesn't sound normal at all to me, maybe smaller solicitors operate like this. I'm no expert though, love the fact you said I already have one lol in this situation ��

If im completely honest. I have never had a court case before so i am completely clueless but my understanding was that i was paying the solicitor for legal advice but im not receiving anything what so ever from him. It literally is beginning to feel like he is ignoring me which makes no sense because why on earth would he be ignoring me!

Can this in itself be used as evidence? for instance can a case be struck out because proper legal advice was not given??

I am paranoid the Solicitor is making no effort because the guard that is prosecuting me told me that he knows my solicitor very well and was going to talk to him. Do not ask me what he was meaning by that as i have no idea but im beginning to feel like there may be truth in that and perhaps he is deliberately not wanting to win the case for fear of falling out with this "friend" / guard?

Esse85

How did you approach the solicitor, where did you get their details from?

I'd be wary of any solicitor that says don't worry I won't charge you much.

ohnonotgmail

Did we not have this before? It all sounds terribly familiar, in particular the solicitor telling you not to bother turning up and then phoning to ask where you were.

baalad

Esse85 wrote: »

How did you approach the solicitor, where did you get their details from?

Met him in a pub lol No jokin aside. I contacted him via his website.

baalad

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Did we not have this before? It all sounds terribly familiar, in particular the solicitor telling you not to bother turning up and then phoning to ask where you were.

Yes, how absolutely crazy is that. Who would even believe it. I just spoke to my partner about that. Like why on earth would he even have the nerve to ring knowing full well he advised me to not attend. Its madness but who do i complain too? Whats it gonna achieve ? Ive no idea what to do

NovaDublin

Go to FLAC, it is a free legal advice service, they can advise you but they don't represent you.

enricoh

There is a light wrote: »

I'd be wary of any solicitor that says don't worry I won't charge you much.

Sure sign yer getting fleeced!

ohnonotgmail

baalad wrote: »

Yes, how absolutely crazy is that. Who would even believe it. I just spoke to my partner about that. Like why on earth would he even have the nerve to ring knowing full well he advised me to not attend. Its madness but who do i complain too? Whats it gonna achieve ? Ive no idea what to do

No, i meant you have another thread on the same problem. do we really need two threads on the same topic?

baalad

enricoh wrote: »

Sure sign yer getting fleeced!

Haha i am gonna just be straight up and tell you that he told me if he does not win the case that i only owe him 200 euro which is why i think he cant be arsed doing a thing for me. He has clearly decided to not even bother his arse fighting for me and he pockets a handy 200 for sweet FA

baalad

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

No, i meant you have another thread on the same problem. do we really need two threads on the same topic?

Not exactly. I may have mentioned this in the threat about my case but i did not have a thread for this specific query

drunkmonkey

baalad wrote: »

Yes, how absolutely crazy is that. Who would even believe it. I just spoke to my partner about that. Like why on earth would he even have the nerve to ring knowing full well he advised me to not attend. Its madness but who do i complain too? Whats it gonna achieve ? Ive no idea what to do

Do as he said, look at the evidence and find your own to dispute it if that's what your going to do, your not in any worse a situation as you didn't turn up don't get overly caught up on that point.
Does the Guards evidence help you, impartial witness, cctv, anything like that. Have a good chat with the solicitor on the possible outcomes and anything that you notice wasn't in the book of evidence. Also ask how much this is all going to cost, can it be settled out of court etc.

Dublin Lad2021

baalad wrote: »

If im completely honest. I have never had a court case before so i am completely clueless but my understanding was that i was paying the solicitor for legal advice but im not receiving anything what so ever from him. It literally is beginning to feel like he is ignoring me which makes no sense because why on earth would he be ignoring me!

Can this in itself be used as evidence? for instance can a case be struck out because proper legal advice was not given??

I am paranoid the Solicitor is making no effort because the guard that is prosecuting me told me that he knows my solicitor very well and was going to talk to him. Do not ask me what he was meaning by that as i have no idea but im beginning to feel like there may be truth in that and perhaps he is deliberately not wanting to win the case for fear of falling out with this "friend" / guard?

It sounds like it should be struck out for the Garda knowing your solicitor very well or at least claiming to. Apart from that it sounds like your solicitor is taking the piss completely, I wouldn't be happy with it at all if I were you if you have the time I'd swap solicitor or something this sounds crazy. Maybe you can get a new solicitor based on conflict of interest and get the case adjourned until later, but I'm no expert so hopefully someone with a bit more knowledge comes in with some advice. You can always contact the FLAC

baalad

Dublin Lad2021 wrote: »

It sounds like it should be struck out for the Garda knowing your solicitor very well or at least claiming to. Apart from that it sounds like your solicitor is taking the piss completely, I wouldn't be happy with it at all if I were you if you have the time I'd swap solicitor or something this sounds crazy. Maybe you can get a new solicitor based on conflict of interest and get the case adjourned until later, but I'm no expert so hopefully someone with a bit more knowledge comes in with some advice. You can always contact the FLAC

Someone else told me to do the same. The problem is i have left it too late. I figured he would just contact me eventually. Im due in court Friday week.

I know it sounds mad but is it crazy to think that maybe there is truth in that they know each other and the solicitor simply does not want to win a case against his so called friend. The guard told me he knew my solicitor very well and when i said this to my solicitor weeks ago when during a rare 30 second phone chat that he cut short, he just responded with "nonsense"

GreenRdBoy

Guards talk with solicitors all the time. There is no conspiracy at all ffs. No one said they were friends, only assumptions made. Is the defendant pleading guilty, is an adjournment needed, to what date.....these are all discussed between gardai and solicitors before being signed off by the judge. Half the time the solicitor doesn't recognise his client and has to ask the guard!

drunkmonkey

There's no conspiracy between the Guard and the Solicitor it would be very surprising if they didn't know each other and may be on good terms working in the same districts.
The case went to the DPP, they looked at it and believed there's enough there to get a successful prosecution. That could be a criminal record, it may be a donation to charity.
The only person getting you out of this is you, the solicitor is merely presenting your side of the story.

I assume your aim here is not to get a conviction as your innocent, if you don't think the solicitor is good enough consider a barrister but that will cost you a lot more.

grassylawn

If a judge thinks you have not been served properly by your solicitor, he may postpone the hearing to give you time to get that sorted out. I would think they might only strike it out in such a case if it was something trivial to begin with.

Voguementol

I would not be happy if i had a case on next week and the solicitor was not replying. Do you still not know what this other charge is? Normally i think they have six months to issue on summary summonses (for summary offences - indictable offences they have more time to issue) so this does sound a bit strange. You need to email your solicitor and tell him you have tried to contact him several times with no response and that this is not satisfactory. As a solicitor he is obliged by the law society to keep you updated on your case. He may be busy but thats not acceptable. Hopefully this is just crossed wires. If this is a road traffic matter you wont get legal aid btw.

Under covid rules, people on bail are no longer required to attend in person if a solicitor is representing and there's nothing for them to actually do

If you are right of cash, the solicitor may request legal aid. He probable already has.

Gardai are the prosecution so they will talk to the defence.

I have had cases against school friends. Means nothing. I'm a professional, they are a professional. It's left in the court

baalad

I understand what you guys are saying.When the guard said that he knew my solicitor very well. Of course he would from speaking to him in court but it was put to me as if he was suggesting he knew him beyond that. It was the way it was said which i believe was just him trying to mess with me i guess.

None the less, I did not appreciate that being said especially now that i am having issues with my solicitor.

I am unaware what this "new charge" is i never received a summons for it but apparently they can bring a new charge against you once you arrive before the judge for your initial charge. I was told if i pleaded guilty that i would escape this new charge but i thought he was bluffing.

It was only when my case was adjourned that i was informed i actually was having a new charge brought against me but again i have never received any summons for this.

This is a road traffic matter. I was 1 nanogram over the limit for cannabis which i accept. What i do not accept is the Guard telling a load of lies and saying i had slurred speech and was intoxicated and unable to drive but yet i have messages from him describing me as a decent man and saying he hates doing this to people but its his job. I was also told in the station that i was positive for heroin as a joke. Let alone he said i refused to answer questions he asked. All absolute 100% rubbish. I was in utter shock reading the evidence.

The last time i heard from my solicitor was when he emailed me the evidence and said "consider the evidence" . I replied with my version of events and i outlines each statement that was not true and i have not heard from him since! This was almost a month ago (3 - 4 weeks) I have text and emailed asking when is a good time to catch him because every time i call he does not answer and i have yet to get a reply.

I have found a site which gives details to lodge a complaint and have done so tonight!

Another twist to this is that i told my solicitor i was coming into money soon but that i did not know when and therefore i may need free legal aid at this moment in time as i lost my job over covid. He was adamant that he will not charge me much and for some reason he told me to not mention coming into money in the court house as the judge would likely not like it being rubbed in his face. Strange choice of words i thought but there you go

drunkmonkey

Giving out about the solicitor or guard isn't going to help you much. There's nothing to defend so when he says you won't be charged much money i'd believe him as there's not much he can do.
The Guard hardly remembers you i'd say adding in the slurred speech is just part of the course, you can dispute it if you like won't change the outcome though. Your kinda goosed here as the main charge is the one that's going to hurt.

The 1 nanogram might be small but you would have got the option to have a sample yourself to take home and get your own test done incase there was a discrepancy. It doesn't sound like you did so nothing you can argue there.

It might be worth getting a barrister to review it, talk to that solicitor if it could be worth exploring, retract your compliant there's no point venting at anyone it's not helping your case.

grassylawn

They tested you for drugs for a reason. The simplest explanation is that they observed you driving erratically.

There is no contradiction between the guard saying you are decent and that he was only doing his job, and his description of your condition. Even if there was I don't see any grounds for complaint. His job is to gather evidence when someone breaks the law. You're not a customer in this situation.

The evidence is very clear cut. Talk to your solicitor about how to encourage them go easy on you. Maybe demonstrating that you have discontinued consumption of drugs would be good. Maybe a donation to the poor box. Maybe expressing remorse. Maybe just shutting up and accepting the situation. You're not in a position to fight.

ohnonotgmail

grassylawn wrote: »

They tested you for drugs for a reason. The simplest explanation is that they observed you driving erratically.

There is no contradiction between the guard saying you are decent and that he was only doing his job, and his description of your condition. Even if there was I don't see any grounds for complaint. His job is to gather evidence when someone breaks the law. You're not a customer in this situation.

The evidence is very clear cut. Talk to your solicitor about how to encourage them go easy on you. Maybe demonstrating that you have discontinued consumption of drugs would be good. Maybe a donation to the poor box. Maybe expressing remorse. Maybe just shutting up and accepting the situation. You're not in a position to fight.

remorse won't help them. Drug driving is a minimum 1 year driving ban.

baalad

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Giving out about the solicitor or guard isn't going to help you much. There's nothing to defend so when he says you won't be charged much money i'd believe him as there's not much he can do.
The Guard hardly remembers you i'd say adding in the slurred speech is just part of the course, you can dispute it if you like won't change the outcome though. Your kinda goosed here as the main charge is the one that's going to hurt.

The 1 nanogram might be small but you would have got the option to have a sample yourself to take home and get your own test done incase there was a discrepancy. It doesn't sound like you did so nothing you can argue there.

It might be worth getting a barrister to review it, talk to that solicitor if it could be worth exploring, retract your compliant there's no point venting at anyone it's not helping your case.

Yeah deep down i feel im clutching at straws and i know you are right.

Although regarding the sample. I was told the limit was zero and when i was offered the sample i replied "whats the point, if the limit is zero" The guard shrugged his shoulders and said "yeah your probably right"

It was only afterwards that i was informed the limit is 5ng NOT zero! Had i known that then i may have took the sample. But again im unsure if this is going to matter!

baalad

grassylawn wrote: »

They tested you for drugs for a reason. The simplest explanation is that they observed you driving erratically.

There is no contradiction between the guard saying you are decent and that he was only doing his job, and his description of your condition. Even if there was I don't see any grounds for complaint. His job is to gather evidence when someone breaks the law. You're not a customer in this situation.

The evidence is very clear cut. Talk to your solicitor about how to encourage them go easy on you. Maybe demonstrating that you have discontinued consumption of drugs would be good. Maybe a donation to the poor box. Maybe expressing remorse. Maybe just shutting up and accepting the situation. You're not in a position to fight.

No disrespect but your not in a position to tell me what my position is! I have read of past cases where it seemed like the accused had nothing to fight but the way in which they arrested him etc was not done to the book as it should be and they fought the case on technicalities and won.

As for driving erratic. Anyone would tell you that the limit of 5ng is very very low. If 5ng is extremely low then 1ng is certainly not enough to be the difference between driving fine and driving erratically in my opinion. Besides the point, they allegedly came after me because my front headlight was gone which was news to me but indeed it was gone. What are the odds!

At the end of the day i will face whatever comes my way but im only human. Of course i want to get away with this if at all possible. At the very least i deserve to tell my story as it paints a different picture to the exaggerated rubbish the guard has put forward. If the judge decides to punish me then so be it. Lesson has already been learned and it will never happen again anyway!

ohnonotgmail

baalad wrote: »

No disrespect but your not in a position to tell me what my position is! I have read of past cases where it seemed like the accused had nothing to fight but the way in which they arrested him etc was not done to the book as it should be and they fought the case on technicalities and won.

As for driving erratic. Anyone would tell you that the limit of 5ng is very very low. If 5ng is extremely low then 1ng is certainly not enough to be the difference between driving fine and driving erratically in my opinion. Besides the point, they allegedly came after me because my front headlight was gone which was news to me but indeed it was gone. What are the odds!

At the end of the day i will face whatever comes my way but im only human. Of course i want to get away with this if at all possible. At the very least i deserve to tell my story as it paints a different picture to the exaggerated rubbish the guard has put forward. If the judge decides to punish me then so be it. Lesson has already been learned and it will never happen again anyway!

your story is irrelevant. you are charged with a strict liability offence.

baalad

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

your story is irrelevant. you are charged with a strict liability offence.

You have not got a clue what you are talking about. If your statement was correct than you would receive a fine or a ban on the spot. Why bother bringing you to court at all and expecting you to defend yourself?? There are various technicalities that must be carried out. Failure to do so and your blood results mean nothing. Im not saying i will win my case. Im simply saying you cannot say that your story should not be heard simply because you are over the limit!

drunkmonkey

Maybe engage a barrister it's really your only hope. Garda probably knew what he was doing if it wasn't his first day at the rodeo.
You'd better off take this discussion to r/Crainn as it pops up there a lot.

ohnonotgmail

baalad wrote: »

You have not got a clue what you are talking about. If your statement was correct than you would receive a fine or a ban on the spot. Why bother bringing you to court at all and expecting you to defend yourself?? There are various technicalities that must be carried out. Failure to do so and your blood results mean nothing. Im not saying i will win my case. Im simply saying you cannot say that your story should not be heard simply because you are over the limit!

either you were over the limit or you weren't. either the procedure was carried out correctly or it wasn't. if you were over the limit (and it seems you were) and the procedure was carried out correctly (you have said nothing to suggest it wasn't) you will be found guilty and receive a minimum 1 year driving ban plus whatever else the judge decides. that is all that matters. your stories about your solicitor being mates with the guard or the guard contacting you on FB are irrelevant.

baalad

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Maybe engage a barrister it's really your only hope. Garda probably knew what he was doing if it wasn't his first day at the rodeo.
You'd better off take this discussion to r/Crainn as it pops up there a lot.

Cannot afford one sadly. I believe a barrister costs around 7,000 for the day.

You see i can accept i am over the limit but i cannot accept a Guard making the situation 10 times worse by telling lies. I was dumb enough to believe he was trying to help me out at one stage but in hindsight he was a snake. Aside from his ridiculous statement, I was also lied to about the limit, about the driving ban and i was also told at the last minute he was bringing another charge against me but would drop it if i plead guilty. He told me he knew my solicitor very well which we have established was obvious perhaps but he was clearly trying to intimidate me for some reason. He went as far as to say that he has never lost a case and then for some weird reason he decided to tell me that there is scumbags in Carrick that have his back if he ever gets trouble from anyone.

Like my bloods are over. You have me. Leave it at that. Why bother been an absolute wanker and creating lies

baalad

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

either you were over the limit or you weren't. either the procedure was carried out correctly or it wasn't. if you were over the limit (and it seems you were) and the procedure was carried out correctly (you have said nothing to suggest it wasn't) you will be found guilty and receive a minimum 1 year driving ban plus whatever else the judge decides. that is all that matters. your stories about your solicitor being mates with the guard or the guard contacting you on FB are irrelevant.

Of course i have said nothing to suggest it wasn't , because i have no idea! Thats for my solicitor to determine. Thats what brought me here to begin with. I want my solicitor to go over the details and determine if in fact the correct procedures were carried out but the communication from him has been poor.

I have been told by a solicitor in the uk (he is a friend of a friend) that some of the things i have told him may possibly be relevant. Im inclined to agree with you regarding the outcome. I just want the truth to at least be told in court and not a load of lies that paints an awful picture of me.

Slurred speech, intoxicated, unable to drive. Refusal to answer questions. Absolute rubbish. I was nothing but co-operative. I told him immediately i had smoked a small amount of cannabis but his statement says "i had no option but to form the opinion he was under the influence of an intoxicant" There was no need for him to form any opinion. I told him the truth from the second i spoke to him!

He had the audacity to lie about the time i was released from the station also. They wrote the time down 20 minutes before my actual release. I have text messages to my partner saying that i am still in the station almost 20 minutes after the time they say i was released.

This experience has been an eye opener for sure.

drunkmonkey

baalad wrote: »

Cannot afford one sadly. I believe a barrister costs around 7,000 for the day.

Not anywhere near that for your case. Call you solicitor they'd have one attached to the practice.

You were over the limit. Everything else is just worming

awsah

drunkmonkey wrote: »

There's no conspiracy between the Guard and the Solicitor it would be very surprising if they didn't know each other and may be on good terms working in the same districts.
The case went to the DPP, they looked at it and believed there's enough there to get a successful prosecution. That could be a criminal record, it may be a donation to charity.
The only person getting you out of this is you, the solicitor is merely presenting your side of the story.

I assume your aim here is not to get a conviction as your innocent, if you don't think the solicitor is good enough consider a barrister but that will cost you a lot more.

You can't hire a barrister, the solicitor hires the barrister if they can't make it to the district court for whatever reason.

Also courts are not like on tv, its all very boring until the day you plea or a hearing day. Your solicitor would not have been told that the gardai are going to add extra charges and what possibly happend is the garda showed up expecting you to be there and then said to your solicitor that they had told you you need to attend (did the garda contact you to tell caution you to attend?) So ya your solicitor went in and asked for disclosure and now has given you time to consider it, there is no defense for him to consider until you tell him if you want to plead guilty or not guilty based on the evidence. Next court date (under current cocid guidelines) you will not need to attend unless pleading guilty (some courts are making people come in to request a hearing date so check with your solicitor) it sounds like you're going not guilty so you can discuss your case with your solicitor before the hearing date.

grassylawn

The less time and drama in court, the less chance a journalist will put your name in the paper.

Claw Hammer

baalad wrote: »

Cannot afford one sadly. I believe a barrister costs around 7,000 for the day.

You would get a barrister for drink driving at €750.

Sono Topolino

1. Yes it's normal for some solicitors. District court level cases are not a lucrative source of business, and solicitors spend as little time as possible on them. 20 minutes face time is a luxury.
2. Never EVER EVER talk to the Gardaí unless you're reporting a crime - it's NEVER EVER a good idea. Any information you voluntarily give them can be twisted and used against you, and they cannot hang you with words that you do not utter. So next time you interact with a Garda, keep your mouth shut. Only answer questions put to you directly, and give them as little detail as possible.
3. Especially do not joke about using illegal substances around Gardaí. Your "joke" might get you hanged with a new offence that you never committed.
4. Fire your solicitor, get new counsel and appoint a barrister. Your solicitor is not listening to you and not representing your interests well by the sounds of things. It may cost you a little bit of money, but it's worth it to keep your charge sheet as small as possible.

And next time, do not talk to the Gardaí. They're not your friend.

This is a road traffic matter. I was 1 nanogram over the limit for cannabis which i accept. What i do not accept is the Guard telling a load of lies and saying i had slurred speech and was intoxicated and unable to drive but yet i have messages from him describing me as a decent man and saying he hates doing this to people but its his job. I was also told in the station that i was positive for heroin as a joke. Let alone he said i refused to answer questions he asked. All absolute 100% rubbish. I was in utter shock reading the evidence.

How the Gardaí treated you here is standard fair. They include "slurred speech" in every drunk/drug driving charge sheet. This is why you should avoid talking to them as much as possible.

baalad

Claw Hammer wrote: »

You would get a barrister for drink driving at €750.

Hardly. Sure thats cheaper then what a solicitor would charge to represent you?

RobbieMD

baalad wrote: »

Hardly. Sure thats cheaper then what a solicitor would charge to represent you?

The solicitor will pay the barrister, so of course they’re going to cost more. The barrister will only be required for the hearing date, the solicitor will have attended each date prior to the hearing. Bear in mind the solicitor’s practice has additional costs of office, staff etc that the barrister doesn’t have.

baalad

I was informed of something strange the Guard did which i did not cop until now. He made me take the drug drager test back at the station but im told this should have been done roadside.

It was suggested to me that the guard perhaps arrested me and then later at the station he thought that he needed a reason to justify my arrest so he conducted a drug drager test. Solicitor says this is a strange move as he should have had the test available roadside and its possible he even forgot to do it and then remembered back at the station. Its also possible he simply knew he was lying about the slurred speech and incapable of driving so he needed the drug drager test in order to justify the arrest. According to the solicitor this cannot be done in hindsight. If you arrest someone on suspicion of something but your not sure at the time of arrest and its only proven AFTERWARDS that you were right. You still wrongfully arrested him as you did not have enough evidence to justify the arrest at the time of arrest. Im not saying this gets me away with this btw. Im just passing on what i was told.

I was also told i was parked in a private car park and they need to have a good reason for pursuing me into a private car park. They say i avoided the checkpoint but how can this be proven? Every other car that turned into this car park avoided them too so?? They saw my car was a sporty boy racer type car and came after me is hardly good enough reason.

baalad

RobbieMD wrote: »

The solicitor will pay the barrister, so of course they’re going to cost more. The barrister will only be required for the hearing date, the solicitor will have attended each date prior to the hearing. Bear in mind the solicitor’s practice has additional costs of office, staff etc that the barrister doesn’t have.

What is a hearing because my understanding was i was due to attend court this week to defend myself and get this thing over with but i have been told that its only a hearing this week and i do not need to attend??

Sono Topolino

baalad wrote: »

I was informed of something strange the Guard did which i did not cop until now. He made me take the drug drager test back at the station but im told this should have been done roadside.

It was suggested to me that the guard perhaps arrested me and then later at the station he thought that he needed a reason to justify my arrest so he conducted a drug drager test. Solicitor says this is a strange move as he should have had the test available roadside and its possible he even forgot to do it and then remembered back at the station. Its also possible he simply knew he was lying about the slurred speech and incapable of driving so he needed the drug drager test in order to justify the arrest. According to the solicitor this cannot be done in hindsight. If you arrest someone on suspicion of something but your not sure at the time of arrest and its only proven AFTERWARDS that you were right. You still wrongfully arrested him as you did not have enough evidence to justify the arrest at the time of arrest. Im not saying this gets me away with this btw. Im just passing on what i was told.

I was also told i was parked in a private car park and they need to have a good reason for pursuing me into a private car park. They say i avoided the checkpoint but how can this be proven? Every other car that turned into this car park avoided them too so?? They saw my car was a sporty boy racer type car and came after me is hardly good enough reason.

Did he arrest you because he suspected you were high and then made you take a drug test? You admit that you had THC in your system.

Please be honest here - why did the Garda arrest you? What act did he refer to? Is there anything you can remember?

I'm starting to believe that you were high. Gardaí don't walk up to people in parked cars, arrest them and ask them to take drug tests willy nilly.

Witcher

There's been a smell of BS off this story since the first time it was posted in another thread and the story has changed every time we've heard it since.

baalad

Witcher wrote: »

There's been a smell of BS off this story since the first time it was posted in another thread and the story has changed every time we've heard it since.

There has never been a word of BS so if you have a problem with something. Point it out to me and let me correct it / explain myself.

There is a lot of detail that sometimes gets lost and you mention it in hindsight etc so perhaps some of my story is a little all over the place as a result but i have never told any BS and thats a fact!

baalad

Sono Topolino wrote: »

Did he arrest you because he suspected you were high and then made you take a drug test? You admit that you had THC in your system.

Please be honest here - why did the Garda arrest you? What act did he refer to? Is there anything you can remember?

I'm starting to believe that you were high. Gardaí don't walk up to people in parked cars, arrest them and ask them to take drug tests willy nilly.

If he suspected i was high he should have made me take the test roadside and then arrest me when he had his evidence. Not arrest me and then do the test. This is what iam being told. These words are coming from a solicitor not me

Witcher

baalad wrote: »

I was informed of something strange the Guard did which i did not cop until now. He made me take the drug drager test back at the station but im told this should have been done roadside.

It was suggested to me that the guard perhaps arrested me and then later at the station he thought that he needed a reason to justify my arrest so he conducted a drug drager test. Solicitor says this is a strange move as he should have had the test available roadside and its possible he even forgot to do it and then remembered back at the station. Its also possible he simply knew he was lying about the slurred speech and incapable of driving so he needed the drug drager test in order to justify the arrest. According to the solicitor this cannot be done in hindsight. If you arrest someone on suspicion of something but your not sure at the time of arrest and its only proven AFTERWARDS that you were right. You still wrongfully arrested him as you did not have enough evidence to justify the arrest at the time of arrest. Im not saying this gets me away with this btw. Im just passing on what i was told.

I was also told i was parked in a private car park and they need to have a good reason for pursuing me into a private car park. They say i avoided the checkpoint but how can this be proven? Every other car that turned into this car park avoided them too so?? They saw my car was a sporty boy racer type car and came after me is hardly good enough reason.

There's no requirement for you to be swabbed before you're arrested and Gardai have the power to enter any place bar a dwelling for the purposes of drink/drug driving specimens.

Sono Topolino

baalad wrote: »

If he suspected i was high he should have made me take the test roadside and then arrest me when he had his evidence. Not arrest me and then do the test. This is what iam being told. These words are coming from a solicitor not me

Well your solicitor could ask why he didn't carry out the test on the roadside, but he may not have had the testing equipment with him.

Did he arrest you on suspicion of driving while under the influence? Simply smelling marijuana from your car, slurred speech or dilated pupils is enough to arrest someone and compel a blood/urine sample in this day and age.

baalad

Witcher wrote: »

There's no requirement for you to be swabbed before you're arrested and Gardai have the power to enter any place bar a dwelling for the purposes of drink/drug driving specimens.

My solicitor hasn't got a clue so. He says the opposite.

Sono Topolino

baalad wrote: »

My solicitor hasn't got a clue so. He says the opposite.

You need a different solicitor and a barrister. It'll cost you a wee bit if you don't qualify for legal aid but by the sounds of things you need it.

Also, in general, keep your interractions with the law as brief as possible and don't trust the Gardaí.