Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

"Without the solicitors, the criminals are fúcked"- *alleged* Dublin criminal

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    arybvtcw0eolkf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,878 ✭✭✭✭arybvtcw0eolkf


    kraggy wrote: »
    Somebody has to represent them in court. Just because they represent them, doesn't mean they agree or support them.

    It's a necessary part of the legal system.

    Is it not the barrister who represents the defendent in court?.


  • Options
    #63
    Professey Chin
    Registered Users Posts: 51,054 ✭✭✭✭Professey Chin


    LighterGuy wrote: »
    I was talking about from a solicitors point of view. Them agreeing to repersent a clearly guilty man. Take johnny cochran. Great example. Took on the Oj Simpson case. Cochran knew he was guilty. The world knew he was guilty. But he got him off.
    I'm talking about ethics and morals here. Can a person repersent a clearly guilty man (talking oj case level of clearly guilty here) and look in the mirror and say "i am a good person" .. or is it all about the money. Not caring if they did it or not. As long as you get them off any get the paycheck.

    To be fair, this would get Hitler off
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1QI4P0YqtM


  • Options
    #64
    TelePaul
    Registered Users Posts: 4,093 ✭✭✭TelePaul


    I gots the shotgun, you gots the brief case...s'all in the game yo.


  • Options
    #65
    billybudd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,497 ✭✭✭billybudd


    sock puppet wrote: »
    It seemed from your post that you had an issue with the fact that it doesn't take a degree in law to become a solicitor (or a barrister for that matter).

    Hmm not me guv, i merely suggested and i am sure you would agree that anything is possible, rain on a sunny day etc.

    It was another poster who suggested those possibilities.

    you can defend yourself thus you being your own solicitor or barrister without any proffessional exams, example: John Gilliigan v The state.

    Being a solicitor or barrister is not that difficult.


  • Options
    #66
    billybudd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,497 ✭✭✭billybudd


    Ellis Dee wrote: »
    There must be some risk, because our prisons are severely overcrowded. And only a small proportion of their inmates are there for not having a TV licence and ridiculous things like that.:rolleyes::rolleyes:


    Compared to what should be there? plenty of criminals who for instance recieved a 3 yr sentence have been released after 8-9 months due to new arrivals who probaly will face the same scenario, so say you rob a shop and get 75 grand, get caught stash the cash, get sentenced to 3 yrs but you know you will be out in 9 months, would that not be a lucrative thing?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    44leto
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    This is a great idea, no legal aid would would give an incentive for the scummers not to commit crimes,,,not,,,..

    The truth is free legal aid is a necessity in a democracy, but do the fees have to be so high, I think the very closed shop and powerful lobby, the legal profession have to face cut backs like the rest of us.


  • Options
    #68
    Gyalist
    Registered Users Posts: 2,537 ✭✭✭Gyalist


    billybudd wrote: »
    Compared to what should be there? plenty of criminals who for instance recieved a 3 yr sentence have been released after 8-9 months due to new arrivals who probaly will face the same scenario, so say you rob a shop and get 75 grand, get caught stash the cash, get sentenced to 3 yrs but you know you will be out in 9 months, would that not be a lucrative thing?

    That's hardly the fault of the legal system. The blame lies with the politicians who have failed to provide sufficient prison places.


  • Options
    #69
    billybudd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,497 ✭✭✭billybudd


    Gyalist wrote: »
    That's hardly the fault of the legal system. The blame lies with the politicians who have failed to provide sufficient prison places.


    I agree 100%


  • Options
    #70
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    Hank_Jones wrote: »
    Still makes them a danger to society after they are cleared of crime 51.

    Taken from Guardian article, but still..

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8853042/Repeat-criminals-responsible-for-half-a-million-crimes.html

    All of this stuff relating to rights, I would think people would have a different view if a career criminal hurt someone close to them.


    What do you suggest then? Removing someone's basic human rights - ie. the right to representation & a fair trial?


  • Options
    #71
    Orando Broom
    Registered Users Posts: 3,351 ✭✭✭Orando Broom


    LighterGuy wrote: »
    I was talking about from a solicitors point of view. Them agreeing to repersent a clearly guilty man. Take johnny cochran. Great example. Took on the Oj Simpson case. Cochran knew he was guilty. The world knew he was guilty. But he got him off.
    I'm talking about ethics and morals here. Can a person repersent a clearly guilty man (talking oj case level of clearly guilty here) and look in the mirror and say "i am a good person" .. or is it all about the money. Not caring if they did it or not. As long as you get them off any get the paycheck.

    Perhaps you should just ascend straight to heaven, oh omni-cogniscent one!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    cosmicfart
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,298 ✭✭✭cosmicfart


    The law is the law. unfortunately though civilised society needs to have people who can twist words in order to call a spade a shovel. Ill never get how Justice is perverted by technicalities and the clearly guilty persons walk free while victims get abused even moreso than the original crime they had perpetrated upon them. Judges in this land are pawns of the political elite and like their compatriot lawyers on the opposing bench are all in it for the monetary gain and not for justice.

    Those so called lawyers and judges on the tribunals of the recent past have only been surpassed in criminality by those people responsible for our generational recession.

    Criminals of the highest order, answerable to no one.


  • Options
    #73
    44leto
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    The big question I have, is why are legal fees so high. Its a profession but not a particularly difficult one. I personally have more respect for an engineer or the medical profession. What is wrong with a soliticor or barrister earning a sane hourly rate.

    The legal profession have protected themselves by knowledge of the law and a kind of closed shop.


  • Options
    #74
    Teyla Emmagan
    Registered Users Posts: 5,641 ✭✭✭Teyla Emmagan


    Gyalist wrote: »
    That's hardly the fault of the legal system. The blame lies with the politicians who have failed to provide sufficient prison places.

    Clearly it's cheaper (in terms of the cost of legal aid and damages to person and property) to let criminals back on the streets than it is to provide more prison places. €75k per inmate per year I believe, and that's just for existing places. I think we've spent €43 million on Thornton Hall so far and not a brick laid.


  • Options
    #75
    Brain Stroking
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,874 ✭✭✭Brain Stroking


    Funny watching a bunch of people tar a profession with the one brush from a position of complete ignorance.


  • Options
    #76
    DEFTLEFTHAND
    Registered Users Posts: 16,500 ✭✭✭✭DEFTLEFTHAND


    44leto wrote: »
    The big question I have, is why are legal fees so high. Its a profession but not a particularly difficult one. I personally have more respect for an engineer or the medical profession. What is wrong with a soliticor or barrister earning a sane hourly rate.

    The legal profession have protected themselves by knowledge of the law and a kind of closed shop.

    Give Blackhall or Kings Inns a try and tell me its not a difficult profession. It's a high stress job where you have to be on the ball at all times, there is no margin for error, if you fcuk up, you open yourself up to being sued by the client or struck off by the Law Society. The law is constantly evolving which means its a never ending learning experience and you have to keep on top of it.


  • Options
    #77
    cosmicfart
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,298 ✭✭✭cosmicfart


    Brain Stroking wrote: »
    Funny watching a bunch of people tar a profession with the one brush from a position of complete ignorance.

    Maybe funny to you but im not laughing. Its a clear fact that numerous lawyers starting out on their careers working on tribunal cases went on afterwards to start up their own practices employing numerous people. That might not sound to bad but when you put it in context, that the tribunals were nothing but mere show trials that achieved nothing whatsoever and cost the taxpayer Hundreds of millions (possibly even going into billions), well its hardly ignorance, maybe on your part but not mine.


  • Options
    #78
    44leto
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »
    Give Blackhall or Kings Inns a try and tell me its not a difficult profession. It's a high stress job where you have to be on the ball at all times, there is no margin for error, if you fcuk up, you open yourself up to being sued by the client or struck off by the Law Society. The law is constantly evolving which means its a never ending learning experience and you have to keep on top of it.

    As is other professions and they are not the only ones opened to be sued and have a profession which is constantly evolving.

    I have dealt with them and know people in the profession and they don't seem to stressed to me,, the opposite they seem to age very healthily and well.


  • Options
    #79
    Ellis Dee
    Registered Users Posts: 2,512 ✭✭✭Ellis Dee


    K-9 wrote: »
    This presumed innocent thing is costing the state a fortune.

    I mean who needs the presumption of innocence?


    You or I might need it one day.:)


  • Options
    #80
    Brain Stroking
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,874 ✭✭✭Brain Stroking


    cosmicfart wrote: »
    Maybe funny to you but im not laughing. Its a clear fact that numerous lawyers starting out on their careers working on tribunal cases went on afterwards to start up their own practices employing numerous people. That might not sound to bad but when you put it in context, that the tribunals were nothing but mere show trials that achieved nothing whatsoever and cost the taxpayer Hundreds of millions (possibly even going into billions), well its hardly ignorance, maybe on your part but not mine.

    I've highlighted the part of your post i want to deal with. The rest is absolute nonsense. Which lawyers started their careers working on tribunals? Starting your career working a tribunal case seems like a 20 year headstart on a career to me. Also, who set up the tribunals? Do you blame lawyers for crimes being committed too?
    As for the rest of your post, you just prove my initial point. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about and just want to have a go.

    As for my position of ignorance, well i am a Solicitor so hardly a position of ignorance to this issue is it? And this thread is actually making me doubt the intelligence of those that post on this site.

    Anyone who thinks being a Solicitor is easy or easy to get into is again talking through their arse. Very time consuming job, €35k a year for relatively newly qualifieds like myself and the constant threat of being sued by clients, banks and sanction from the Law Society makes every letter sent out potentially hazardous.

    Also, there is no more awful people doing law than any other profession. I come from a rural non-legal background. More ignorance

    But hey, you armchair critics know best, sure Johnnie Cochrane represented a clearly guilty man. Screw all lawyers :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #81
    woodoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,219 ✭✭✭woodoo


    Criminals should have to pay some of their legal costs out of their dole.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    cosmicfart
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,298 ✭✭✭cosmicfart


    Brain Stroking wrote: »

    what a winge baby.

    I've highlighted the part of your post i want to deal with :rolleyes:

    u chose ur profession, deal with it.

    And yes , I am strictly correct that many lawyers started up their own practice from the monies they made from working on tribunals.


  • Options
    #83
    Brain Stroking
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,874 ✭✭✭Brain Stroking


    cosmicfart wrote: »
    what a winge baby.

    I've highlighted the part of your post i want to deal with :rolleyes:

    u chose ur profession, deal with it.

    And yes , I am strictly correct that many lawyers started up their own practice from the monies they made from working on tribunals.

    You said that they started their careers working on tribunals. That is what i said wasnt true. Far from "strictly correct" as you mistakenly put it.

    I like my job. It is interesting, constantly changing and you need to rely on your own judgment a lot of the time which gives great satisfaction (when you get it right). I am not whinging. In fact, by the very nature of this thread and your comments, you are the whinger. What do i have to whinge about? I'm just saying you and a host of others here are talking complete crap and showing up your lack of intelligence. Maybe i am whinging about that actually, so you could be right. I do get annoyed by stupid people who try to shout loud about things they havent the first clue about.

    Ps i assumed you were on about me whinging even though you call it "winge". Maybe you are saying i'm whining? I'll let you join the dots


  • Options
    #84
    CrazyRabbit
    Registered Users Posts: 8,659 ✭✭✭CrazyRabbit


    7 arrests. No convictions. God I love solicitors.







    (May, or may not be true.)


  • Options
    #85
    LighterGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,243 ✭✭✭LighterGuy


    Orando Broom wrote: »
    Perhaps you should just ascend straight to heaven, oh omni-cogniscent one!

    Excuse me for having some sort of morals/ethics.


  • Options
    #86
    desertcircus
    Registered Users Posts: 2,648 ✭✭✭desertcircus


    LighterGuy wrote: »
    Orando Broom wrote: »
    Perhaps you should just ascend straight to heaven, oh omni-cogniscent one!

    Excuse me for having some sort of morals/ethics.

    At the risk of asking the flamingly obvious question: how does a lawyer decide who's guilty and therefore unworthy of representation, and who's innocent and deserves help? Presumably they'd have to strive for impartiality, maybe they could hire someone to argue their guilt and someone else to argue their innocence...

    You have no more ethics than the next man, so get down off the high horse.


  • Options
    #87
    Killer Pigeon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,132 ✭✭✭Killer Pigeon


    44leto wrote: »
    The big question I have, is why are legal fees so high. Its a profession but not a particularly difficult one. I personally have more respect for an engineer or the medical profession. What is wrong with a soliticor or barrister earning a sane hourly rate.

    The legal profession have protected themselves by knowledge of the law and a kind of closed shop.

    You clearly don't know how much money solicitors or barristers earn themselves, remember they also have to pay their staff. Just because a very small percentage of solicitors/barristers earn massive three figure salaries doesn't mean they all do. The legal profession in Ireland has become ten-a-penny, you'd rarely see someone earning over €50/60 thousand.


  • Options
    #88
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »
    Give Blackhall or Kings Inns a try and tell me its not a difficult profession. It's a high stress job where you have to be on the ball at all times, there is no margin for error, if you fcuk up, you open yourself up to being sued by the client or struck off by the Law Society. The law is constantly evolving which means its a never ending learning experience and you have to keep on top of it.

    No, no, no, no, no. Its one of them jobs like Taxi driving, being a guard, soldier, teacher, nurse or Nigerian. Free money for feck all.


  • Options
    #89
    44leto
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    Killer Pigeon wrote: »
    You clearly don't know how much money solicitors or barristers earn themselves, remember they also have to pay their staff. Just because a very small percentage of solicitors/barristers earn massive three figure salaries doesn't mean they all do. The legal profession in Ireland has become ten-a-penny, you'd rarely see someone earning over €50/60 thousand.

    I love these screams of poverty whenever there is any kind of industrial action, so they have to pay "their staff" really, that I think is the best poverty cry I have ever heard.


  • Options
    #90
    Killer Pigeon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,132 ✭✭✭Killer Pigeon


    44leto wrote: »
    I love these screams of poverty whenever there is any kind of industrial action, so they have to pay "their staff" really, that I think is the best poverty cry I have ever heard.

    Yes, staff who barely earn €20,000 a year themselves.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    44leto
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    Killer Pigeon wrote: »
    Yes, staff who barely earn €20,000 a year themselves.

    Well on the new rates solicitors will have to make their own tea.

    This is the market place, if there are to many professions in the legal practice why isn't the consumer benefiting from the additional competition??. I draw a parallel there are a lot of unemployed builders, house improvements have never been cheaper.


Advertisement