You are not Rumpole of the Bailey | Vital Forums

You are not Rumpole of the Bailey

#1
People who are forced to represent themselves in court as legal aid budgets are cut should not attempt to imitate the fast-talking lawyers they see on television, according to a new "idiot's guide".

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/you-are-not-rumpole-of-the-bailey-as-more-people-represent-themselves-in-court-the-bar-council-has-issued-some-pressing-advice-8555773.html

:3: :59:

Really, anyone considered moulding themselves on the examples:

Ally McBeal

Boston's temperamental fast-talking TV lawyer won global audiences for her passionate, off-the-cuff style. But a more considered, and less personal, approach should be used in real life.

Clive Reader

Suave and ferociously ambitious, Rupert Penry-Jones may act the part in the BBC series, Silk, but expect any amateur imitation to jar. Honesty is key.

Kavanagh QC

John Thaw was ITV's gruff and principled defence lawyer.

Vinny Gambini

Arriving in Alabama to defend his cousin, Joe Pesci's encounters with the judge in 'My Cousin Vinny' included falling asleep in court and arriving late, in a leather jacket

-----

My Cousin Fucking Vinny PMSL
 

kefkat

Vital Football Legend
#3
I suppose there are people out their who need to be told this, as common sense doesn't prevail with many.

Having represented myself at a civil court hearing where a removal firm lost some of our boxes in storage many years ago (yes we won) and though having a fantastic legal aid solicitor for my very acrimonious divorce from the ex and all that entailed I would have thought alot of what was being said goes without saying however there are alot of people in this world with average minds who don't have the ability to think out of the box
 

Jonah

Vital Football Legend
#5
merlin - 1/4/2013 12:03

does anyone ever dread coming up in front of a jury knowing what numpties there are out there?

I could never be tried by a jury as I have no peers, I am simply superior to all and sundry. :14:


 

badge73

Vital 1st Team Regular
#6
always opted for trial by jury, as would not put my faith in the magistrate system whats so ever.

most of how you present your case is down to things such as body language, and pauses to allow the jury to think over what you have just said and of cause leaving the seeds of doubt in their minds.
 

The Fear

A Wise Man (once sat next to him)
#7
I remember my one mate years ago being found guilty by the magistrates of one count of assault and not another. It was a technical impossibility to be guilty of the one and not the other so on appeal it was thrown out!

Happy days.

:120: :13:

I would go for jury, I'm so charming and debonair no jury could resist my charms and would of course find me not guilty.

:182: