*/
Uncle Julian wishes all his readers a very Happy New Year and hopes the entire Bar is fully booked for 2009 (unlike Uncle Julian). Relaxing after my chambers’ Christmas luncheon, I was casually wiping off some Christmas pudding from my Vincent’s tie, when Sarah, my PA, asked me when the baby was due. This was too accurate a remark to be funny, so Uncle Julian has resolved to use his ample free time in the next 12 months to lose weight and to get fit. And now to my letters...
Q I am a criminal practitioner of eight years’ call. I spend most of my time in the magistrates’ court in London doing shoplifting cases and other petty theft, criminal damage or possession of cannabis, with the occasional trip to the Crown court to do more or less the same kind of work. This barely pays my travelling and chambers’ expenses, especially as most of my clients seem to plead guilty and I rarely get a contested Crown court trial. I feel that I did not get a first in law from Trinity in order to waste my life in Woolwich and Uxbridge. Can Uncle Julian give me any advice, both for the immediate and longer terms?
A You do not say whether you got your first from Trinity, Oxford or from Trinity, Cambridge. I am assuming that it was Trinity, Cambridge, because had you obtained a first from Trinity, Oxford, you would undoubtedly have been a tenant in one of the fashionable Human Rights or Public Law chambers and, by now, enjoying a vast income. But your predicament is, I fear, a very common one at the criminal Bar, so my answer is a little fuller than usual. Uncle Julian’s advice for the immediate future is as follows. In 2009, none of your clients are to plead guilty. It is a complete myth that pleading guilty in the magistrates’ courts does you any good. On the contrary, if you plead guilty, the court is sure that you are guilty and will give your client a harsh sentence. If on the other hand you plead not guilty, anything can happen in the trial (witnesses often don’t turn up for the inevitably adjourned hearing). Even if your client is convicted, the magistrates will feel a bit embarrassed (not being hardened professional judges) and they will reflect this embarrassment and also their unease and doubt about your client’s guilt anyway, in their lenient sentence. Except for the most serious crime in the Crown court (which you are not doing), the position, though for different reasons, is exactly the same there. You are supposed to get 33% off your sentence if you plead guilty, as compared to what your client would have received had he been convicted after a trial. Do you believe that? Does anybody believe that? On the other hand, you are not supposed to get a higher sentence for pleading not guilty, which is your right. Even at Trinity, Cambridge, I do not suppose you were taught how to hold two contradictory beliefs, simultaneously. Long gone are the days when a timely plea on a Friday, so the judge could go home early, saved your client from prison. A custodial sentence in fact now depends only upon the crime, not the plea, and, of course, upon whether there is any space in prison. Uncle Julian’s advice for the longer term is equally simple. You must position yourself as a specialist in a field where the work is going to expand hugely in the next few years. My recommendation is public order offences. An article in the New Law Journal entitled Why Looting by the Poor is their Human Right would be a good start. Uncle Julian has sent you a draft.
Q At my chambers’ Christmas dinner the seating allocation was done at random and although I am only a pupil, I found myself sitting next to a very attractive lady of about my age from Brazil and we got on really well. Indeed, so well that she gave me her mobile number and we have made a date for lunch in the New Year. Afterwards and to my dismay, I discovered that she is the new (third) wife of my Head of Chambers. What should I do? I am afraid that, if matters progress as I would like, this could affect my prospects of a tenancy.
A There is no fool like an old fool and if your Head of Chambers allows his much younger wife to sit next to a clever man of her own age, he has only himself to blame. Remember men fall in love through their eyes, but women fall in love through their ears. So definitely take her to lunch (somewhere discreet obviously). The only things in life you will regret are the things you did not do. But be cool about this and concentrate upon what you both really want. She wants a British passport (she is almost there, but not quite) and you want a tenancy in chambers (you are almost there, but not quite). So over lunch agree a deal. When she has her passport and you have a tenancy, true love will blossom. Until then, stay platonic.
Q What further shocks and troubles for the Bar does Uncle Julian think are coming in 2009?
A Uncle Julian is not a soothsayer and can only observe what is and not what is to come. But it happens that our new Chairman is known to me and there is no tougher or shrewder man at the Bar. He is also, by virtue of his character and seniority, immune to considerations of personal ambition. So the profession continues to be in good hands.
Julian Malins QC
Q I am a criminal practitioner of eight years’ call. I spend most of my time in the magistrates’ court in London doing shoplifting cases and other petty theft, criminal damage or possession of cannabis, with the occasional trip to the Crown court to do more or less the same kind of work. This barely pays my travelling and chambers’ expenses, especially as most of my clients seem to plead guilty and I rarely get a contested Crown court trial. I feel that I did not get a first in law from Trinity in order to waste my life in Woolwich and Uxbridge. Can Uncle Julian give me any advice, both for the immediate and longer terms?
A You do not say whether you got your first from Trinity, Oxford or from Trinity, Cambridge. I am assuming that it was Trinity, Cambridge, because had you obtained a first from Trinity, Oxford, you would undoubtedly have been a tenant in one of the fashionable Human Rights or Public Law chambers and, by now, enjoying a vast income. But your predicament is, I fear, a very common one at the criminal Bar, so my answer is a little fuller than usual. Uncle Julian’s advice for the immediate future is as follows. In 2009, none of your clients are to plead guilty. It is a complete myth that pleading guilty in the magistrates’ courts does you any good. On the contrary, if you plead guilty, the court is sure that you are guilty and will give your client a harsh sentence. If on the other hand you plead not guilty, anything can happen in the trial (witnesses often don’t turn up for the inevitably adjourned hearing). Even if your client is convicted, the magistrates will feel a bit embarrassed (not being hardened professional judges) and they will reflect this embarrassment and also their unease and doubt about your client’s guilt anyway, in their lenient sentence. Except for the most serious crime in the Crown court (which you are not doing), the position, though for different reasons, is exactly the same there. You are supposed to get 33% off your sentence if you plead guilty, as compared to what your client would have received had he been convicted after a trial. Do you believe that? Does anybody believe that? On the other hand, you are not supposed to get a higher sentence for pleading not guilty, which is your right. Even at Trinity, Cambridge, I do not suppose you were taught how to hold two contradictory beliefs, simultaneously. Long gone are the days when a timely plea on a Friday, so the judge could go home early, saved your client from prison. A custodial sentence in fact now depends only upon the crime, not the plea, and, of course, upon whether there is any space in prison. Uncle Julian’s advice for the longer term is equally simple. You must position yourself as a specialist in a field where the work is going to expand hugely in the next few years. My recommendation is public order offences. An article in the New Law Journal entitled Why Looting by the Poor is their Human Right would be a good start. Uncle Julian has sent you a draft.
Q At my chambers’ Christmas dinner the seating allocation was done at random and although I am only a pupil, I found myself sitting next to a very attractive lady of about my age from Brazil and we got on really well. Indeed, so well that she gave me her mobile number and we have made a date for lunch in the New Year. Afterwards and to my dismay, I discovered that she is the new (third) wife of my Head of Chambers. What should I do? I am afraid that, if matters progress as I would like, this could affect my prospects of a tenancy.
A There is no fool like an old fool and if your Head of Chambers allows his much younger wife to sit next to a clever man of her own age, he has only himself to blame. Remember men fall in love through their eyes, but women fall in love through their ears. So definitely take her to lunch (somewhere discreet obviously). The only things in life you will regret are the things you did not do. But be cool about this and concentrate upon what you both really want. She wants a British passport (she is almost there, but not quite) and you want a tenancy in chambers (you are almost there, but not quite). So over lunch agree a deal. When she has her passport and you have a tenancy, true love will blossom. Until then, stay platonic.
Q What further shocks and troubles for the Bar does Uncle Julian think are coming in 2009?
A Uncle Julian is not a soothsayer and can only observe what is and not what is to come. But it happens that our new Chairman is known to me and there is no tougher or shrewder man at the Bar. He is also, by virtue of his character and seniority, immune to considerations of personal ambition. So the profession continues to be in good hands.
Julian Malins QC
Uncle Julian wishes all his readers a very Happy New Year and hopes the entire Bar is fully booked for 2009 (unlike Uncle Julian). Relaxing after my chambers’ Christmas luncheon, I was casually wiping off some Christmas pudding from my Vincent’s tie, when Sarah, my PA, asked me when the baby was due. This was too accurate a remark to be funny, so Uncle Julian has resolved to use his ample free time in the next 12 months to lose weight and to get fit. And now to my letters...
Chair of the Bar finds common ground on legal services between our two jurisdictions, plus an update on jury trials
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
An interview with Rob Wagg, CEO of New Park Court Chambers
With at least 31 reports of AI hallucinations in UK legal cases – over 800 worldwide – and judges using AI to assist in judicial decision-making, the risks and benefits are impossible to ignore. Matthew Lee examines how different jurisdictions are responding
What has changed, and why? Paul Secher unpacks the new standards aligning the recruiting, training and appraising of judges – the first major change to the system for ten years
The deprivation of liberty is the most significant power the state can exercise. Drawing on frontline experience, Chris Henley KC explains why replacing trial by jury with judge-only trials risks undermining justice
Ever wondered what a pupillage is like at the CPS? This Q and A provides an insight into the training, experience and next steps
The appointments of 96 new King’s Counsel (also known as silk) are announced today