Do you know anyone with a criminal record?

Gregor Samsa

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Personally I have never seen a case where the cost was an issue. Just my experience though.

Yeah, look, I’m not an expert in the legal system, and I can only talk about the experience I have first hand knowledge of. All I know is wife was £1000 lighter in paying for this for the family member who couldn’t afford it himself, and legal aid didn’t pay for it. And that it was crucial in exposing some serious errors in the State’s evidence (that caused a minor scandal at the time, not just related to his case, but others too. The individual who provided the flawed evidence no longer holds the State position they did at the time).

joeguevara

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

Their fee was £1000. So if there’s limits on what Legal Aid will pay for, then it’s valid to say that those who rely solely on Legal Aid don’t have access to the same level of defence as those who can afford some private extras.

Edit: that £1000 was for a document that contained rebuttal of forensic evidence. I think legal aid may have covered them giving testimony ant the trial itself, because we didn’t have to pay for that.

Not sure when it occurred but the fees for now are as follows: https://www.legalaidboard.ie/en/our-services/criminal-legal-aid/guidance-documents/expert-witness-fees-procedures-and-guidelines-document.html

I have never seen a case where something necessary was required wasn't approved. In reality, the only things i have seen denied were things that weren't considered necessary. I have seen a few times is a private payment made for what was above the legal aid limit (but this was rarely).

Higgins5473

Higgins5473 wrote: »

Look no further than Dermot Laide, Sean Mackey, Desmond Ryan, Andrew Frame for case in point for what you say above.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Brian_Murphy

Saw one of them throwing back pints in the Old Punch Bowl in Booterstown no more than a few months after the murder. Not a bother on him.

What's your point? They appealed. People generally stay on bail under appeal.

Would you expect them to be crying in an open bar months later?

There's thousands of cases where people get suspended sentences for serious crimes. Boards is littered with threads about them. Google is your friend.

This class thing, it's ****e before the courts. Actually sometimes it works the other way. Hard for a rich kids to play the poverty, poor upbringing card.

Going by this type of evidence produced here, allow me to go the other way. Businessmen hey hammered on court compared to commoners. Just look at the garlic case compared to a illegal cigarette case.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/man-jailed-for-six-years-over-16m-garlic-tax-scam-26830346.html

https://www.thejournal.ie/man-sentenced-cigarette-smuggling-dublin-airport-1632076-Aug2014/

The only time I have seen a rich kids throw money at a case, was drink driving. Cost him thousands to avoid getting the bus for 3 months.

And a lad that brought a barrister at 300 an hour to contest s parking ticket. Day off work in court + 300 euro minimum to fight an 80 Euro fine that he deserved. Maybe he thinks he won the case but I don't see how in real terms.

To push the point. Look at these cases, all using legal aid.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/true-predatorjailed-for-seven-years-for-30-counts-of-sexual-abuse-of-four-girls-1004704.html

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/IE-Web

https://www.dublinlive.ie/news/dublin-news/paedophile-grandad-walk-free-just-16623579

And compare them to the private defence in this case;

https://www.thesun.ie/news/5147895/rachel-allen-joshua-son-jailed-drugs-charges/

TheBoyConor

I'm still waiting for Randy Archer to name us the case and circumstances where a judge's son or daughter was up for a serious crime and go the book thrown at them for it.

We'll be waiting I'd say. It doesn't happen I suspect. Not because they are angles, but because they are untouchable. What Garda in their right mind would bring a judges son before a court to be prosecuted by a colleague and friend of their parent.

I know of an instance where a judge was brought up for something, and the Garda who let the case ended up the worse off for it. life made very difficult for him for years.

joeguevara

TheBoyConor wrote: »

I'm still waiting for Randy Archer to name us the case and circumstances where a judge's son or daughter was up for a serious crime and go the book thrown at them for it.

We'll be waiting I'd say. It doesn't happen I suspect. Not because they are angles, but because they are untouchable. What Garda in their right mind would bring a judges son before a court to be prosecuted by a colleague and friend of their parent.

I know of an instance where a judge was brought up for something, and the Garda who let the case ended up the worse off for it. life made very difficult for him for years.

What was the judge brought up for and what examples was the leading Gardaí life made very difficult? Did the prosecuting solicitor and barrister have their lives made difficult?

TheBoyConor

TheBoyConor wrote: »

I'm still waiting for Randy Archer to name us the case and circumstances where a judge's son or daughter was up for a serious crime and go the book thrown at them for it.

We'll be waiting I'd say. It doesn't happen I suspect. Not because they are angles, but because they are untouchable. What Garda in their right mind would bring a judges son before a court to be prosecuted by a colleague and friend of their parent.

I know of an instance where a judge was brought up for something, and the Garda who let the case ended up the worse off for it. life made very difficult for him for years.

What about the cases I showed?

There's a former judge currently serving a sentence ffs! There's ex Gardai currently serving sentences.

Maybe, here's a crazy one, maybe judges don't go around committing crimes to the same extent as career Criminals?

How about you show us the case that you refer to?

And read these:

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-30975864.html

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/circuit-court/politician-s-son-avoids-jail-for-lighting-firework-in-copper-face-jacks-1.4180909

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/views/analysis/michael-clifford-is-the-long-arm-of-the-law-extending-too-far-1010749.html

Actually, wasn't a minister dismissed as a result of a previous interaction with Gardai?

Gregor Samsa

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

Yeah, look, I’m not an expert in the legal system, and I can only talk about the experience I have first hand knowledge of. All I know is wife was £1000 lighter in paying for this for the family member who couldn’t afford it himself, and legal aid didn’t pay for it. And that it was crucial in exposing some serious errors in the State’s evidence (that caused a minor scandal at the time, not just related to his case, but others too. The individual who provided the flawed evidence no longer holds the State position they did at the time).

Fair enough. I can only think of one case that you could be referring to. This isn't relating to an autopsy and cause of death is it?

bmc58

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I would say most people would easily know a dozen such people, possibly more.

Even a regulatory offence like speeding forms part of a criminal record.

Don't think that sort of person the Op was talking about.

gogo

Grayson Immense Vagrant wrote: »

if you are aware of it can you not control it?

Jepers Kellykelly, don’t look now but I think you just stumbled across a cure for autism, now we just have to roll out a memo telling them all they just have to ‘control it’ ........

/mindblown

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

thats a bit ****ing mean and unnecessary TBH!

Lundstram wrote: »

Love how this disgusting post is totally acceptable because it's aimed at mr_fegelien.

Bully.

What in the hell are the two of you guys blathering on about?

I make an observation about someone's posting style on this site (which contained zero derogatory remarks btw), and somehow I'm deemed to be a "mean" "bully".... :rolleyes:

I know we live PC snowflake wonderland... but this is getting a bit ridiculous!

Here's an idea guys, why don't you ask mr_fegelien if they felt offended by my comment before deciding to be offended on their behalf.

Kylta

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

What in the hell are the two of you guys blathering on about?

I make an observation about someone's posting style on this site (which contained zero derogatory remarks btw), and somehow I'm deemed to be a "mean" "bully".... :rolleyes:

I know we live PC snowflake wonderland... but this is getting a bit ridiculous!

Here's an idea guys, why don't you ask mr_fegelien if they felt offended by my comment before deciding to be offended on their behalf.

I'm truly puzzled how can you offend a computer generated program. That's like shouting abuse at the wall. Mr feg is not a real person. He was invented to get a reaction on mostly the same boring topics. I think its hilarious to watch people argue of somebody who doesn't exist. I bet the programmer is pissing himself laughing too.
Bully a computer thats actually brilliant, that one. Maybe i'm wrong, wait I just seen Koyzer Zosa and Godzilla walk past my window.

mick087

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

Yeah, look, I’m not an expert in the legal system, and I can only talk about the experience I have first hand knowledge of. All I know is wife was £1000 lighter in paying for this for the family member who couldn’t afford it himself, and legal aid didn’t pay for it. And that it was crucial in exposing some serious errors in the State’s evidence (that caused a minor scandal at the time, not just related to his case, but others too. The individual who provided the flawed evidence no longer holds the State position they did at the time).

You might not be an expert but what you have is experience of the system.

Many people may try to find holes in your story or think its nonsense until of course its happens to them.
personal experience in anything is a priceless commodity. Sharing your experience is a helpful tool.

D3V!L

I came very close to having a criminal record for defending myself in a fight when I was assaulted. The other party came off much worse off and the Garda looking after the case tried to get a prosecution against me. Thankfully the Judge saw sense when he saw some CCTV footage and threw it out after 18 months of court hearings. It would have ruined me and my career.

ohnonotgmail

mick087 wrote: »

You might not be an expert but what you have is experience of the system.

Many people may try to find holes in your story or think its nonsense until of course its happens to them.
personal experience in anything is a priceless commodity. Sharing your experience is a helpful tool.

who has said their story was nonsense?

TheBoyConor

joeguevara wrote: »

What was the judge brought up for and what examples was the leading Gardaí life made very difficult? Did the prosecuting solicitor and barrister have their lives made difficult?

I don't know the full details but basically there was a pub somewhere in Tipperary that was doing illegal late night drinking lockins and one of the regulars for these late night sessions was a judge. Then some hot shot Guard decided they'd do the pub for the lockin and went in and ordered everyone out, including the judge.
I think shortly afterwards the Guard was sent off, reassinged to some crap place.

weldoninhio

TheBoyConor wrote: »

I don't know the full details but basically there was a pub somewhere in Tipperary that was doing illegal late night drinking lockins and one of the regulars for these late night sessions was a judge. Then some hot shot Guard decided they'd do the pub for the lockin and went in and ordered everyone out, including the judge.
I think shortly afterwards the Guard was sent off, reassinged to some crap place.

I’ve heard this old wives tale a hundred times. Isn’t there a snazzy quote that goes with it too. I can’t remember if now.

TheBoyConor

TheBoyConor wrote: »

I think shortly afterwards the Guard was sent off, reassinged to some crap place.

Issued with Toyota Yaris Garda car then too?

joeguevara

TheBoyConor wrote: »

I don't know the full details but basically there was a pub somewhere in Tipperary that was doing illegal late night drinking lockins and one of the regulars for these late night sessions was a judge. Then some hot shot Guard decided they'd do the pub for the lockin and went in and ordered everyone out, including the judge.
I think shortly afterwards the Guard was sent off, reassinged to some crap place.

So the judge wasn't brought up for anything as you had stated, and you don't know really if he was sent off, or even if he was for what reason? This is completely different to what you had posted previously.

mick087

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

who has said their story was nonsense?

Nobody said there story was nonsense as far as im aware.

Randy Archer

FishOnABike wrote: »

If you can afford to pay a solicitor / barrister their hourly rate I think you will find you can buy more of their time and expertise than the fixed rate legal aid fees can buy you. It's simple economics.

Utter nonsense ! You have nothing to back that up

It’s criminal law ffs, the less you talk to the client the better, for they may incriminate themselves leaving the lawyer being in a difficult position to represent them. You don’t go and ask the client “so ,did you do it “

You deal solely with the evidence that the prosecution present and no more . There’s no way of avoiding that, be it legal aid or private .what extra time would the client need? Offer an answer to what is asked and say no more

You clearly don’t know what you are talking about so stop waffling. It’s enough having to listen the other other moron gobbing on about an environment that they know nothing about

Randy Archer

mick087 wrote: »

In any court in almost country the Rich and powerful will nearly always fair better.
This is not in anyway to criticise any individual working within the legal system.
If your are rich and powerful you will have better access to the legal system be it through contacts or fee payment.

More nonsense

Back that up with specific cases.

You and that other class warrior imbecile have claimed that a rich person has a less chance of being convicted of charges against them than a poor person ,Especially they go private

All this by

1. Clearly mixing up the difference between avoiding a conviction with getting a lenient sentence - two different things . This has clearly gone way over yer heads big time - the other moron couldn’t tell the difference between a defence and mitigating factors

2. Completely ignoring what the actual charges are in such cases , the kind of crimes committed - this no doubt will go way over your head

3. Providing any evidence or knowledge that rich people were not on legal aid themselves .

You are talking utter bollox . You have no experience of the legal field so stop acting like you do.

The vast majority of criminal law specialists represent legal aid clients . The number of private ,especially for cases concerning the risk of liberty, is tiny . (Some road traffic offences aren’t covered by legal aid ) once someone has been approved of legal aid, they have access to ANY barrister (even Senior in big cases ) and solicitor who agrees to take their case

No peasant up in court for serious crimes , on legal aid , are hiring mediocre solicitors, barristers and senior counsel

Some serious libellous stuff spouted by some of they. Stupidity is not a defence

Randy Archer

TheBoyConor wrote: »

I don't know the full details but basically there was a pub somewhere in Tipperary that was doing illegal late night drinking lockins and one of the regulars for these late night sessions was a judge. Then some hot shot Guard decided they'd do the pub for the lockin and went in and ordered everyone out, including the judge.
I think shortly afterwards the Guard was sent off, reassinged to some crap place.

You don’t know the full details

Perhaps find out the full details before you talk bollox. You are talking utter crap. Do you actually think before you speak ?

Randy Archer

TheBoyConor wrote: »

I'm still waiting for Randy Archer to name us the case and circumstances where a judge's son or daughter was up for a serious crime and go the book thrown at them for it.

We'll be waiting I'd say. It doesn't happen I suspect. Not because they are angles, but because they are untouchable. What Garda in their right mind would bring a judges son before a court to be prosecuted by a colleague and friend of their parent.

I know of an instance where a judge was brought up for something, and the Garda who let the case ended up the worse off for it. life made very difficult for him for years.

You understand what a “serious crime “ is ? Here is a hint, one that makes the press , one that get splashed all over the press if the accused is a son or daughter of a politician , judge , doctor etc .

I don’t recall such cases of such accused committing serious crime . It’s your claim, so YOU provide an example. People of such backgrounds normally don’t commit “serious crime”

You are making some seriously libellous statements that you are not man enough to make in person .


Gardai were happy to bring Judge Curtin before the court on porno possession charges .... talking crap , again

ShatterAlan

Randy Archer wrote: »

If people are charged with crimes that will or could lead to jail, they will be entitled to legal aid, if they don’t have funds to pay for their legal team

You suggesting that lawyers practice their skills differently when representing well off people than they do with people on legal aid ? Rather serious claim , go prove it

Most convictions happen because they were caught red handed or have no defence

Spare us the class warrior horse crap

Does Ireland not have the public defender system?
Do legal aid defendants get the same calibre of legal representation as someone with deep pockets who can afford a serious lawyer and not some rookie who is just going through the motions and isn't getting much financial reward whether he wins or loses the case?

joeguevara

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Does Ireland not have the public defender system?
Do legal aid defendants get the same calibre of legal representation as someone with deep pockets who can afford a serious lawyer and not some rookie who is just going through the motions and isn't getting much financial reward whether he wins or loses the case?

They get the same calibre of barristers. For example Linda Mulhall had Brendan Grehan defending her for murder who would be the best criminal senior in the country. SHe was on legal aid. Does that answer you?

TheBoyConor

TheBoyConor wrote: »

........
I think shortly afterwards the Guard was sent off, reassinged to some crap place.

Tipperary iirc.

ShatterAlan

weldoninhio wrote: »

Know quite a few from massive drugs busts to murder to small time drug dealing. I'm very lucky i never got any. Was in college with the guy who recently shot the Gardai.

So you never got caught or you beat the rap each time?

TheBoyConor

More nonsense
Back that up with specific cases.

No, I won't. Why should I? This is the internet, not a court room. Same craic pisses me off when people ask for proof and refernces. It's the damn internet, man, not peer review of a PhD.

You don’t know the full details
Perhaps find out the full details before you talk bollox. You are talking utter crap. Do you actually think before you speak ?

Look, you need to calm down. You are getting too exercised over it. Maybe you should out for a walk or something.

ShatterAlan

I Am Nobody wrote: »

I actually had to read that twice,still in disbelief.Is the prisons here still that soft?I spent 7 years in a Fed prison in TN,and we were given nothing except meals for free.If you wanted a radio or tv you had to rent it.Stamps/stationary you had to buy.And so on,plus most of the inmates were various minorities.

And they always took over the rec room,even walking in the yard was touchy.So you pretty much visited a few friends for a few minutes.But mostly stayed in your cell.

You had to achieve trustee status to get any kind of job,in the kitchen or chapel.And after a year or two it was tough to stay by yourself and not get involved with the different dynamics.Depending on your skin colour,you were expected and at times demanded to join their groups.The Aryan Brotherhood are bastards for that if your white.

Stabbings between the groups were daily,and despite what they show on tv,rapes were few.So yeah I would of loved to have your experiences.

What were you or The Aryan Brotherhood or The Crips or MS13 doing in a Federal prison and not a State prison? Were you all done for insider trading or leaking classified government documents?

emeldc

It's about 30 years ago now but I met Martin Cahill (the General) a few times. He used to come in to a bookmakers that I worked in. I actually got a bit thick with him once :eek:. A few of his henchmen were also regulars. We knew they were ropey as fcuk but didn't really know what they were into for sure. But any time a bank was robbed they always seemed to have loads of money . Most of them were actually ok to talk to although one of them got 10 years for kidnapping some years later. In those days they weren't really shooting each other, just nailing young lads to snooker tables .

ShatterAlan

I Am Nobody wrote: »

Our clubhouse was raided by the DEA,FBI,and the IRS.We were all blanket charged under the RICO Act.If memory serves me right the charges were Racketeering,Drug Trafficking,and Tax Evasion.Myself also carried a charge of Malicious wounding and firearms violations,which I was convicted of.Spent 7 years in FCI Memphis and then deported.

You've answered my question.

Randy Archer

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Does Ireland not have the public defender system?
Do legal aid defendants get the same calibre of legal representation as someone with deep pockets who can afford a serious lawyer and not some rookie who is just going through the motions and isn't getting much financial reward whether he wins or loses the case?

There’s a legal aid panel, and the law society has a criminal law committee but no such thing as a public defender system per se. Private solicitors sign up to the legal aid panel . In some cases like extradition, there was /is an Attonery General scheme kinda like legal aid - but the accused picks their solicitor , and solicitor informs the court if a barrister is needed

The vast majority of criminal law specialists provide their services under the criminal legal aid Scheme. It’s their bread and butter in fact. There are certain offences where legal aid may not be available eg road traffic related matters like no tax, insurance etc

Some offences are basic , as in there is little extra skill over what should be the standard high practices expected of the lawyer

A person granted legal aid, has the access to all the solicitors and barristers that are in the legal aid panel. They chose (obviously, the solicitors pick their own barristers, which it’s in their interest to pick good ones - which they will know from their experience

For every massive white collar crime case that Staines Co limited do (Staines is one of the leading criminal law practices in the country ) they represented Sean Fitzpatrick (or at least did for the start ) they will be back to more mundane usual district and circuit criminal law cases on foot of legal aid the next day eg theft , criminal damage , drugs possession etc

It ain’t all attending and presenting murder cases or rape cases every day (the big pay days along with publicity )

A firm like that will have a team of solicitors, from the rookie doing the run of the mill district court cases to the mid and high ranking solicitors in the circuit and central and special . Those rookies, who do the district court work (not exactly pressing or difficult for a trained solicitor ) don’t just waltz in off the street , they pick the best and they throughly train them and supervise them at all stages
. It’s the same with the DPP solicitors

A group like Staines don’t get to where they are (30-40 years in the game ) by messing up cases through laziness or negligence simply because a case is legal aid or a case is a small time district court matter .

For the smaller firms , they can’t afford to be seen to give Poor quality services. Complaints are made by clients to legal aid and they Take them seriously. If there’s evidence of cock ups , you might be kicked off the legal aid panel , which ain’t easy to get onto by the way .also as previously pointed out by me and another poster, what goes on in the court is in public. There will be loads of regular visitors ,plenty of Antos who are in court regularly who will spot bad advocacy and they will tell their pals to avoid so and so. A judge won’t intentionally nominate a solicitor before them when an accused is asking for a solicitor and legal aid (some don’t come to court with a solicitor)

A rookie solicitor ain’t going to run a case without help, be it an experienced colleague or getting a barrister for circuit cases

Yes , legal aid clients can get the same calibre lawyers who specialise in criminal law ,as the deep pockets people .

Some top class lawyers maybe more expert on say extradition and warrants but not too hot in say road traffic offences and vice versa .

A solicitor going through the motions gets caught out extremely fast in the criminal law courts, by judges, gardai , the public, the client and other accused . They won’t get much work again if they truly **** up . There are plenty of solicitors and barristers to compete with

Criminal law ain’t exactly the area of law to practice in if the only motive is money .

Besides , some basic run of the mill district court cases could end up in the High Court for Judicial Review because of some nutty decisions by the District Court judge , that means big pay day. So it pays to pay attention (some ex dc judges were notorious for thinking that they were a law onto themselves and dissing out decisions that were utterly at odds with law and procedure )

Those guys who top the legal aid pay outs... they literally work and have to available 24 hours day seven days a week. Crime doesn’t stop at a Christmas (assaults are big on New Year’s Eve )

Attending Garda stations at 12 midnight with no guarantee of getting paid and no guarantee that that person will come back looking for his service if he’s charged !!! Spending a day going down to the midlands prisons to visit a client only to be told On arrival that they don’t want to see you at that particular time because his or her head is wrecked or they are throwing a hissy fit or they are in solidarity confinement - and then screaming blue murder about not being visited or demanding they come the next day

joeguevara

Randy Archer wrote: »

There’s a legal aid panel, and the law society has a criminal law committee but no such thing as a public defender system per se. Private solicitors sign up to the legal aid panel . In some cases like extradition, there was /is an Attonery General scheme kinda like legal aid - but the accused picks their solicitor , and solicitor informs the court if a barrister is needed

The vast majority of criminal law specialists provide their services under the criminal legal aid Scheme. It’s their bread and butter in fact. There are certain offences where legal aid may not be available eg road traffic related matters like no tax, insurance etc

Some offences are basic , as in there is little extra skill over what should be the standard high practices expected of the lawyer

A person granted legal aid, has the access to all the solicitors and barristers that are in the legal aid panel. They chose (obviously, the solicitors pick their own barristers, which it’s in their interest to pick good ones - which they will know from their experience

For every massive white collar crime case that Staines Co limited do (Staines is one of the leading criminal law practices in the country ) they represented Sean Fitzpatrick (or at least did for the start ) they will be back to more mundane usual district and circuit criminal law cases on foot of legal aid the next day eg theft , criminal damage , drugs possession etc

It ain’t all attending and presenting murder cases or rape cases every day (the big pay days along with publicity )

A firm like that will have a team of solicitors, from the rookie doing the run of the mill district court cases to the mid and high ranking solicitors in the circuit and central and special . Those rookies, who do the district court work (not exactly pressing or difficult for a trained solicitor ) don’t just waltz in off the street , they pick the best and they throughly train them and supervise them at all stages
. It’s the same with the DPP solicitors

A group like Staines don’t get to where they are (30-40 years in the game ) by messing up cases through laziness or negligence simply because a case is legal aid or a case is a small time district court matter .

For the smaller firms , they can’t afford to be seen to give Poor quality services. Complaints are made by clients to legal aid and they Take them seriously. If there’s evidence of cock ups , you might be kicked off the legal aid panel , which ain’t easy to get onto by the way .also as previously pointed out by me and another poster, what goes on in the court is in public. There will be loads of regular visitors ,plenty of Antos who are in court regularly who will spot bad advocacy and they will tell their pals to avoid so and so. A judge won’t intentionally nominate a solicitor before them when an accused is asking for a solicitor and legal aid (some don’t come to court with a solicitor)

A rookie solicitor ain’t going to run a case without help, be it an experienced colleague or getting a barrister for circuit cases

Yes , legal aid clients can get the same calibre lawyers who specialise in criminal law ,as the deep pockets people .

Some top class lawyers maybe more expert on say extradition and warrants but not too hot in say road traffic offences and vice versa .

A solicitor going through the motions gets caught out extremely fast in the criminal law courts, by judges, gardai , the public, the client and other accused . They won’t get much work again if they truly **** up . There are plenty of solicitors and barristers to compete with

Criminal law ain’t exactly the area of law to practice in if the dole motive is money .

Those guys who top the legal aid pay outs... they literally work and have to available 24 hours day seven days a week. Crime doesn’t stop at a Christmas (assaults are big on New Year’s Eve )

Attending Garda stations at 12 midnight with no guarantee of getting paid and no guarantee that that person will come back looking for his service if he’s charged !!! Spending a day going down to the midlands prisons to visit a client only to be told On arrival that they don’t want to see you at that particular time because his or her head is wrecked or they are throwing a hissy fit or they are in solidarity confinement - and then screaming blue murder about not being visited or demanding they come the next day

I think the poster was more alluding to the barristers rather than solicitors. But the top barristers are all available to those on legal aid. I don'#t understand why people keep thinking that they aren't and only availalable to those with deep pockets who don't commit anywhere the amount of crime.

Randy Archer

TheBoyConor wrote: »

No, I won't. Why should I? This is the internet, not a court room. Same craic pisses me off when people ask for proof and refernces. It's the damn internet, man, not peer review of a PhD.



Look, you need to calm down. You are getting too exercised over it. Maybe you should out for a walk or something.

Why should you ? Eh, you make wild claims , it’s for you to support them , because you clearly have no interest in listening to people who actually know what they are talking about

At least have some self respect and try not make yourself look like the fool that you clearly have portrayed yourself to be on this subject

Yes internet - Because we all know mouths like you would be too scared of being humiliated at laughed at if you spoke in person On these matters

I’m a calm. Nothing is more funny than reading crap from people like you and you being so desperate in trying to get the last word or prove a point, which you have been doing. Stick to things more on your level ,son

Randy Archer

joeguevara wrote: »

I think the poster was more alluding to the barristers rather than solicitors. But the top barristers are all available to those on legal aid. I don'#t understand why people keep thinking that they aren't and only availalable to those with deep pockets who don't commit anywhere the amount of crime.

I pointed out that the solicitor picks the barrister , and it’s the solicitors best interest For himself and his client to pick the best available barrister . Only their schedule will be a reason for the best barristers and seniors to turn down work as you know

The first person that an accused will Met is the solicitor , the legal aid will be assigned to the solicitors office (obviously with the named barrister included )

What was said about the solicitor preparing a case and spotting faults in the case and running the case in court applied equally to the barrister, as you know, (barristers will also attend prisons too )

Dyr

ShatterAlan wrote: »

What were you or The Aryan Brotherhood or The Crips or MS13 doing in a Federal prison and not a State prison? Were you all done for insider trading or leaking classified government documents?

You get send to federal prison when you're convicted in a federal court when you're tried for breaking federal laws. It's not just for national security offences. Federal prisons are full of gang members and the like.

And you thought that you were catching this fella out?

ohnonotgmail

ShatterAlan wrote: »

What were you or The Aryan Brotherhood or The Crips or MS13 doing in a Federal prison and not a State prison? Were you all done for insider trading or leaking classified government documents?

Bambi wrote: »

You get send to federal prison when you're convicted in a federal court when you're tried for breaking federal laws. It's not just for national security offences. Federal prisons are full of gang members and the like.

And you thought that you were catching this fella out?

as bambi said federal prison is for federal offences. I am nobody was charged with RICO offences. RICO is a federal law.

mick087

Randy Archer wrote: »

More nonsense

Back that up with specific cases.

You and that other class warrior imbecile have claimed that a rich person has a less chance of being convicted of charges against them than a poor person ,Especially they go private

All this by

1. Clearly mixing up the difference between avoiding a conviction with getting a lenient sentence - two different things . This has clearly gone way over yer heads big time - the other moron couldn’t tell the difference between a defence and mitigating factors

2. Completely ignoring what the actual charges are in such cases , the kind of crimes committed - this no doubt will go way over your head

3. Providing any evidence or knowledge that rich people were not on legal aid themselves .

You are talking utter bollox . You have no experience of the legal field so stop acting like you do.

The vast majority of criminal law specialists represent legal aid clients . The number of private ,especially for cases concerning the risk of liberty, is tiny . (Some road traffic offences aren’t covered by legal aid ) once someone has been approved of legal aid, they have access to ANY barrister (even Senior in big cases ) and solicitor who agrees to take their case

No peasant up in court for serious crimes , on legal aid , are hiring mediocre solicitors, barristers and senior counsel

Some serious libellous stuff spouted by some of they. Stupidity is not a defence

I would disagree that it is not nonsense in that the law is there to protect the rich and poweful.

No i cannot back it up with specific cases.

The justice system as well as the law system needs change.
I would suggest and the following is only a suggestion not a matter of fact its an idea towards change.

Soilctors and barristers earn a salary in line say with say teachers pay scale.
Judges maybe on a pay scale like that of a school head.
We could have 2 seperate bodies ie Prosecution and defence run totaly independant of each other.
To access this system you could make an appointment to be assesed on earnings.
If you cannot afford to pay then the sate picks up the tab.
Then an indepenanant body picks the solictor that will represent you.
So basicly we dont pick who represents us, an indepenant body would.
Bring down the wage structure to be in line with a fair wage so the excess can tickle down to all that are involved in law and justice.

ShatterAlan

Randy Archer wrote: »

Utter nonsense ! You have nothing to back that up

It’s criminal law ffs, the less you talk to the client the better, for they may incriminate themselves leaving the lawyer being in a difficult position to represent them. You don’t go and ask the client “so ,did you do it “

You deal solely with the evidence that the prosecution present and no more . There’s no way of avoiding that, be it legal aid or private .what extra time would the client need? Offer an answer to what is asked and say no more

You clearly don’t know what you are talking about so stop waffling. It’s enough having to listen the other other moron gobbing on about an environment that they know nothing about

I'm no lawyer but why wouldn't defence counsel not present exxonerating evidence that has not been presented by the prosecution.

JasonStatham

A man in our area, was convicted of membership of the RA - he was away for a long time. I don't know if that gives you a criminal record.

ShatterAlan

joeguevara wrote: »

They get the same calibre of barristers. For example Linda Mulhall had Brendan Grehan defending her for murder who would be the best criminal senior in the country. SHe was on legal aid. Does that answer you?

It certainly does answer the question. Thank you.


My question then would also be, if someone who applies for legal aid receives the same quality of representation as one who can afford to pay for it then why would a wealthy person not apply if there is no difference? Are you means tested before your trial?

Ted_YNWA

Randy Archer wrote: »

Utter nonsense ! You have nothing to back that up

It’s criminal law ffs, the less you talk to the client the better, for they may incriminate themselves leaving the lawyer being in a difficult position to represent them. You don’t go and ask the client “so ,did you do it “

You deal solely with the evidence that the prosecution present and no more . There’s no way of avoiding that, be it legal aid or private .what extra time would the client need? Offer an answer to what is asked and say no more

You clearly don’t know what you are talking about so stop waffling. It’s enough having to listen the other other moron gobbing on about an environment that they know nothing about

Randy Archer wrote: »

More nonsense

Back that up with specific cases.

You and that other class warrior imbecile have claimed that a rich person has a less chance of being convicted of charges against them than a poor person ,Especially they go private

All this by

1. Clearly mixing up the difference between avoiding a conviction with getting a lenient sentence - two different things . This has clearly gone way over yer heads big time - the other moron couldn’t tell the difference between a defence and mitigating factors

2. Completely ignoring what the actual charges are in such cases , the kind of crimes committed - this no doubt will go way over your head

3. Providing any evidence or knowledge that rich people were not on legal aid themselves .

You are talking utter bollox . You have no experience of the legal field so stop acting like you do.

The vast majority of criminal law specialists represent legal aid clients . The number of private ,especially for cases concerning the risk of liberty, is tiny . (Some road traffic offences aren’t covered by legal aid ) once someone has been approved of legal aid, they have access to ANY barrister (even Senior in big cases ) and solicitor who agrees to take their case

No peasant up in court for serious crimes , on legal aid , are hiring mediocre solicitors, barristers and senior counsel

Some serious libellous stuff spouted by some of they. Stupidity is not a defence

Randy Archer wrote: »

You understand what a “serious crime “ is ? Here is a hint, one that makes the press , one that get splashed all over the press if the accused is a son or daughter of a politician , judge , doctor etc .

I don’t recall such cases of such accused committing serious crime . It’s your claim, so YOU provide an example. People of such backgrounds normally don’t commit “serious crime”

You are making some seriously libellous statements that you are not man enough to make in person .


Gardai were happy to bring Judge Curtin before the court on porno possession charges .... talking crap , again

Randy Archer wrote: »

You don’t know the full details

Perhaps find out the full details before you talk bollox. You are talking utter crap. Do you actually think before you speak ?

Mod
you are clearly unable to debate this is good faith & resort to personal jabs & insults. Do not post in this thread again.

ShatterAlan

Bambi wrote: »

You get send to federal prison when you're convicted in a federal court when you're tried for breaking federal laws. It's not just for national security offences. Federal prisons are full of gang members and the like.

And you thought that you were catching this fella out?

Calm down there, Bambi. My question was tongue in cheek. I have a bit of difficulty in distinguishing between "federal" courts/crimes and "state" courts/crimes.

ShatterAlan

Randy Archer wrote: »

There’s a legal aid panel, and the law society has a criminal law committee but no such thing as a public defender system per se. Private solicitors sign up to the legal aid panel . In some cases like extradition, there was /is an Attonery General scheme kinda like legal aid - but the accused picks their solicitor , and solicitor informs the court if a barrister is needed

The vast majority of criminal law specialists provide their services under the criminal legal aid Scheme. It’s their bread and butter in fact. There are certain offences where legal aid may not be available eg road traffic related matters like no tax, insurance etc

Some offences are basic , as in there is little extra skill over what should be the standard high practices expected of the lawyer

A person granted legal aid, has the access to all the solicitors and barristers that are in the legal aid panel. They chose (obviously, the solicitors pick their own barristers, which it’s in their interest to pick good ones - which they will know from their experience

For every massive white collar crime case that Staines Co limited do (Staines is one of the leading criminal law practices in the country ) they represented Sean Fitzpatrick (or at least did for the start ) they will be back to more mundane usual district and circuit criminal law cases on foot of legal aid the next day eg theft , criminal damage , drugs possession etc

It ain’t all attending and presenting murder cases or rape cases every day (the big pay days along with publicity )

A firm like that will have a team of solicitors, from the rookie doing the run of the mill district court cases to the mid and high ranking solicitors in the circuit and central and special . Those rookies, who do the district court work (not exactly pressing or difficult for a trained solicitor ) don’t just waltz in off the street , they pick the best and they throughly train them and supervise them at all stages
. It’s the same with the DPP solicitors

A group like Staines don’t get to where they are (30-40 years in the game ) by messing up cases through laziness or negligence simply because a case is legal aid or a case is a small time district court matter .

For the smaller firms , they can’t afford to be seen to give Poor quality services. Complaints are made by clients to legal aid and they Take them seriously. If there’s evidence of cock ups , you might be kicked off the legal aid panel , which ain’t easy to get onto by the way .also as previously pointed out by me and another poster, what goes on in the court is in public. There will be loads of regular visitors ,plenty of Antos who are in court regularly who will spot bad advocacy and they will tell their pals to avoid so and so. A judge won’t intentionally nominate a solicitor before them when an accused is asking for a solicitor and legal aid (some don’t come to court with a solicitor)

A rookie solicitor ain’t going to run a case without help, be it an experienced colleague or getting a barrister for circuit cases

Yes , legal aid clients can get the same calibre lawyers who specialise in criminal law ,as the deep pockets people .

Some top class lawyers maybe more expert on say extradition and warrants but not too hot in say road traffic offences and vice versa .

A solicitor going through the motions gets caught out extremely fast in the criminal law courts, by judges, gardai , the public, the client and other accused . They won’t get much work again if they truly **** up . There are plenty of solicitors and barristers to compete with

Criminal law ain’t exactly the area of law to practice in if the only motive is money .

Besides , some basic run of the mill district court cases could end up in the High Court for Judicial Review because of some nutty decisions by the District Court judge , that means big pay day. So it pays to pay attention (some ex dc judges were notorious for thinking that they were a law onto themselves and dissing out decisions that were utterly at odds with law and procedure )

Those guys who top the legal aid pay outs... they literally work and have to available 24 hours day seven days a week. Crime doesn’t stop at a Christmas (assaults are big on New Year’s Eve )

Attending Garda stations at 12 midnight with no guarantee of getting paid and no guarantee that that person will come back looking for his service if he’s charged !!! Spending a day going down to the midlands prisons to visit a client only to be told On arrival that they don’t want to see you at that particular time because his or her head is wrecked or they are throwing a hissy fit or they are in solidarity confinement - and then screaming blue murder about not being visited or demanding they come the next day

Thank you.


And for not biting my head off

Cork Trucker

Yes i do.








































































Me.

ShatterAlan

Personally I've met people who have definitely had criminal records and some who probably had given their line of work but I would say that anyone in my circle of friends or relatives haven't anything more than a traffic violation.


I did however work for Jordan Belfort for a brief stint in New York and knew one or two brokers back then who spent a bit of time inside for fraud and securities violations.

ohnonotgmail

ShatterAlan wrote: »

It certainly does answer the question. Thank you.


My question then would also be, if someone who applies for legal aid receives the same quality of representation as one who can afford to pay for it then why would a wealthy person not apply if there is no difference? Are you means tested before your trial?

legal aid is for those who cannot afford to pay so there is a means test.

Higgins5473

Cork Trucker wrote: »

Yes i do.



Me.

What you get up to Trucker? Motorway petrol station toilet solicitation glory hole type of stuff? or some kind of farm yard ‘relief’ with nearby cattle on a long trip? You dirty f*cker either way,

spurious

Lots and lots. Probably in the hundreds.

joeguevara

mick087 wrote: »

I would disagree that it is not nonsense in that the law is there to protect the rich and poweful.

No i cannot back it up with specific cases.

The justice system as well as the law system needs change.
I would suggest and the following is only a suggestion not a matter of fact its an idea towards change.

Soilctors and barristers earn a salary in line say with say teachers pay scale.
Judges maybe on a pay scale like that of a school head.
We could have 2 seperate bodies ie Prosecution and defence run totaly independant of each other.
To access this system you could make an appointment to be assesed on earnings.
If you cannot afford to pay then the sate picks up the tab.
Then an indepenanant body picks the solictor that will represent you.
So basicly we dont pick who represents us, an indepenant body would.
Bring down the wage structure to be in line with a fair wage so the excess can tickle down to all that are involved in law and justice.

MMMM similar to the US system which is weighted to people who are richer.

What problem are you trying to fix in Ireland as it has been said on countless times, people who are on legal aid, get the same barristers as people who have to pay full whack. It cannot be made clearer.