Conversation Society, News and Sport
Helper icon Helpers: Chris2mates , LLstill , PrincessFruitBat

About us

Midsummer's Eve is a free online dating community - based around friendship, real meetups, real people, and real relationships. We've been online since 1999 and have twice won Radio 2's Web Site of the Day award. So why not join us for free and join in the discussion?

Are lawyers to be trusted..

it often seems strange...

1 2 Next >  Last >> 

tumbleweed  Male  Gloucestershire 1-Jun-2019 13:29 Message #4741102
I was just watching one of the old black and white mystery drama things that I watch, and in it, a lawyer helped get a defendant 'not guilty'.

The defendant was accused of shooting his wife, but was then freed...It turns out that he did shoot his wife after all..

It got me thinking of the job that Lawyers do...You often hear things like 'Get yourself a good lawyer'...and you often hear about real life cases, where if you can afford 'a good lawyer', they will find holes in the case and you stand a good chance of 'walking free'

That same Lawyer though, if they were on the other side, and trying to find the person guilty, would probably get a result that way..

So for the same case, a lawyer, especially 'a good lawyer', can either mean that someone will be found guilty, or not guilty, depending on what side the lawyer is on...

lawyers must have to be quite two faced at times...especially 'good ones'
Minnie-the-Minx  Female  Hertfordshire 1-Jun-2019 14:23 Message #4741103
I don't think I would fully trust a lawyer for other completely different reasons. They need to be pretty ruthless. ;)

Describing them as two faced is looking at it on an emotional level and what a good lawyer does is quite the opposite. They objectively weigh up the evidence on either side to build a case. It doesn't matter which side they are on, the process would still be the same.
I think that I am right in thinking that lawyers don't actually choose a case and it is awarded to them by the courts, so they may end up having to argue a case that they may or may not believe to be the truth. To get future work, they are obliged to do a good job, all the same. That was certainly the case in the past.
I am not a lawyer, I do regulatory work, but I often find myself in a similar position where I have to build a persuasive case from what I know, even though I know that I am chancing my arm, at times. And I am probably one of the most truthful people that I know. Anyone who works in a negotiating role will find themselves having to do similar, by weighing up the weaknesses and strengths in the evidence from both sides. It is highly skilled work.
Don't forget that what lawyers do isn't just about getting guilty people off scot free, it is also looking for mitigating circumstances or whether a lesser charge is more appropriate, and also whether what they did actually broke the law. For example, murder versus manslaughter or whether it was self defence. I would think most cases involving personal injury are complex.
But I think that in many cases, the only person who really knows the truth is the perpetrator.
NotHermit  Male  Derbyshire 1-Jun-2019 14:26 Message #4741104
Everyone should study the law, not just lawyers.
Otherwise you are fair game.
In court any person with reasonable acumen should beat a lawyer.
Lawyer dealing with hundreds of cases, person dealing with one.
Its an easy win for anyone making the effort.
There are lots of people in prison because they did not study the law.
Too many examples of bad defence.
A quote from Rumpole, * Things said, that should have been left unsaid.*.
This quote always sums it up for me.
An historical example would be Dick Turpin, any lawyer would have got him off.
But he did not understand basic law and was hung.
Its easy to study law nowadays, for instance real police programs on tv.
Some good books out there too.
barney  Male  Surrey 1-Jun-2019 21:31 Message #4741111
" Are lawyers to be trusted ".

About as far as I could throw one.
MrNatural  Male  Essex 2-Jun-2019 01:00 Message #4741117
I am a lawyer many years qualifier as solicitor and Officer of the Supreme Court.

You are of course welcome to you opinions as am I. You are all appear to beill-informed ‘red-top’reading ill-informed *s who don’t have a clue and speak beyond their intellect or with absolutely no knowledge of the legal profession. To be perfectly frank I cannot be bothered to enlighten you and I welcome you to continuing wallow in you ignorance. Sadly, many of my clients seem to share with you the apparent intellect of the slugs that I am about to euthanize in my garden.

If you don’t trust a lawyer- go sell your house without one or sort your own probate out & see how far you get.

Barney - next time you want to sell your house or update your will - best of luck on your own there...
Nigel_In_Devon  Male  Devon 2-Jun-2019 01:34 Message #4741118
Charming! Someone sounds a tad arrogant!
NotHermit  Male  Derbyshire 2-Jun-2019 02:13 Message #4741119
You can trust him though, sounds like the kids do not get any balls back from him.

How dare your ball trespass on my land, you are all thick as slugs!
Wait till your dad wants to sell his house, he will need me then.
Gosh Barney must be really upset.
We all need to club together and buy turtle wax, or a syrup!
NotHermit  Male  Derbyshire 2-Jun-2019 02:14 Message #4741121
Not actually a lawyer is he.
Minnie-the-Minx  Female  Hertfordshire 2-Jun-2019 11:14 Message #4741140
It seems that our learned friend has left the house.
fosy  Male  Leicestershire 2-Jun-2019 11:23 Message #4741141
just goes to show you cant trust a lawyer...this ones legged it just as the flack starts to fly !!
terry  Male  West Yorkshire 2-Jun-2019 11:37 Message #4741142
Are lawyers to be trusted?

It's a job, a very lucrative job where as Minnie says, they fight for whatever their brief is, truth and right are just words. I would guess we all have tales giving both sides, personally I steer well clear of them now and wouldn't employ one; that said, they are human and I suspect some of them believe in and fight for, truth.
wonderoushen  Female  Gwynedd 2-Jun-2019 11:57 Message #4741146
One of the things that seem to have been missed out is the difference between a solicitor and a barrister, as far as I can see its a bit like the difference between a GP and a consultant. I agree that our legal system is a bit antiquated, but trust is another matter, a barrister has to do their best for thier client in court, if the defence has been found inadaquate then it can be grounds for appealling a conviction. A barrister must challenge the prosecution to do their job properly, we see to much sloppy preparation by the CPS that just wastes everyones time and money when a case can't proceed. I think many people think that British court opperate in the same way that American ones do and they don't, theres no shouting 'objection!' for one thing.

I think you should pick your solicitor with care, you don't have to stay with them if you don't find them satisfactory, you can sack them and take your business elsewhere, its harder with a barrister because you get less time with them before a case, but you do have a right to a second opinion.
barney  Male  Surrey 2-Jun-2019 13:22 Message #4741149
Ooh, looks like I touched a nerve there lol. Why has he left the court before I can state my case ?.

So anyone who reads a red top newspaper is a ignorant peasant. I rest my case m'lud.

For a while there I thought I was reading a post by one of our other esteemed posters.
Orson  Male  Tayside 2-Jun-2019 15:40 Message #4741164
Mr Natural seems to be doing what comes naturally to him.

" I don't know the name, but the manner is familiar"

NotHermit  Male  Derbyshire 2-Jun-2019 16:31 Message #4741168
Back to serious business, Barney needs to update his will, so he needs help.
Here it is Barney.

Get a DIY will writing kit, just fill it in.

Even more help for you, just write the following short statement.
I leave all my money and belongings to Not Hermit
Remember to get it witnessed, and think about the money you have saved by not using a lawyer.
If anyone else needs legal advice, I will be glad to help.
Nigel_In_Devon  Male  Devon 2-Jun-2019 18:03 Message #4741169
Seems you can't always trust the legal team. Anglia Ruskin Uni were sued over fals advertising of one of their degrees by a student. Despite the court ruling in the University's favour and ruling the student should pay towards the Uni's legal costs the solicitors from the Uni's Insurers have paid out to the student!
warmundeft  Male  Wrexham 3-Jun-2019 10:06 Message #4741206
To guide my choice of a professional to represent my interests, I am inclined towards one who at least is capable of stringing a coherent sentence together. Regardless of the length of time passed since qualification and offices presently held, I would probably not trust someone displaying the language skills of a failed ESOL student.
Judance  Female  Berkshire 3-Jun-2019 10:53 Message #4741216
I am not a lawyer (American term?) nor a solicitor or barrister but I recognise that the jobs require a lot of knowledge of the law and previous case law to be successful. The time spent with clients is only a small amount compared to the research and other paperwork needed to put a case together for court, for instance.

My Daughter-in-law is a solicitor and I would trust her to the moon and back, to quote a favourite phrase of my grandchildren!

I think we look at the law-person as someone who 'gets people off' in a court situation when we see a guilty person in front of us.
It's about working within the law (which we all know is an ass!) so if a case isn't presented well, it will fail.

There are situations when DIY can be the way to go. Writing a will, power of attorney and the like can easily be done with the WH Smith kits.
As long as the wording you use is unambiguous, you should have no problem.
Personally I preferred to use a solicitor (and yes, I did pay the standard fees) to make sure there is no confusion when I go doolally or shuffle off this mortal coil!
tumbleweed  Male  Gloucestershire 3-Jun-2019 11:23 Message #4741218
Good replies and info...

I'm never sure of the correct 'terminology' for the legal people.

I'm sure that most are hard working and full of integrity, or at least half full anyway, but it's always intrigued me as to how, in a court case for instance, they can do what they do, no matter which side they are on...

Something that springs to mind a bit, regarding a real case...Now, this is sort of from memory, so I would have to look up all the real details properly to get an accurate account, but the girl who got murdered in Italy quite a few years ago, one of the suspects having a surname 'Knox'...The evidence seemed to prove her guilty, and I remember it being one way, then another way, then they got a 'good lawyer' team in, who got some evidence thrown out, I think to do with the police maybe unintentionally contaminating evidence, by 'possibly' having contact between Knox's clothes and the murder weapon ( Knife ). DNA and all that.

That was originally used to find her guilty, but the 'legal eagles' argued about the 'possible' contamination, and the evidence was thrown out, which meant she walked free.

Now if that 'legal' team had been on the other side, they 100% wouldn't have argued that same point and got the evidence thrown out like they did.

So it meant the difference between her being found guilty and not guilty...

I'm not sure if the legal team were just happy having done their job, which in this case was to get a 'not guilty', or if deep down they were seething that they were working for her...and really wanted her locked up, but couldn't turn down the dosh...

Some of the details above may be a bit sketchy, but it's just an example..
Gilpin  Female  Middlesex 3-Jun-2019 16:30 Message #4741233
Can lawyers be trusted. They are trained professionals and have to act within the law. They also have to take an oath. A reputable firm of solicitors will build up a reputation, I imagine trust is high on the list. It pays them to give a reputable service, and act to your best advantage.
tumbleweed  Male  Gloucestershire 3-Jun-2019 17:20 Message #4741238
I could have worded it a bit better, but things like 'acting to your best advantage', isn't always the honest way...It is often about trying to clear their clients name for instance, as they are being paid to do that, even if the client is 'guilty' of a crime.

It can be a bit of a confusing issue for a 'lawyer'...Do I take this case to try and find the defendant 'not guilty'...or if I'm approached by the 'other side', do i take the case to try and get them prosecuted?
Gilpin  Female  Middlesex 3-Jun-2019 17:31 Message #4741239
Ok the example you used was murder and a black & white film ….

I would probably go with can the law be trusted. Or is there a loop hole somewhere. How clever is your solicitor, or you. How appealing to the judge.

But I think the lawyer has to consider his career, and future client recommendations. You have to also trust your lawyer's ability, or change him. And he of course has to trust what the client is telling him is the complete truth, and find avenues of greater precedence.
tumbleweed  Male  Gloucestershire 3-Jun-2019 18:02 Message #4741241
It's a tricky one...I don't think i'll put in for the lawyers job that I saw then...unless they offer me a shed load of dosh obviously...

I remember reading about the Knox case at the time, and as far as I'm aware she is free...I always believed she was guilty though...

Her lawyer picked up on the 'possible' contamination of her clothes coming into contact with the knife, whilst they were being handled by the police...From what I can remember, they didn't come into contact, but her lawyer managed to persuade the right people that there was a possibility that they did, therefore the evidence could not be used, therefore they had nothing to find her quilty...If the lawyer had been prosecuting tough, then I'm absolutely certain he wouldn't have persued that line of enquiry, and then if nobody else picked up on it, the evidence would have been used, would have put her DNA on the murder weapon, which it was anyway, but perhaps by the contamination...which would have found her guilty...
tumbleweed  Male  Gloucestershire 3-Jun-2019 18:05 Message #4741242
A few typos in there...I must find a lighter area to type in...
wonderoushen  Female  Gwynedd 3-Jun-2019 18:41 Message #4741244
If you engage legal counsel then its their job to find potential holes in the prosecutions case, that dosen't matter if its a paring ticket or murder. They may believe that you're guilty, but they're not there to act on belief but facts, I'm sure there are times when they're glad they lose and maybe wish they had when they've won, but if you think of all the miscarriages of justice where people have been wrongly found guilty, then you should be glad that there are people so rigorous in your corner. Contamination of DNA evidence is an issue, thats why real CSI's wear a full boiler suit, cover their hair, shoes and wear masks, DNA can be found from such tiny traces these days, it can be hard to determine if its there through benign, sinister or contamination reasons.

1 2 Next >  Last >> 

Back to top  Back to top

Help with conversations Help with conversations »