Share this page!

The Secret Barrister Profile picture
Twitter logo
Jun 11 • 3 tweets • 2 min read
Three bits of #FakeLaw in this Mail article:

1. The government has *not* “boosted legal aid funding by £135 million”.

This is a lie. It has not increased legal aid funding by a penny. To the contrary, last year it *reduced* legal aid payments by £240 million.
2. There was an enormous and *growing* backlog long before Covid.

We warned about this at the time.

The backlog was caused by government cuts. Covid simply made things worse.

It is dishonest to pretend that the sole cause was Covid.
3. It is false that criminal barristers “will earn £7,000 extra per year”. This is a figure plucked out of the air by the Ministry of Justice to divert from the savage cuts that are driving junior criminal barristers out of the profession.

Don’t let them lie to you.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with The Secret Barrister

The Secret Barrister Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @BarristerSecret

The Secret Barrister Profile picture
Jun 4
As people have asked (and you only have yourselves to blame)…

1. The precise charge isn’t reported, which is a huge error for reasons we’ll get to. But in any event, whatever the charge, there is no criminal offence in existence that carries a maximum sentence of 15 years.
2. “Prosecutors decided to pursue him on the lightest possible charge”. That charge is not specified. Presumably that means he was charged with possession of a controlled drug of Class B, rather than possession with intent to supply or production/cultivation of cannabis. But…
3. …if he was indeed charged with simple possession of cannabis, the Sentencing Guideline provides a starting point of a fine, and a range as low as a discharge (no action taken). So this doesn’t square with a community order being “the lowest possible sentence”.
Read 12 tweets
The Secret Barrister Profile picture
May 7
***MY COUSIN VINNY LIVE-TWEET: THE RULES***

This lecture explores the cinematic classic 'My Cousin Vinny' through the lens of English and Welsh law.

Contributions and observations are welcome, but I'm perfectly prepared to tweet the entire film to a wall of embarrassed silence.
This paper considers, inter alia, how the irrepressible journey of Vincent LaGuardia Gambini might have been different had he been practising English law and subject to the jurisdiction of the Bar Council of England and Wales.
Now, the eagle eyed among you may notice as the film unfolds, this documentary is based in America (USA). I, by contrast, am *not* based in America (USA). And I know very little about law or criminal procedure in Alabama, New York or anywhere else of relevance to this exercise.
Read 50 tweets
The Secret Barrister Profile picture
Apr 21
I see that a famously apolitical barrister is once again offering his neutral expert view on criminal law - which just so happens (as always) to exonerate the government - while omitting to mention that he is a Conservative counsellor and does not specialise in criminal law.
Councillor. COUNCILLOR.

I’m an idiot.
The entire premise of the article is based on a misunderstanding of criminal law. Again. (We saw this when the same writer attempted to offer expertise on the Colston 4, to disastrous effect).

This is the thrust of the argument.

Let me tell you why it is bollocks. Image
Read 13 tweets
The Secret Barrister Profile picture
Feb 16
“Disruptive action” actually means “barristers declining to continue to work for free to plug the gaps in the criminal justice system that I and my political colleagues have defunded to the point of collapse”.

We’re done clearing up your mess.

The public deserves better.
“Disruptive action” means exercising our right, as self-employed individuals, to decline to cover other people’s cases when chaotic court listing makes it impossible for barristers to attend hearings.

The system runs on our goodwill.

Politicians have exploited it for too long.
The criminal courts were in chaos long before Covid, as detailed in my first book published in 2018.

Since then, @jcartlidgemp and co have further slashed funding to criminal justice, sending delays and case backlogs soaring.

We have worked for free to try to fix it.

No more.
Read 6 tweets
The Secret Barrister Profile picture
Feb 10
Criminal barristers have not received a “20% increase in [their] pay”.

In 2018, the government cut fees in the most complex cases by up to 40%.

During the pandemic, we worked for free as the govt withheld £240m in legal aid.

@DominicRaab should tell the public the truth.
As for “patience” - the government promised to “review” criminal legal aid after their most recent round of savage cuts in 2018.

They have done nothing.

Meanwhile solicitors firms are closing and junior barristers are working for below minimum wage.

We have been patient.
The independent review that has finally, belatedly been published, makes clear that as a bare minimum, £35m must be *immediately* invested to stop the criminal Bar from collapsing.

For context, the government saved £240m in legal aid last year by not paying us for work done.
Read 5 tweets
The Secret Barrister Profile picture
Jan 31
Brutal.

Sue Gray’s report is redolent of a summing up from a judge who firmly believes the jury should convict.

“It’s of course a matter for you, but you *may* think the prosecution case overwhelming and the defendant’s evidence obviously a tissue of lies…”
This is basically an elongated subtweet.
The “general findings” are as damning (and specific) as they could be given the limitations placed on what SG was allowed to include.

“Failures of leadership and judgment (sic) by different parts of No 10”.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(