3 ms·

> or they're just as good as any other lawyer My experience is that some advocates are much better than most advocates. The best lawyer I've had was a trainee

> or they're just as good as any other lawyer My experience is that some advocates are much better than most advocates. The best lawyer I've had was a trainee barrister, standing in for a run-of-the-mill high-street solicitor, who couldn't show up. Presumably because she was a trainee, she did a really meticulous job for me, on what was a trivial offence: speeding. Few lawyers would put much effort into a speeding ticket. She got me off; I was speeding, but I had been charged under the wrong section of the Road Traffic Act. "I humbly submit, your honour, that it would be quite wrong, your honour, for my client to be convicted of an offence he didn't commit, your honour".

chinathrow 5y ago
Where you charged for speeding afterwards?
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  No, she got me off. I was acquitted. The copper that was standing duty as the prosecutor wasn't briefed. He had an afternoon's-worth of cases to present, and he wasn't qualified to argue a case. And either I couldn't be re-charged because double-jeopardy, or it just wasn't worth the effort. Just as icing on the cake, my advocate was a stunningly beautiful redhead.
  - CamelCaseName 5y ago
    > Just as icing on the cake, my advocate was a stunningly beautiful redhead. relevance?
    - nurbel 5y ago
      Not saying that mentioning it that way is relevant here, but I'd wager that being good looking is an asset for a lawyer in court.
    - denton-scratch 5y ago
      Only that I had a lucky day in more ways than one.
rileymat2 5y ago
Isn’t this a great example of what the OP was talking about? You did not get off because of absolute innocence, but “technical minutiae as if they are source code”. But it does answer the OPs question, some are better at navigating it.
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  I don't think it's "technical minutiae"; I was charged with an offence that I didn't commit. My advocate just took the trouble to read the Act that I was charged under. Given that the court knew I hadn't committed the offence I was charged with, it would certainly have been a miscarriage of justice to go on and convict me anyway, and I could have got it overturned on appeal.
  - rileymat2 5y ago
    Oh I agree, but the law was confusing enough that an official bungled the charges.
    - bombcar 5y ago
      This is way more common than people realize, and one of the reasons courts accept "no contest" and pleas so often, especially in things like traffic laws.
  - lordnacho 5y ago
    You said you were speeding, right? But somehow the judge can't just say "ah right, looks like it's the wrong traffic statute that's been filed. Here's a fine for whatever it was that you actually did, you can just settle it here or we do a proper trial if you disagree". I mean of course we don't want people to be convicted of things they didn't do, but how is it ok for someone to get away with something they did do, just because some bureaucrat picked the wrong law?
    - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
      > somehow the judge can't just say "ah right, looks like it's the wrong traffic statute that's been filed. Here's a fine for whatever it was that you actually did We shatter the powers to bring and adjudicate charges. This creates inefficiencies, like this. But it also brings stability. (More practically, the judge may not have all the facts and circumstances relevant for citing the person.)

chinathrow 5y ago

Where you charged for speeding afterwards?

denton-scratch 5y ago
No, she got me off. I was acquitted. The copper that was standing duty as the prosecutor wasn't briefed. He had an afternoon's-worth of cases to present, and he wasn't qualified to argue a case. And either I couldn't be re-charged because double-jeopardy, or it just wasn't worth the effort. Just as icing on the cake, my advocate was a stunningly beautiful redhead.
- CamelCaseName 5y ago
  > Just as icing on the cake, my advocate was a stunningly beautiful redhead. relevance?
  - nurbel 5y ago
    Not saying that mentioning it that way is relevant here, but I'd wager that being good looking is an asset for a lawyer in court.
  - denton-scratch 5y ago
    Only that I had a lucky day in more ways than one.

rileymat2 5y ago

Isn’t this a great example of what the OP was talking about? You did not get off because of absolute innocence, but “technical minutiae as if they are source code”. But it does answer the OPs question, some are better at navigating it.

denton-scratch 5y ago
I don't think it's "technical minutiae"; I was charged with an offence that I didn't commit. My advocate just took the trouble to read the Act that I was charged under. Given that the court knew I hadn't committed the offence I was charged with, it would certainly have been a miscarriage of justice to go on and convict me anyway, and I could have got it overturned on appeal.
- rileymat2 5y ago
  Oh I agree, but the law was confusing enough that an official bungled the charges.
  - bombcar 5y ago
    This is way more common than people realize, and one of the reasons courts accept "no contest" and pleas so often, especially in things like traffic laws.
- lordnacho 5y ago
  You said you were speeding, right? But somehow the judge can't just say "ah right, looks like it's the wrong traffic statute that's been filed. Here's a fine for whatever it was that you actually did, you can just settle it here or we do a proper trial if you disagree". I mean of course we don't want people to be convicted of things they didn't do, but how is it ok for someone to get away with something they did do, just because some bureaucrat picked the wrong law?
  - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
    > somehow the judge can't just say "ah right, looks like it's the wrong traffic statute that's been filed. Here's a fine for whatever it was that you actually did We shatter the powers to bring and adjudicate charges. This creates inefficiencies, like this. But it also brings stability. (More practically, the judge may not have all the facts and circumstances relevant for citing the person.)