Senator stuart syvret v AG

[cpcarrot]

In relation to Legal Aid:

http://www.cab.org.je/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=106&Itemid=66

He applied, and it was not granted. Don't know for certain why, but if I was going to guess I would imagine given both him and his partner receive a States Members Salary (so £88K household income year) it would be deemed that he could afford to pay for legal advice himself. Legal aid is typically only awarded to someone who's income is below average, of which a States Member would not fall.

The argument he is presumably raising in relation to this is that of "equality of arms", in that if the prosecution has access to professional legal advice (by way of Advocate Baker) then he must be entitled to the same in order to ensure equality on the two sides of the trial. It's an argument that falls down if it is shown that:
a) He does still have access to such advise. There is nothing that insists the State provide such advise free of charge to people who can afford it. Simply choosing not to spend your own money is insufficient to show you don't have access to such advise - There are plenty of legal professionals in Jersey , and he certainly has access to them just like any other citizen. It's a matter of conjecture how much money you need to earn to be fairly deemed as being able to afford such advise, but I would certainly view a States Members Salary as sufficient to afford such things.
b) The "equality of arms" is irrelevant in respect of the charges being presented - Essentially if the charges are simple, such as road traffic offences, then the fact that the State has a trained legal professional (as they will in pretty much all cases) and you are representing yourself does not have a material impact on the case. The arguments are such that you are capable of representing yourself without doing yourself a prejudice. I would suspect that this would be the case in terms of the charges Senator Syvret is facing, however not in respect of the various arguments he is bringing in respect of the "fair trial" argument, where it is fairly clear from the transcripts he is substantially out of his depth - Although to be fair to the prosecution and Judge Straw they have being going to great pains to explain the various issues to him as they come up.

[en830]

I thought Sinels were his advocates ?

[rico sorda]

All advocates want paying en830...

So you cant get paid legal aid if you earn 43,000 a year have o got that right...

But if you do have legal aid and your facing Stephen Baker across the court room you would then expect to have the same in your corner not be given say an apprentice or the tea lady is that the "equality of arms".. i remember the equality of arms cropping up in the curtis warren case..

Durendal you say
Rico
What the Blessed SSS™ had was a commentary on Human Rights Law.

"He brought before the Magistrate a case in that book. Quite rightly she wanted to look at it I have seen this before in a court of law when a case is quoted and the Judge is unfamiliar with it. They ask to see what the person has and then often look at the decision of the case later."

Should the judge in the magistrate court already have that book out of interest

rs

[Durendal]

All advocates want paying en830...

So you cant get paid legal aid if you earn 43,000 a year have o got that right...

But if you do have legal aid and your facing Stephen Baker across the court room you would then expect to have the same in your corner not be given say an apprentice or the tea lady is that the "equality of arms".. i remember the equality of arms cropping up in the curtis warren case..

Durendal you say
Rico
What the Blessed SSS™ had was a commentary on Human Rights Law.

"He brought before the Magistrate a case in that book. Quite rightly she wanted to look at it I have seen this before in a court of law when a case is quoted and the Judge is unfamiliar with it. They ask to see what the person has and then often look at the decision of the case later."

Should the judge in the magistrate court already have that book out of interest

rs

Why should she have every single text book?

[Calimachon]

Sometimes advocates take a view ,,, as , in ,"c,mon you are having a laugh , do you seriously expect me to turn up in court with this crap?"

Where there is  muck there is brass sometimes eh?

What is crap to one person is gold to another.

Why shouldn't the plebs be given good legal service at whatever level they are at.  Is it only the minted that can expect a decent level of service from a lawyer. 

The trouble with this flower of an island is that they (legal beagles) are all clamouring around the same  nectar plants, they all want to rub over the most vigourous stamen on the biggest plant ever, to hell with the weeds.

[cpcarrot]

Should the judge in the magistrate court already have that book out of interest

rs

I would not expect them to have every single case, or every single book to hand - no. Ever seen a law library? They are pretty huge, and there are countless volumes on European Human Rights Law.

This was actually the Judge doing Senator Syvret a favour actually, as procedurally if you are going rely on a case your supposed to notify the judge and the other side in advance so they have time to familiarise themselves with it's contents. Rather than have to have to schedule another later meeting it was evidently sensible to just borrow the book, call a short break, allow the Judge to familiarise herself with what points it refers to and move on from there. I'm kind of surprised the Senator seemed to want to draw attention to it in his blog to be honest, as the incident just shows how unfamiliar he is with the legal system, as the necessity to borrow the book was of his own doing.

[iruka]

Furthermore, why go rummaging around the shelves for a book, then find the page and the reference, when some schmuck has already done it for you and stuck a Post It™ note on the relevant section.

<duh>

[Durendal]

I would not expect them to have every single case, or every single book to hand - no. Ever seen a law library? They are pretty huge, and there are countless volumes on European Human Rights Law.

This was actually the Judge doing Senator Syvret a favour actually, as procedurally if you are going rely on a case your supposed to notify the judge and the other side in advance so they have time to familiarise themselves with it's contents. Rather than have to have to schedule another later meeting it was evidently sensible to just borrow the book, call a short break, allow the Judge to familiarise herself with what points it refers to and move on from there. I'm kind of surprised the Senator seemed to want to draw attention to it in his blog to be honest, as the incident just shows how unfamiliar he is with the legal system, as the necessity to borrow the book was of his own doing.

Thanks CP I had already made this point but we are dealing with people with blinkers on so perhaps necessary!

[rico sorda]

Im finding all these posts really good and im learning a little about law so if we can stop the slagging by the time im finished with this it will be a decent thread...

Slagging for the Syvret rant thread please

Durendal if i dont ask the questions how do i get the answers

"But if you do have legal aid and your facing Stephen Baker across the court room you would then expect to have the same in your corner not be given say an apprentice or the tea lady is that the "equality of arms".. i remember the equality of arms cropping up in the curtis warren case"

I posted this before can you help on this durendal..

If you are facing stephen baker across the court room and you apply for legal aid is it law that you should get someone of the same standing and not someone just out of law college.. Would that be senator syvrets right..

rs

[Bentos]

why should he get legal aid if he can afford to pay?

[Durendal]

why should he get legal aid if he can afford to pay?

Exactly!

He earns too much to be elligible.

[cpcarrot]

If you are facing stephen baker across the court room and you apply for legal aid is it law that you should get someone of the same standing and not someone just out of law college.. Would that be senator syvrets right..

rs

It's a fairly mute point on the basis that he could afford to appoint his own lawyer, but if hypothetically he couldn't then no the equality of arms does not extend to say you would be entitled to someone of the same "standing" (whatever that means - I have no idea how you could even begin to compare two Advocates on an objective basis - what would you base it on, experience, cases won?). You are entitled to someone who can provide competent representation given the issues at hand. You never get someone "just out of law college", worst case is a newly qualified Advocate, who is someone who has been out of college some time, had several years of training, past various exams and been appointed to the court. All Advocates are considered to be competent in the eyes of the court unless evidence is presented to prove otherwise (which would not be an issue you could raise until after the trial as you would have to show his incompetence in respect of the case at hand).

It would be a fairly ludicrous situation if the two opposing lawyers had to be of equal "standing" (again something not exactly easy to define). Imagine telling the defendant, "I'm sorry your lawyer is too competent, the state only has an average lawyer available today so you'll have to pick a defence council who is less good".

Basically by the ECHR - if you can not afford your own lawyer (and again, only if you genuinely can't afford one) then you are entitled to adequate legal representation provided by the State, not to chose your own lawyer. A qualified Advocate is by definition of being a qualified Advocate competent legal representation.

[The Backbencher]

I thought Sinels were his advocates ?

He was but the rumour is that he dropped Mr Syvret because at first he thought it was good publicity for him and the firm but then it appeared that it was not good publicity as he does not have as many supporters as some people would like you to believe.  I am surprised people are still talking about him on here though because elsewhere it looks like he has already been discarded.

[boatyboy]

Sounds Like DeeBee, is back, yet again !

BB

[Pomme de terre]

He was but the rumour is that he dropped Mr Syvret because at first he thought it was good publicity for him and the firm but then it appeared that it was not good publicity as he does not have as many supporters as some people would like you to believe.  I am surprised people are still talking about him on here though because elsewhere it looks like he has already been discarded.

Yeah, but rumours ain't worth jack sh!t are they? They're usually...erm...complete fabrications, aren't they?

I thought you Backbenchers were supposed to stick to the facts?