Mr Bates vs The Post Office

Author
Discussion

LeoSayer

7,314 posts

245 months

Wednesday 8th May
quotequote all
It's fascinating seeing two KCs directly interacting in this way.

Altman isn't covering himself in glory.

The conflict between lawyer ethics and who pays your wages has been evidenced a few times in this inquiry.

Wills2

23,007 posts

176 months

Wednesday 8th May
quotequote all
This probably won't do Altman any harm, as he'll be known to be willing to turn a blind eye to corrupt practice in order to take a fat fee and there are plenty of businesses wanting to hire a man like that.

I don't think for a second that the lawyers and KCs being shown to be of low moral standards in this inquiry are rare birds, quite the opposite.





Edited by Wills2 on Wednesday 8th May 15:37

Short Grain

2,829 posts

221 months

Wednesday 8th May
quotequote all
Ooh, getting a bit more heated!

LimmerickLad

1,001 posts

16 months

Wednesday 8th May
quotequote all
Getting a taste of his own medicine and it doesn't taste very nice.

balise

1,871 posts

211 months

Wednesday 8th May
quotequote all
He looks like Rupert Murdoch

The_Nugget

652 posts

58 months

Wednesday 8th May
quotequote all
Stein v Altman was a like a QC face off.

“Do you agree?”

Bonefish Blues

26,940 posts

224 months

Wednesday 8th May
quotequote all
The_Nugget said:
Stein v Altman was a like a QC face off.

“Do you agree?”
Snark v Snark

LimmerickLad

1,001 posts

16 months

Wednesday 8th May
quotequote all
The_Nugget said:
Stein v Altman was a like a QC face off.

“Do you agree?”
KC...................You are either incompetent or a lawyer..which is it?

732NM

4,714 posts

16 months

Wednesday 8th May
quotequote all
2 hours into the morning session.

What an incredibly arrogant berk.

Stussy

1,878 posts

65 months

Wednesday 8th May
quotequote all
Seemed to think he was Mr untouchable

Wills2

23,007 posts

176 months

Wednesday 8th May
quotequote all
LimmerickLad said:
The_Nugget said:
Stein v Altman was a like a QC face off.

“Do you agree?”
KC...................You are either incompetent or a lawyer..which is it?
Very good, I like it.





732NM

4,714 posts

16 months

Wednesday 8th May
quotequote all
Watch the whole day now.

Another pompous, arrogant tosspot who didn't give a damn about justice, just bank the cash.

This is supposed to be an elite KC, how many other poor buggers have been let down over his 40 years creaming it in, by such a crappy attitude?

Bonefish Blues

26,940 posts

224 months

Thursday 9th May
quotequote all
732NM said:
Watch the whole day now.

Another pompous, arrogant tosspot who didn't give a damn about justice, just bank the cash.

This is supposed to be an elite KC, how many other poor buggers have been let down over his 40 years creaming it in, by such a crappy attitude?
I expect his clients rate him. Perhaps not the 'collateral damage'...like innocent people.

Fastpedeller

3,883 posts

147 months

Thursday 9th May
quotequote all
This really brings home the belief that there is only justice for those who can afford it - A broken legal system? Maybe this scenario will be the turning point? I doubt it. frown

Wills2

23,007 posts

176 months

Thursday 9th May
quotequote all

It's not a good look for the profession or the system as a whole is it, we're seeing into a world that we don't normally see, I think we all accept that in civil proceedings the old painting of the lawyer milking the cow as the plaintiffs pull from either end is the reality, but the thought that criminal law is practiced in the same way is very concerning.

It wasn't lost on me that the chair came to the aid of Altman yesterday, I find it unthinkable that a man of his intellect just simply floated through his "terms of reference" without suspecting that the POL had acted terribly and that a massive miscarriage of justice had happened, he was up to his neck in it all the way up to the disgraceful conduct of the appeal case, where eventually it was all laid bare.






GiantEnemyCrab

7,622 posts

204 months

Thursday 9th May
quotequote all
simonrockman said:
mikeiow said:
LimmerickLad said:
IMO - "(2) in-house ability to prosecute - losing the necessary objectivity" was a major factor above all, as they just felt they had all the power...and at that time in fact, they did!
AFAIK, they somehow still have that power.
Not sure I have seen it stripped?

Clearly they should NO LONGER have that power, and indeed I hope and pray that the Police take action against those who have so clearly shown themselves to have been complicit in ruining so many lives.

I still feel there might only be one scapegoat, which makes me fume: it is one thing to suggest that it is a culture issue, or that they were only assuming people above knew and did the right thing, but so many SPMs (& their families) lives were utterly ruined by the actions of so many individuals, they really do need holding to account: in many cases it feels that jail is too good for them: SPMs have died or taken their own lives over this.
I went to Nick Wallis' talk at Hays. It transpires that the exceptional prosecution powers belonged to The Royal Mail, and after the separation in 2013, POL didn't have the powers, but no-one realised this and they just continued.

Edited by simonrockman on Tuesday 7th May 20:24
Is this not quite a massive issue? Eg they were prosecuting when they shouldn't have been able to?

Maxdecel

1,251 posts

34 months

Thursday 9th May
quotequote all
Wills2 said:
It's not a good look for the profession or the system as a whole is it, we're seeing into a world that we don't normally see, I think we all accept that in civil proceedings the old painting of the lawyer milking the cow as the plaintiffs pull from either end is the reality, but the thought that criminal law is practiced in the same way is very concerning.

It wasn't lost on me that the chair came to the aid of Altman yesterday, I find it unthinkable that a man of his intellect just simply floated through his "terms of reference" without suspecting that the POL had acted terribly and that a massive miscarriage of justice had happened, he was up to his neck in it all the way up to the disgraceful conduct of the appeal case, where eventually it was all laid bare.

I'd never seen this, sums up my view perfectly; thanks.

LimmerickLad

1,001 posts

16 months

Thursday 9th May
quotequote all
Did I hear right?.............Defence lawyers at fault for no disclosure by the PO?

Wills2

23,007 posts

176 months

Thursday 9th May
quotequote all

It's great isn't it, the fat judge and lawyer and the poor skinny fools fighting whilst the cow is milked.


Maxdecel

1,251 posts

34 months

Thursday 9th May
quotequote all
Wills2 said:
It's great isn't it, the fat judge and lawyer and the poor skinny fools fighting whilst the cow is milked.
thumbup
First impressions of Simon Clarke, totally the opposite of what we've seen previously.