Late guilty plea - possibly jail time
Discussion
People's thoughts on this. I'm no legal expert so have no idea whether he's operating within the law if he wants to go ahead with it.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/judge-guilty...
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/judge-guilty...
He might have an issue with that one as decisions he makes could be subject to judical review and appeal, he's clearly venting and I'm almost certain a late not guilty plea is not a good enough reason to remand someone for sentence
At the end of the day a late guilty plea means virtually no credit when it comes to sentence, that is the punishment if you like for a late guilty plea
At the end of the day a late guilty plea means virtually no credit when it comes to sentence, that is the punishment if you like for a late guilty plea
Who benefits from the defendants that are guilty, pleading guilty after months of case preperation and direction.
The Solicitors and Barristers, all who have had the opportunity to tell their client it's a waste of time you should plead guilty.
It would be interesting to see how many late guilty pleas are by defendants on legal aid v defendants paying private.
It's all about who can make money.
Bring in a system to recover legal aid paid out to hopeless cases. Judge would decide on review ect.
The Solicitors and Barristers, all who have had the opportunity to tell their client it's a waste of time you should plead guilty.
It would be interesting to see how many late guilty pleas are by defendants on legal aid v defendants paying private.
It's all about who can make money.
Bring in a system to recover legal aid paid out to hopeless cases. Judge would decide on review ect.
kestral said:
It's all about who can make money.
It's mainly about gaming the system. A lot more often than you'd expect, witnesses don't appear / key evidence (CCTV etc.) isn't available, and a court case collapses. Why plead guilty up-front when you can wait and see if the evidence to convict you is actually there or not? The "frequent flyers" in the system know this and play the game - I suspect it's those people that the judge is really ranting at...and morally correctly so, even if legally he's on dubious ground.
Barristers aren't THAT interested in legal-aid rate criminal cases - it's not a moneyspinner for them - their effective hourly rate is probably a lot lower than yours or mine.
As for Legal Aid, go and google the limit for entitlement to legal aid...pretty much anyone with a proper job isn't entitled to it anymore, and full-rate criminal solicitor/barrister fees mean even a simple case is tens of thousands, a moderately complex one £100k+. Which the defendant CANNOT claim back from the state even if innocent.
So someone with a job who ends up on the wrong end of a criminal trial won't be playing the game above - they'll be weighing up their (advised) chances of conviction and likely sentence if found guilty vs the huge cost to them/their family right up-front to defend themselves. It's a sick f
king joke - the scrotes get effectively free legal support time and time again, while ordinary citizens who may/may not have done something wrong (I refer you to the not inconsiderable number of miscarriages of justice that keep hitting the papers - another one today where the police and CPS were well aware of new DNA evidence that should have quashed a recent conviction but ignored it, leaving an innocent man to rot in jail for over a decade) have to pay through the nose just to gain access to 'justice'...kestral said:
Who benefits from the defendants that are guilty, pleading guilty after months of case preperation and direction.
The Solicitors and Barristers, all who have had the opportunity to tell their client it's a waste of time you should plead guilty.
It would be interesting to see how many late guilty pleas are by defendants on legal aid v defendants paying private.
It's all about who can make money.
Bring in a system to recover legal aid paid out to hopeless cases. Judge would decide on review ect.
As a long time criminal lawyer with probably 85% of our work being legal aid I can tell you that there is no financial reason to advise a not guilty to then change it to guilty.The Solicitors and Barristers, all who have had the opportunity to tell their client it's a waste of time you should plead guilty.
It would be interesting to see how many late guilty pleas are by defendants on legal aid v defendants paying private.
It's all about who can make money.
Bring in a system to recover legal aid paid out to hopeless cases. Judge would decide on review ect.
We advise but ultimately the punter decides whether they go not guilty or not.
A lot of the time its too see whether witnesses attend, before all the evidence is served as CCTV is generally the last thing we receive and a lot of it is because they like to delay the inevitable . I had one yesterday pleaded not guilty to 6 charges as hes going to Tenerife for a couple of months and will plead when he's home
So posts like that discussing the rewards in legal aid cases are a bit frustrating as what the general public perception is, is very from the reality.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff