Top critical review
2 people found this helpful
defendants and juries coming across as an intellectual bully happy to slap justice about to achieve immoral even unethical ...
on 8 September 2015
Snide and contemptuous, this is a nasty book. The author ridicules judges, court officers, the police, defendants and juries coming across as an intellectual bully happy to slap justice about to achieve immoral even unethical ends. Perhaps it does highlight a couple of points though. The balance of equity in English law is not right. The writer makes it quite clear that on occasion defendants he knows in his own mind absolutely to be guilty are set free not because they are innocent but because their barrister has found something incorrect in the prosecution evidence that he ( or she) can manipulate to hide or rule inadmissable evidence that would convict their client. In English Law, two wrongs can result in a not guilty verdict. The first wrong is the crime itself, the second wrong is a witness who demonstrably lies or a lawyer who can bully a witness into confusion and apparent contradiction. Perhaps contempt of court (as this book is) should be strengthened so that noone neither an advocate nor a solicitor, neither a police officer nor a court officer not even a judge is "above the law". The author of this seems to believe he is. Shame on him.