• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Shamima Begum

Yeah but the camera operator and sound technician never get a mention.
 
Just restore her citizenship and put her and anybody else in a similar situation on trial. She is about as misguided as Lord Haw Haw was (and they hung him).
 
Even if she regains her citizenship, gets tried and does her time, she's going to have a target on her back for the rest of her life in this country.
 
Maybe in danger for a couple of years,then the public will be voting for her to do a challenge on I'm a celebrity,or she'll appear on celebrity bake off something like that
 
Keef said:
Maybe in danger for a couple of years,then the public will be voting for her to do a challenge on I'm a celebrity,or she'll appear on celebrity bake off something like that
Click to expand...

:clap: :icon_lol:
 
You do know that doing purely legal aid work is basically working on the breadline? There is bugger all money in it and most legal aid lawyers do it for reasons other than personal enrichment?
 
Paddingtonwolf said:
You do know that doing purely legal aid work is basically working on the breadline? There is bugger all money in it and most legal aid lawyers do it for reasons other than personal enrichment?
Click to expand...

Longer-tables.jpg

£50-70 an hour is none too shabby , according to this table of legal aid fees? Thats 4-600 a day or 2-3 grand a week. Sorry if my sympathies for lawyers put them well below Nurses, Firefighters, soldiers, Teachers, Police officers in the list of trades that need a pay increase.
 
That goes to the firm not the lawyer. And it is limited on hours per case at a level MILES below the time needed to do a case properly. If you do purely legal aid work you take home a lot less than a teacher.
 
Paddingtonwolf said:
That goes to the firm not the lawyer. And it is limited on hours per case at a level MILES below the time needed to do a case properly. If you do purely legal aid work you take home a lot less than a teacher.
Click to expand...

Nope , still not feeling that sympathitic to lawyers. newly qualified teacher starts at 23.5 k.Newly qualified solicitor 25-40k. I agree that legal aid does not pay great but then nor does NHS dentists. I dont know a private firm that is purely run on legal aid but I also dont know a private dentist that is purely NHS. An NHS dentist is 38k to 83k so again I dont have much sympathy for them in my "needs a pay rise" list

I know plenty of teachers on under 25k. I know plenty of police officers under 25k. I know firefighters under 25k, I know soldiers on under 25k soI am afraid even with the argument of my Learned friend, Lawyers / solicitors still earn enough.
 
Even if you do believe they get paid enough - what's the answer? She doesn't get legal representation?
 
Jesus this is hard work. You are effectively GIVING your time for free because it doesn’t pay. This is an appeal against the Home Secretary so is going High Court minimum, realistically House of Lords. So rights of audience rules say you are going to need a barrister and very probably a silk. Which you are paying for out of that £50 to £70 an hour you get from the government. So unless they are pro bono that is a loss making exercise. Want to interview the client? Then travel to Syria is charged at £27 an hour. Good luck with getting flights at that price. Do it by phone and you can claim FOUR QUID
 
Paddingtonwolf said:
You do know that doing purely legal aid work is basically working on the breadline? There is bugger all money in it and most legal aid d)lawyers do it for reasons other than personal enrichment?
Click to expand...

They would say that wouldn't they?
 
Criminal legal aid and civil legal aid have been stripped beyond the bare bones by austerity.
The result has been a legal advice wilderness for the majority of the population, which has created a wealth of opportunity for disaster capitalists.
Most civil legal aid organisations were charities and have gone under as a result of their loss of funding.
The fact that the legal aid system is not worth it to lawyers is a travesty. Doing legal aid cases isn't sufficient to build a practise on. Most lawyers who run legal aid did so more because of the implications of the cases. In most cases, prior to austerity, they covered their costs, and trained new staff. Occasionally they did a bit of pro bono work on top of this.
 
Paddingtonwolf said:
Then travel to Syria is charged at £27 an hour. Good luck with getting flights at that price. Do it by phone and you can claim FOUR QUID
Click to expand...

Surely Ryanair fly there (well, Iraq but they will class it as Syria)
 
Cyber-_-man said:
Nope , still not feeling that sympathitic to lawyers. newly qualified teacher starts at 23.5 k.Newly qualified solicitor 25-40k. I agree that legal aid does not pay great but then nor does NHS dentists. I dont know a private firm that is purely run on legal aid but I also dont know a private dentist that is purely NHS. An NHS dentist is 38k to 83k so again I dont have much sympathy for them in my "needs a pay rise" list

I know plenty of teachers on under 25k. I know plenty of police officers under 25k. I know firefighters under 25k, I know soldiers on under 25k soI am afraid even with the argument of my Learned friend, Lawyers / solicitors still earn enough.
Click to expand...

I worked in an FE college for 7 years. For almost 4 years I've worked in higher education.
In that time I've met zero teachers on under £25k. I worked on schemes to recruit people to the police force. After training, all started on over £25k. A mate of mine is a firefighter. On well above £25k, and none of his crew are on less than that.
All tough, intensive jobs. Deserving of a decent salary. Even so, the comparison is relatively pointless (even if it is untrue in the majority of cases). Any legal work costs money to complete. If it isn't cost effective to do the work, lawyers won't do it. Then only the rich will have access to legal advice they can pay for.

Who is that better for? disaster capitalists and brexit loving misguided individuals who will be in for a hell of a "woe is me" moment when the full implications become clear to them.
 
Paddingtonwolf said:
Jesus this is hard work. You are effectively GIVING your time for free because it doesn’t pay. This is an appeal against the Home Secretary so is going High Court minimum, realistically House of Lords. So rights of audience rules say you are going to need a barrister and very probably a silk. Which you are paying for out of that £50 to £70 an hour you get from the government. So unless they are pro bono that is a loss making exercise. Want to interview the client? Then travel to Syria is charged at £27 an hour. Good luck with getting flights at that price. Do it by phone and you can claim FOUR QUID
Click to expand...

I suggest that she try crowdfunding it then if , now granted legal aid, that is not enough. ( good luck with that justgiving page)

It may well be a loss making exercise but I bet she ends up with a bloody good brief even if the "amount claimable" will be small. LJ is right, austerity is a problem but thats not the debate.
 
crowdfunding is essentially filling a gap that appropriate taxation and apportioning of tax funds should be fulfilling in a decent society.

Sadly, it results in only cases getting funding where the "marketing" of the case draws attention, rather than legal merits and benefits. Loads of cases go unheard as a result. And the law is less beneficial to society as a result.
 
lemonjelly said:
I worked in an FE college for 7 years. For almost 4 years I've worked in higher education.
In that time I've met zero teachers on under £25k. I worked on schemes to recruit people to the police force. After training, all started on over £25k. A mate of mine is a firefighter. On well above £25k, and none of his crew are on less than that.
All tough, intensive jobs. Deserving of a decent salary. Even so, the comparison is relatively pointless (even if it is untrue in the majority of cases). Any legal work costs money to complete. If it isn't cost effective to do the work, lawyers won't do it. Then only the rich will have access to legal advice they can pay for.

Who is that better for? disaster capitalists and brexit loving misguided individuals who will be in for a hell of a "woe is me" moment when the full implications become clear to them.
Click to expand...

Police officer pay now starts at 19k
Firefighter starts 22k
Nurse 22k- qualified
Teacher starts 23k
Lawyer starst 25k-40k
My figures are accurate. Austerity and changes to starting salaries since 2010.

I repeat, I am not crying in my soup for lawyers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top