Defence barrister calls judge's trial conduct 'an absolute disgrace'

[AlwaysAskingQuestions]

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/defence-barrister-calls-judges-trial-conduct-an-absolute-disgrace-542970.html

or http://tinyurl.com/7zh5hhy

Okay, it's Ireland not the UK but can a barrister actually get away with
comments like that during a trial?

[Zapp Brannigan]

"AlwaysAskingQuestions" <alwaysaski...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9s19pj...@mid.individual.net...

In the UK it would potentially be treated as contempt.

[GB]

Surely, the judge was absolutely right to allow this evidence, in any case?

"Today, prosecuting counsel, Deirdre Murphy SC, outlined how Mr Warren had
been arrested and detained on at least three occasions, unrelated to the
investigation of the 2007 offence.

Alan Toal BL, defending Mr Warren, objected to the evidence of these arrests
being heard by the jury but Judge Hunt ruled it was admissible.

The judge said Mr Warren was telling the jury he had no previous experience
of being arrested after he gave evidence that the robbery and his subsequent
arrest were "a new world to me". "








--
Register as an organ donor with the NHS online. It takes 1 minute and
saves you carrying an organ donor card with you.
http://www.uktransplant.org.uk/ukt/how_to_become_a_donor/how_to_become_a_donor.jsp

[The Todal]

"Zapp Brannigan" <ZBr...@DOOP.com> wrote in message
news:jjj403$br9$1...@dont-email.me...

I'm not sure that's true, but in the UK the barrister would be reported to
the Bar Council and would face disciplinary action. If he thinks the judge
has mishandled the case he should appeal. In fact, it's good news for his
client if there are good grounds for appealing an adverse verdict. The only
comparable case that comes to mind was that of Rudy Narayan, now dead:

http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/council-inns-court-disciplinary-tribunal-council-inns-court-rudy-narayan-barrister-lincoln039s-

[The Todal]

"The Todal" <deadm...@beeb.net> wrote in message
news:9seeup...@mid.individual.net...

The link doesn't seem to work reliably so I'll quote most of it (some might
find it funny, others might wonder whether Mr Narayan might have been ill):

On 28 July 1988 a disciplinary tribunal of the Council of the Inns of Court
(chairman: the Honourable Mr Justice Owen) sat to hear and determine charges
of professional misconduct against Rudy Narayan.
Rodger Bell appeared on behalf of the professional conduct committee of the
Bar Council and Mr Narayan who was present throughout the hearing was
represented by Mr Khadri for most legal arguments and submissions.
Mr Narayan pleaded not guilty to five charges of which the following were
found proved:

Charge: professional misconduct.

Particulars: On 15 September 1986, at Birmingham Crown Court, while
appearing on behalf of William Leopold Barrett before His Honour Judge
Malcolm Potter, you failed to act with due courtesy to the court in that:

(a) you accused the judge of racial discrimination against you and of
discriminating against your client by saying:
(i) 'I wish to place on record that members of the Birmingham Bar known to
Your Honour have conducted two trials at once in this building known to Your
Honour, with the greatest of respect, and Your Honour is now seeking to act
against a black member of the Bar in a different way to which you would have
acted to a white member of the Bar and to a member of the Birmingham Bar
know to you and I have no hesitation in making that charge. If you want to
discriminate against me as against your white brothers .
(ii) 'In my respectful view, Your Honour is discriminating on grounds of
race and colour against me .
and
(iii) 'May I ask Your Honour respectfully why you seek to discriminate
against Mr Barrett, I use the word "discriminate" very deliberately, as oppo
sed to any other defendant?';
and (b) you refused to leave Judge Potter's court when he told you that you
were required in Judge Cole's court and asked you to go there.
Contrary to paras 6(a) and 133 of the code of conduct for the Bar of England
and Wales.

Charge: professional misconduct.

Particulars: Between 14 September 1986 and 15 September 1986, at the
Birmingham Crown Court, while appearing on behalf of Arnold Salmon before
His Honour Judge Cole, you failed to act with due courtesy to the Court in
that:

(a) on the afternoon of 15 September 1986, you failed to appear in Judge
Cole's court although released by His Honour Judge Malcolm Potter from his
court in order that you might attend Judge Cole's court;
(b) on 16 September 1986, you accused Judge Cole of taking part in a
vendetta and witch-hunt against you, and of racism and racial
discrimination;
(c) on 16 September 1986, you used Judge Cole's court as a forum for
allegations of a vendetta or witch-hunt against you and of racism and racial
discrimination at Birmingham Crown Court, and you refused to stop making the
allegations of racism and racial discrimination when asked by Judge Cole;
(d) on the morning of 17 September 1986, you refused to be quiet when asked
by Judge Cole and you persistently interrupted the judge and said:
(i) 'Don's speak to me like that';
(ii) 'Pleae don't try and order me about as if I'm a wild colonial boy'; and
(iii) 'I don't want there to be any court in England and Wales where black
lawyers can be told to shut up'; and
(e) on the afternoon of 17 September 1986, you refused to answer questions
from Judge Cole relating to your late return to court, you refused to stop
talking when asked and you said to Judge Cole:
(i) 'You want to treat me like dirt? I will no be treated like dirt. I am a
human being, and I am sorry, I have never heard of an interrogation of a
white barrister in the way you seek to treat me. I am very sorry, I will not
allow you to humiliate me in this way';
(ii) 'You are trying to humiliate me and I am not going to tolerate it';
(iii) 'You are here to try and humiliate Rudy Narayan as part of a
conspiracy in Birmingham and with the greatest of respect the judiciary of
Birmingham the judiciary of Birmingham are doing their very best to try and
reduce Rudy Narayan to nothing';
(iv) 'I will not stop talking. I am here to defend my black brothers and
sisters. If you want to humiliate me, please try, but you will not succeed';
(v) 'I know what you are trying to do. You are trying to provoke me, so that
you can make a complaint. It is transparently clear. You will not succeed in
provoking me'; and
(vi) 'You can't tell me to be quiet, I am not a black boy.'
Contrary to paras 6(a) and 133 of the code of conduct for the Bar of England
and Wales.

The tribunal having taken into account the matters raised by way of
mitigation and having considered the decision of past tribunals upon Mr
Narayan's conduct ordered that Mr Narayan be suspended for 30 months.
Mr Narayan appealed to the visitors against findings and sentence of the
disciplinary tribunal on 24 February 1989.
The appeal was allowed to the extent that the sentences of 18 months in
respect of two of the charges were to stand but that the periods of
suspension for the two further charges be reduced to a period of six months
in respect of each charge, such periods to run concurrently with each other
and the visitors directed that the total period of two years' suspension
should be treated as running from the dat e six months before the decision
of the tribunal was confirmed, and put into effect by Mr Narayan's Inn of
Court so that he will in effect have a period of suspension of 18 months
from that time.
Masters of the Bench of Lincoln's Inn meeting at the Council on Thursday 27
April 1989 pronounced that Mr Narayan should be suspended from practice for
a period of two years with six months of the suspension running prior to the
pronouncement of that sentence.

[Percy Picacity]

On 2012-03-15 15:20:02 +0000, The Todal said:

> "The Todal" <deadm...@beeb.net> wrote in message
> news:9seeup...@mid.individual.net...
>>
>> "Zapp Brannigan" <ZBr...@DOOP.com> wrote in message
>> news:jjj403$br9$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>> "AlwaysAskingQuestions" <alwaysaski...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>> message
>>> news:9s19pj...@mid.individual.net...
>>>> http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/defence-barrister-calls-judges-trial-conduct-an-absolute-disgrace-542970.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> or http://tinyurl.com/7zh5hhy
>>>>
>>>> Okay, it's Ireland not the UK but can a barrister actually get away with
>>>> comments like that during a trial?
>>>
>>> In the UK it would potentially be treated as contempt.
>>
>> I'm not sure that's true, but in the UK the barrister would be reported to
>> the Bar Council and would face disciplinary action. If he thinks the
>> judge
>> has mishandled the case he should appeal. In fact, it's good news for his
>> client if there are good grounds for appealing an adverse verdict. The
>> only
>> comparable case that comes to mind was that of Rudy Narayan, now dead:
>>
>> http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/council-inns-court-disciplinary-tribunal-council-inns-court-rudy-narayan-barrister-lincoln039s-
>>
>>
>
> The link doesn't seem to work reliably so I'll quote most of it (some might
> find it funny, others might wonder whether Mr Narayan might have been ill):
>
>

Rudy Narayan's fundamental offence was to draw attention to
institutional racism in the criminal justice system when it was a point
of honour among police, lawyers and politicians to deny that it could
possibly exist in Britain. It was fundamentally unacceptable for a
barrister to suggest it in open court.

All else flowed from this, and his consistent policy of honesty. He
was given many chances to retract. I hope it is not unduly emotional
to suggest that his deliberate martyrdom made a difference.


--

Percy Picacity

[GB]

Percy Picacity wrote:

> Rudy Narayan's fundamental offence was to draw attention to
> institutional racism in the criminal justice system when it was a
> point of honour among police, lawyers and politicians to deny that it
> could
> possibly exist in Britain. It was fundamentally unacceptable for a
> barrister to suggest it in open court.
>
> All else flowed from this, and his consistent policy of honesty. He
> was given many chances to retract. I hope it is not unduly emotional
> to suggest that his deliberate martyrdom made a difference.

He had a real contribution to make, but it sounds like the strain eventually
got to him. Wikipedia says:

However, he started to drink heavily. He was expelled from his chambers in
1984 after assaulting Sibghat Kadri, by then his head of chambers, at a
conference. He tried to requalify as a solicitor, but failed the Law Society
exams. He returned to the Bar, but was then disciplined for overbooking
himself by accepting briefs for trials that were to run simultaneously and
suspended for two years.

He moved back to Guyana in 1991, but met little success and returned to
Britain in 1994. After further disciplinary hearings, he was disbarred in
1994 for professional misconduct.

He died of liver cirrhosis

[The Todal]

"GB" <NOTso...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4f62526e$0$2961$fa0f...@news.zen.co.uk...

> Percy Picacity wrote:
>
>> Rudy Narayan's fundamental offence was to draw attention to
>> institutional racism in the criminal justice system when it was a
>> point of honour among police, lawyers and politicians to deny that it
>> could
>> possibly exist in Britain. It was fundamentally unacceptable for a
>> barrister to suggest it in open court.
>>
>> All else flowed from this, and his consistent policy of honesty. He
>> was given many chances to retract. I hope it is not unduly emotional
>> to suggest that his deliberate martyrdom made a difference.
>
> He had a real contribution to make, but it sounds like the strain
> eventually
> got to him. Wikipedia says:
>
> However, he started to drink heavily. He was expelled from his chambers in
> 1984 after assaulting Sibghat Kadri, by then his head of chambers, at a
> conference. He tried to requalify as a solicitor, but failed the Law
> Society
> exams. He returned to the Bar, but was then disciplined for overbooking
> himself by accepting briefs for trials that were to run simultaneously and
> suspended for two years.
>
> He moved back to Guyana in 1991, but met little success and returned to
> Britain in 1994. After further disciplinary hearings, he was disbarred in
> 1994 for professional misconduct.
>
> He died of liver cirrhosis

I am sure there was racism in the criminal justice system, and I have little
doubt that black or Asian barristers had then, and still have now, obstacles
in their way when finding clients and solicitors willing to instruct them.
But I don't believe that judges have ever displayed racism towards lawyers.
If they ever did, the best course of action would be to make a complaint to
the Court Service or whatever name it had then, and to ask the other lawyers
in the room to corroborate the facts (not necessarily corroborate your
opinion that the words were racist).

It is really idiotic to insult a judge in his court. It achieves nothing at
all and could disadvantage the client even if the client is impressed by
such fighting talk.

I hesitate to say anything disparaging about Rudy Narayan. He's dead so he
can't sue, but I wouldn't want to set a bad example in this group. However
anyone can look at www.bailii.org and search for Rudy Narayan and find cases
where he was involved. And then draw their own conclusions about whether he
was consistently honest and served his clients well. Many regarded him very
highly and he was a passionate and enthusiastic advocate.