Working at the courts
I saw The Man having it stuck to him every day. The solicitors would try all sorts of tricks to keep people out of prison.

A common ploy was to ask an Accused's mates and less salubrious relations to stay out of court for his appearance, rather than go in to support him. The brief would then assure the Beaks that his client had cut all ties with his former low companions and had vowed to go straight.

The magistrates would usually fall for it and Chummy would get a suspended sentence/tag instead of porridge. Job done!

I wasn't above a spot of subversion myself. One day, a scruffy-looking youth rolled up for an appearance, having broken his tag conditions for the umpteenth time. He was on a knife-edge - if the Beaks were feeling grumpy he was going down.

His appearance wasn't helping, but as he was currently sleeping on a mate's sofa he didn't exactly have an extensive wardrobe to draw on.

I suggested that he ring round and get someone to lend him at least a shirt and tie to appear in.
Ten minutes later, a friend of his rushed in wearing his full weddin' suit. They swapped clothes in the lavvy with a minute to spare and the Accused entered the court looking immaculate.

He was out in no time with a stern warning and a short extension to his tag. He and his mate changed their clothes back and were quickly on their joyful way.

OK, the people I'm talking about have broken the law and should pay.
BUT -
a. We are individually powerless against the full weight of the law without representation
b. It's the lawyer's job to get the best result for their client
c. If it was YOU in trouble, you'd expect no less!
(Juan Quar is clinging to her front teeth on, Sun 20 Jun 2010, 13:25, 11 replies)

I don't really have a problem...
...with you helping them out, or their lawyer suggesting they dress smart, etc., but I do have a problem with Magistrates being so effing daft that their judgements are heavily based on whether you're wearing a tie or not. As if it makes any difference...
(SnowyTheWereRabbit the Leporid from Hell, Sun 20 Jun 2010, 13:55, closed)

^^this.
I think that it is very important that people have good legal representarion regardless of income (or lack of). However, I worry about magistrates who can be fooled by cheap tricks.
Also, as I have mentioned before, I assume anyone in a suit is a wanker until proven otherwise (I have to wear a suit to work).
(Me, I'm not... in any way intoxicated, Sun 20 Jun 2010, 14:10, closed)

My current theory
about suits is that they are worn primarily to make people look competent. People who actually are competent don't need to where them. In some areas, I've noticed that the better a person is at their job, the more casually they dress.
( Sextant goes to him is emotionally erect, on this day, Sun 20 Jun 2010, 14:18, closed)

The Rules

Those that can, do.

Those that can't, wear suits and pretend.

Cheers
( Legless Mister Stabby - shanks for the memory, Sun 20 Jun 2010, 15:16, closed)

I don't see how you can say
that the suit made any difference.

One of my close relatives has been a magistrate for over 20 years, and as far as I can tell, the attitude is that they prefer not to send people down unless they are persistent and/or unrepentant offenders.

What they choose to wear makes no diffierence - she has jailed/refered to crown court just as many suit wearing oiks as she has sent off track suit wearing chavs with a flea in their ear.

It probably feels good to believe it has an influence, because it suggests the magistrates are stupid. But in 99% of cases, I bet it doesn't.
( Not Pineapple anymore, Mon 21 Jun 2010, 10:19, closed)

You know when you've got a good defence lawyer..
..they ask to be paid in cash.
( buffet_the_appetite_slayer ٩(●̮̃•)۶ jacked in to the ICE on, Sun 20 Jun 2010, 17:54, closed)

The thing about the daft Beaks/defendants in suits
is that by putting on a suit, a defendant is playing the game. He's showing respect to the court and aknowledging his wrongdoing, and giving an impression of penitence.
As the Beaks have some discretion in sentencing and can come down hard or soft within certain limits, it makes sense to try to impress them.

Everyone in court knows this, except, it seems, many defendants.

Whenever a defendant turns up in a suit, his/her solicitor ALWAYS points it out to the Magistrates. Most defendants don't bother. They come in tracksuits, scruffy jeans, wifebeaters, Bermudas, you name it.

The courts don't want to send anyone down. The prisons are full, most offences are petty, and there are plenty of alternative penalties (tags, curfews, probation, unpaid work, fines, driving bans, compensation orders, ASBOs etc) to use instead.

So it makes sense for the defendant to play along, to give the Magistrates the chance to keep him out of prison.

If you're ever 'ad up, you'd do best to wear a nicely-pressed suit and tie, or a modest skirt and blouse if you're female. Tidy hair and clean shoes are important too. Turn your phone off.
Your brief will then grovel expertly on your behalf, with an expectation of a more lenient sentence.

The exception is where a defendant has to come to court straight from some manual work, in which case uniform or overalls are acceptable. Hands and face MUST be washed, shoes wiped and hair combed though!
The solicitor will point out to the Bench that their client is a hardworking, conscientious individual, etc.

I learned all this during my time as a lowly court usher in local Magistrates' Courts, following an M.A. in criminology. Seeing how justice actually works - what an eye-opener!
(Juan Quar is clinging to her front teeth on, Sun 20 Jun 2010, 22:10, closed)

Yeah
I can understand it makes some difference in the impression given, but still...

I'd imagine this isn't the most silly aspect of the criminal justice system you've experienced, though. I have a few mates who are criminal lawyers and one or two in the police, and it really does sound like a bit of a mess a lot of the time.

Ah well. Hey Ho...
(SnowyTheWereRabbit the Leporid from Hell, Sun 20 Jun 2010, 23:07, closed)

The criminal justice system deals with PEOPLE
so it's never going to run like a well-oiled machine. Every day is different, because people are different.

Of course, the people involved aren't your normal run-of-the-mill types. They have drug and drink problems, tendencies to dishonesty and violence, addictions to habits like speeding and gambling and unusual sex...

And that's just the magistrates. ;)
(Juan Quar is clinging to her front teeth on, Mon 21 Jun 2010, 7:19, closed)

Heh

(SnowyTheWereRabbit the Leporid from Hell, Mon 21 Jun 2010, 9:31, closed)

^^this
A dozen years ago I was extended an invitation to appear in front of a panel of three Magistrates and was given the opportunity to explain why I felt it necessary to conduct my motorcycle at 109MPH along almost two miles of Her Majesty's best tarmac.

I wore my best suit, was freshly shorn and shaved, and was exceedingly polite to any court official I encountered, especially the three beaks at the front of the room. I duly admitted my guilt and subsequent remorse (there was absolutely no way I could get away with pleading Not Guilty short of some moronic technicality, and I didn't know about things like technicalities back then), and vowed solemnly that it was a momentary lapse of judgement and would never, ever happen again, cross my heart. Also, while determining sentencing, would the Court please take into consideration the fact that in the two months between foolishly committing the offence and the date of the trial I had been offered a new job, which was conditional on my being able to drive (this was actually true; I didn't have to lie)?

The Magistrates left the room for a fag/tea break their deliberations and returned a few minutes later to issue their verdict. In their armoury of punishments they had at their disposal the following: a fine of up to £1,000, up to six penalty points on my license, and a disqualification of up to six months. A pretty stiff punishment, all things considered. What they actually gave me was a mere smack on the wrist in comparison.

£250, nil points, and two weeks' disqualification.

I wrote the cheque there and then, all the while biting the inside of my cheek to stop myself from grinning like a loon.

It could easily have been much, much worse. If I'd given the arresting officer any grief he might have told the truth on the report, and I'd have been facing jail time. I recently spoke with a barrister chum of mine over drinks and recalled the incident. He immediately offered the opinion that the arresting officer lied through his teeth, committed perjury, perverted the course of justice, and all that malarkey, and that I should be down on my knees thanking my lucky stars that he had done so.

You see, what I didn't know at the time (but which my barrister pal explained to me many years later) was the sentencing guidelines given to Magistrates for speeding offences. Apparently, if one is up on a charge of 110MPH or greater the reward is time inside.

The motorcycle was new, and the speedometer was still accurate and hadn't yet started to over-read (I later tested it with a GPS receiver stuffed in the map window on the top of my tank bag).

I'd actually been doing 124, flat-out. The bike wouldn't go any faster.

Politeness costs nothing, but can reap rewards. And when in court, wear the right costume, follow the stage directions, and say the right lines. It's the performance of a lifetime.
( flake has nothing against your right leg, Wed 23 Jun 2010, 22:55, closed)