or as I like to call them are absolute fucking CUNTS.
Yes, lawyers—particularly criminal defence barristers and solicitors—are expected to face significant professional and financial disadvantages if jury trials are reduced, a move currently being proposed by super-intellect David Lammy in England and Wales to tackle court backlogs. The legal profession has expressed deep concern that removing the right to a jury trial for many offenses will diminish the need for specialist advocates, reduce income for criminal practitioners, and potentially drive new talent away from the field.
So, do they actually care about the thousands of scumbags being relentlessly hauled through the British courts? Of course not. It`s all about the vast amounts of lovely money they`ll lose out on.
The proposed shift to “judge-only” trials for some cases is expected to shorten proceedings, reducing the work available for defence lawyers. As jury trials are considered “long-form” work, fewer of them directly equates to less billable time, ie, fewer fees for barristers.
• Shrinking Legal Aid: Restrictions on jury trials, particularly when moving cases to magistrates’ courts, may shrink the pool of cases that qualify for legal aid, reducing the overall funding for criminal law firms.
• Reduced Demand for Trial Specialists: Criminal law practitioners are concerned that they will be “overlooked,” as the need for specialists skilled in presenting cases to a jury (who can interpret “real-world” context and emotions) will decrease in a system that focuses on more technical, judge-only hearings.
• Diminished Professional Appeal: The reduced potential for career progression, combined with lower funding for criminal work, is causing law students to reconsider specializing in criminal law, potentially creating a talent shortage.
• Shift in Work Type: While the volume of cases may remain high, they will be shifted to magistrates’ courts where the nature of the work is different, often offering lower remuneration and less opportunity for in-depth advocacy compared to the Crown Court.
Thousands of lawyers have signed letters opposing the restrictions, arguing that the changes are based on “little evidence” and are not the correct solution to the court crisis, which they attribute to underfunding and poor management rather than the use of juries. Lawyers contend that these reforms will not only affect their livelihood but also weaken public confidence in the justice system.
No shit. Really?
What a bunch of parasitic, greedy, unconscionable sociopaths.
🤮
Nominated by sņigger-sņigger.
