Discussion of Range Rover woman being charged .... as formerly seen on CC

icowden

Well-Known Member
Was there 'ever' any doubt that the legal system is skewed in favour of those with more power, and money already .?
Hence power and money objecting to so called 'lefty lawyers'
I think it used to be better, but since the Tories cut legal aid funding and fees for criminal barristers, it is fast becoming the norm for the wealthy to be able to afford top barristers whilst the poor are lucky if they can get representation at all.
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
The quoted article reports it:

The incident involving Speid was caught on camera by a passer-by and heavily bleeped footage was shown to magistrates.

Fair enough, I wasn't dis-believing it, I simply thought that the footage shown on news may have been "bleeped" for viewers benefit, that did not necessarily mean the footage shown to the court was "bleeped". But, it would appear it was.
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
My apologies, the court was reportedly shown 'heavily bleeped' footage.
Fair enough, I wasn't dis-believing it, I simply thought that the footage shown on news may have been "bleeped" for viewers benefit, that did not necessarily mean the footage shown to the court was "bleeped". But, it would appear it was.
 
I think it used to be better, but since the Tories cut legal aid funding and fees for criminal barristers, it is fast becoming the norm for the wealthy to be able to afford top barristers whilst the poor are lucky if they can get representation at all.
Agree,

The system of legal aid was set up to try to redress some of the inequality with regards to access to the law.
The fact that the Tories are undermining it , tells us all we need to know.

That and trying to do away with the human rights act, right to protest, rights for refugees etc etc.

Sliding things in favour of the already powerful.

It's their natural inclination..
 

icowden

Well-Known Member
The system of legal aid was set up to try to redress some of the inequality with regards to access to the law.
The fact that the Tories are undermining it , tells us all we need to know.
@secretbarrister rails against it a lot. My favourite line is that you can earn more by training as a Barista than as a Barrister if you are going to specialise in criminal law.

They also speak out a lot about the principal that *everyone* is entitled to be represented in court by someone legally qualified and that does *not* mean that the the Barrister representing a client thinks that the client is "not guilty" or shares views with the client. In fact most criminal Chambers subscribe to the Duty system whereby you are assigned to a client. It is then your job to represent them regardless of how odious the client might be.

There was a high profile incident in Oxford (I think) where students wanted a Law Professor suspended for representing a dodgy government. They seemingly didn't understand that she did this under the duty system.
 

matticus

Well-Known Member
The charging looks right to me, and I think agrees with your view.
Shoving someone a couple of feet along a road, even with a weapon, is no more than common assault.
However, common assault on its own does not take sufficient account of the use of the car as a weapon, so dangerous driving is added.
Conviction for that offence is a minimum ban of a year.
It's tactics, as usual, so come the trial what I expect will happen is the driver will offer common assault in exchange for dangerous driving being dropped.
She will do this in the knowledge common assault will only be a small fine, and she will get to keep her precious licence.

Interesting to note that things went t'other way round from our Court Correspondent's (December) prediction

Actual outcome:
An assault charge against Speid, in which it was alleged that a protester had been beaten, was dismissed after the prosecution said it would produce no evidence.
 

newfhouse

Jokes mostly pre-owned
Interesting to note that things went t'other way round from our Court Correspondent's (December) prediction

Actual outcome:
An assault charge against Speid, in which it was alleged that a protester had been beaten, was dismissed after the prosecution said it would produce no evidence.
What would you prefer to have on your criminal record, a driving offence (everyone can forgive that, right?) or a conviction for violence?
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
No need to repeat yourself :laugh:

Sorry Moderator, sir/madam* (* delete as appropriate)
 

matticus

Well-Known Member
What would you prefer to have on your criminal record, a driving offence (everyone can forgive that, right?) or a conviction for violence?
Yes - to me (a layperson) that seems logical. I think she's been rather fortunate the Assault charge was dropped.
 

winjim

Well-Known Member
I watched a bit of her interview on LBC, which I would recommend avoiding as she comes across as a massively entitled self publicising arrogant nobber, and she was complaining that she couldn't do her job any more which involved helping people with ADHD fill out forms and such.

Now, far be it from me to diagnose at a distance, and I'm aware this is kind of personal but as somebody who is autistic and possibly ADHD, I have... opinions.

Firstly, don't use disabled people like that to try to gain sympathy. That's downright offensive. Secondly I'm not sure she's of the temperament to be teaching anybody life skills, let alone potentially vulnerable people who may struggle with what society deems 'normal' behaviour. She's a really bad role model. Thirdly, what's her reason for doing this work? Is there history? Part of getting to grips with my neurodivergent nature, and this I think is a good exercise no matter what your neurotype, was looking at my behaviour and my emotions, both past and present. Looking at my triggers and my reactions to certain stimuli and how they impacted on others as well as my own mental state. She's been triggered here clearly and responded badly, maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree but it all seems horribly familiar in a way.

As I've mentioned on the main forum, I used to be one of those annoying entitled shouty cyclists, but I had a good think about what I was doing and why, and I calmed myself right down. Maybe this driver could do with having a sit down and a look at herself, a proper look, and figure out why she reacted the way she did and what she could do to change and support herself to ensure that it's unlikely to happen again. That won't happen of course until she lets her guard down, drops the entitlement and accepts that what she did was inappropriate, but I can't help feeling that there's something there that can be worked on, if only she had the inclination to do so.
 
Top Bottom