oh dear musnt offend the fashion police

[Mustapha]

Freddie, I am not a psychic, I am unable to see the future and even less predict the unpredictable nature of man, should a former client commit one of those offences I would not defend them for commiting, I refuse to represent them again.

Recently I was presented with a case of a young man whom I had defended previously. The previous case had involved defrauding his employer of a few hundred pounds worth of goods. A crime, but not important in the scheme of life.

Now this young man pleaded guilty at my direction, he recieved a sentance, that whilst I felt was light, seemed in keeping with his crime and plea for the area we live in.

Recently his new case is a result of this first. I will not go into specifics as it would not be proper, legal or morally right, but needless to say he was goaded by his ex-employer and some friends in a pub, when attacked the young man defended himself, and the ex-employer was seriously injured.

The young man has been charged with a serious offence that could see him imprisoned for much of the next two decades in theory.

Now I do not know if he is or is not guilty of the offence, I only know what I was told, but what I was told allowed me to make the decision not to defend him, instead I recommended and alternative Solicitor who does not operate as I do.

I have morals and professional pride, I try not to cross certain self-imposed lines.

 

[Freddie]

RTF post freddie, Mustapha said he doesn't solice when some of his clients go free, so stop rubbing it in.

I am not rubbing anything in and i can also read what mustapha has put even though i just wanted to know his thoughts on these people and their actions when the repeated offender does his deed.

Of course you are. How silly of me to think otherwise.

It now seems that not only do you follow people around the forums Oilman making silly remarks to their every post you have now become the spokesman for us all-- amazing--.

I see you're getting the old chestnuts out again, must be coming up to Christmas.

By the way what did the shrink say to you today? any electric shock treatment due or just shed therapy?

If you are going to try and emulate softus's replies, at least get some lessons first, then try to be original, otherwise it looks amateurish.

I couldnt emulate Softus Oilman he never knows who i am--- i didnt know he was your hero Oilman, have you a thing going for him?

 

[Freddie]

Freddie, I am not a psychic, I am unable to see the future and even less predict the unpredictable nature of man, should a former client commit one of those offences I would not defend them for commiting, I refuse to represent them again.

Recently I was presented with a case of a young man whom I had defended previously. The previous case had involved defrauding his employer of a few hundred pounds worth of goods. A crime, but not important in the scheme of life.

Now this young man pleaded guilty at my direction, he recieved a sentance, that whilst I felt was light, seemed in keeping with his crime and plea for the area we live in.

Recently his new case is a result of this first. I will not go into specifics as it would not be proper, legal or morally right, but needless to say he was goaded by his ex-employer and some friends in a pub, when attacked the young man defended himself, and the ex-employer was seriously injured.

The young man has been charged with a serious offence that could see him imprisoned for much of the next two decades in theory.

Now I do not know if he is or is not guilty of the offence, I only know what I was told, but what I was told allowed me to make the decision not to defend him, instead I recommended and alternative Solicitor who does not operate as I do.

I have morals and professional pride, I try not to cross certain self-imposed lines.

Thankyou Mustapha--has anybody ever blamed you for the actions of your client if he re-offends or is it because your clients arent of the worst kind you have never been in that situ-----reason for asking i will reveal in a minute, quite genuine but i have to be sure.

 

[oilman]

I couldnt emulate Softus Oilman he never knows who i am--- i didnt know he was your hero Oilman, have you a thing going for him?

Yet another of your stock silly replies. You don't have to be a dipstick, some of your posts are quite mature, why open yourself up to ridicule. (Note: this is not the same as having a laugh at oneself)

 

[Freddie]

Yet another of your stock silly replies. You don't have to be a dipstick, some of your posts are quite mature, why open yourself up to ridicule. (Note: this is not the same as having a laugh at oneself)

Didnt you know Oilman i enjoy being in the company of fools

 

[Mustapha]

Freddie, to my knowledge I have never been blamed for the actions of others. Perhaps you would like to inform me as to the purpose of your questioning now?

 

[Freddie]

Freddie, to my knowledge I have never been blamed for the actions of others. Perhaps you would like to inform me as to the purpose of your questioning now?

I have to be carefull as you for certain you will know.

Before i left England a few years ago my friends daughter was killed by a ( joyrider ) or car full of them, she was 13 and the case wase headline.

The most any of them got was 18 months and all repeat--repeat--repeat offenders, the circumstances were even more tragic because of the details of the event.

My friend and his wife tried to get the law changed but to no avail, i just remembered what was said by different people at the time.

The killer didnt serve 18 months a lot less, oh and he came from a broken home--usual stuff

 

[Mustapha]

Freddie, I am sorry to read of such a tragic event.

I had nothing to do with this case, I know nothing about it and would not comment on it without knowing details of it.

On the surface I agree that the sentencing appears unusually light, but without the court papers I could not possibly know the motivations of the parties involved.

I hope you understand.

 

[Freddie]

Freddie, I am sorry to read of such a tragic event.

I had nothing to do with this case, I know nothing about it and would not comment on it without knowing details of it.

On the surface I agree that the sentencing appears unusually light, but without the court papers I could not possibly know the motivations of the parties involved.

I hope you understand.

Of course i understand, but i just wondered if you had been in a similar situ.

If it was me i think i would have to pack the job in cause i would want to kill them myself especially as the defence would know stuff that others wouldnt.

It was 1993--thats all i can say

 

[Big_Spark]

Freddie, for once you and I agree. If I was put in this position by some reckless uncaring fool I would want to kill the thieving little pricks.

 

[Zampa]

Mustapha...nothing personal.im sure your an ok guy...

But I wouldnt wee in a solicitors mouth if their back teeth were on fire..

IMO they are no more than mercanaries..defending people for money, they know some of the scum they defend are guilty....but will continue to defend them..why??...for money pure and simple.

They defend the very type of people they wouldnt want on their own doorsteps....and they know the truth.

They say they dont know the truth but are merely presenting the facts...rubbish!.....are they so blind that they cant spot a wrong'un?

Heres one for you...cut short...my daughter was sexually assulted in college..basically a boy tried it on with her and would stop when she pushed him away....although he eventually did.

The college, not wanting to make a fuss didnt want to call the police...enter wife into the equation!.......police were called statements were taken...the boy had boasted to a few mates what he had tried...

Daughters case according to the o/b was a strong one...until it came to light that she had been lets say.....'generous with her affections' with other lads in the college...and at the college...the CPS in their infinate unbiased wisdom said they wouldnt take the case any firther as it wouldnt be in the public intrest....and 'the lads solicitor would DESTROY her....so two issues..the useless CPS who are only after backing a dead cert...and a solicitor who would DESTROY a 16 year old girl in the dock......I spose she was 'asking for it then'....

I have no faith in British justice....

The boy got his just deserts...

Luckily.....I never managed to get my hands on whoever was going to defend them......or the animal at the CPS who advised us not to bother with the case.

But back to solicitors....why is it one will take one sides case on in a arguement and another will take another sides case on.......there can only be one correct conclusion in a dispute......yet both sides solicitors will keep pushing and pushing their arguements until the case is settled...

Why?.....because they are bother getting paid no matter what.......so why should they worry?

Someone once said to me about all the work solicitors do for nothing....well more fool them....

ever seen a poor one?

As I have said in my earlier post, I am careful to screen my clients, I will not represent people accused of crimes against children, involving drugs, sex crimes or violent crimes.

Good for you matey....nice to see some principles

 

[Freddie]

Go away Brightspark back to your Walter Mitty world.

 

[oilman]

I'm not having a dig here freddie, but these "joyriders" should be called what they really are - car thieves.

There is a general trend to use euphemisms nowadays to describe criminals eg joyrider, happy-slapper, mugger and similar words used for their actions. Killing while driving dangerously should be murder, happy slapping is approaching aggravated assualt, mugging is often common assualt if not armed robbery.

Using these media type terms tends to make these destructive crimes sound legitimate.

 

[Freddie]

I'm not having a dig here freddie, but these "joyriders" should be called what they really are - car thieves.

There is a general trend to use euphemisms nowadays to describe criminals eg joyrider, happy-slapper, mugger and similar words used for their actions. Killing while driving dangerously should be murder, happy slapping is approaching aggravated assualt, mugging is often common assualt if not armed robbery.

Using these media type terms tends to make these destructive crimes sound legitimate.

But what they did was in our eyes muder in legal terms manslaughter but at the time you caouldnt be charged with that--i cant and wont say anymore it is too public

 

[Big_Spark]

Freddie, **** you, your an inbred illiterate fool who has no life.

I'll bet if the truth was known your entire life is a fantasy, your probably some dirty little grubby man with a rain mack and a stack of porn videos, and the blisters that accompany them.

I no more care what you think that I do what a worm thinks about tomorrows weather forcast.

You have proved by your own words to be a liar, a charletan and a sick minded racist.

You attack everyone who has an independent thought, and that is because you don't, all your little "quips" you emulate from others here.

It would never surprise me to find out that you and slogger are one and the same as the posting style, spelling errors and gramma are very similar, as was Howie's and Georgie's...and we all know that they and you are the same person.

Instead of posting here, you would be far better advised going to college to get an education.

You are the biggest fool here.