I am sitting at my desk looking at a letter. The letter is from a young lady who appeared before me for sentence in January 2006. She had been dealing class A drugs. I imposed a suspended sentence with a Drug Treatment and Testing Order. That was on the lenient side of lenient, but what I had read suggested that it might work and she brought her Mum to court. I asked to hear from Mum, who seemed very sensible. I looked at the young lady. And, without being in the least bit confident about my own prescience, I took a deep breath...
The letter tells me that this young lady is now drug free. She has a job. She is buying a house. She has a daughter who is living with her. She thinks I saved her life, which I think is wrong - she saved her own life (there is little doubt that drugs would have killed her by now) by the actions she took. And the probation service saved her life.
I have never had a letter like that before and I was really very touched that this young lady had taken the trouble to write. The law affects peoples' lives. Sometimes it is nice to have proof that what you do makes a difference.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I promised them - whaddya gonna do?
A Successful Get Away from the Judge...
It does what it says on the tin.
Contact
simon dot myerson at netserv dot net
I am told that spelling it this way prevents spam. Feel free to get in touch.
I am told that spelling it this way prevents spam. Feel free to get in touch.
Posts - The major posts are listed first. They are the meat of the site and are updated regularly.
- An Introduction
- The Mini Pupillage
- The Application
- The Interview
- If At First You Don't Succeed
- A Pause for Thought
- Final Speech
- An Excellent Prospect - Or Not
- All Beginnings Are Difficult
- Becoming a Solicitor First?
- Sermon
- The BVC - Infallible Tool, Necessary Evil or Total Crap?
- What Type of Law Should I Do? (Part 1)
- What Type of Law Should I Do? (Part 2)
- What Type of Law Should I Do? (Part 3)
- What Type of Law (Part 4)
- What Type of Judge Will I Get (Part 1)?
- What Type of Judge Will I Get (Part 2)?
- Some Issues for the New A-G
- M.A.s and Other Further Academic Degrees
- How Was It For You?
- The BVC - Again
- Countdown
- Blawgs
- BVC Redux
- The, "Does My
ArseEgo Look Big In This?" Competition - Deferral of Call
- New Term, New Beginnings
- What Is A Good University (at which to read Law)
- Poll Results
- Root and Branch
- Have You Got What It Takes?
- The Size of the Bar
- Mature Entrants
Links
- Bar or Bust (Another Hopeful enters the Lists and isn't frightened to express his/her views)
- Bloody Relations (Family Law knowledge Based - Good for Students)
- Ruthie's Law (Knowledge Based/Bizarre)
- Defending People: The Art and Science of Criminal Defence Trial Lawyering
- The Pupillage Chronicles
- The Ramblings of a Paranoid Pupil (Oxbridge Pupil in Commercial Set. Does the BVC work?)
- Publawyer (Knowledge Based)
- Liadnan (General)
- Legal Beagle (Barrister)
- John Bolch (Knowledge Based)
- Martin George (Knowledge Based)
- Nearly Legal (Student/Knowledge Based)
- Geeklawyer (Discursive)
- Charon QC (Discursive)
- Legal Lass (Student)
- Barrister 2 Be (Student)
- Josephine Blogs (Student)
- Law Minx (Student)
- Scholarships and Sponsorships
- Useful info about scholarships - from Solicitors to promote harmony (ah)
- Olpas - the boring but necessary bit
- Baili - Free Cases!
- N E Circuit
Your Chance to Express Yourself...
The Myersonettes
I promised them - whaddya gonna do?
I am a barrister practising on the North Eastern Circuit - which is obviously the best in the country. I was suitably prepared for life at the bar by the constant, grinding, ceaseless and unremitting study of law.
I graduated in 1984, married Nicole in 1987 and moved from London to Leeds at the same time. Since then I have developed some sort of a practice, had 4 children (all girls as you can see above. And is that a CUTE photo or what?) and put on 2 stone and (according to my family though I can't myself see it) another couple of chins. I feel that I now conform to the public ideal of my profession, although I don't recall being an evil parasite who is only interested in bankrupting the Treasury. I simply strive towards four weddings and a bankruptcy.
We have a dog called Sally who is an outstanding example of the Heinz breed.
For my sins I support Leeds United - if you are tempted to laugh just remember that I sit as a Recorder, so I can send you to prison. The consolation used to be that the rest of my family is bound to Middlesborough AFC, which conclusively proved that every cloud has a silver lining. Now Middlesborough have been in Europe (and there wasn't even a war) there is no consolation - no wonder people turn to religion.
In keeping with my commitment to modernity, the website is relaunched as a Blog - only about 2 years after blogs became what everyone has. For the legal profession this is lightening fast. Truthfully, the need for rebirth is because I forgot how to update the website, lost all the passwords and began to feel that the site was losing what relevance it had.
You are reading this because you want, you mad fool you, to be a barrister. There are no guarantees but this will, I hope, help. Field testing suggests that it does - hence the strapline above which Ronseal (who do not pay me) should take as a compliment. If they sue I will post an appeal for a fighting fund.
I have included some useful links below and some less than useful jokes below that. The excuse is that it is everyone's job to wring as much pleasure from life as they legitimately (important word that) can and thus there should be the minimum possible divide between business and pleasure...
About Me
A Successful Get Away from the Judge...
Barrister Jokes
Please do not crack these in interviews and expect to get a Pupillage.
What's the difference between God and a Barrister? God doesn't think He's a barrister.
What's the difference between a barrister and a broken watch? Neither of them work - but the watch is right twice a day.
What's the difference between a BVC student and a mobile phone? A mobile phone comes with a plan.
What's the difference between a pupil and a mushroom? No difference, they're both kept in the dark and have loads of shit shovelled on them.
How many barristers does it take to change a lightbulb? How many can you afford?
The Barrister wakes up after surgery and asks; 'why are the curtains drawn?' The nurse says, 'there's a fire across the street and we didn't want you to think the operation was a failure.'
Why can't barristers have sex with their clients? To prevent double billing.
What happens to a barrister when he takes viagra? He gets taller.
What's the difference between a barrister and a duck? Once in a while the duck will stick its bill up its arse.
Why do surgeons love barristers? Because they're easy to operate on: gutless, with no organs except lips and arseholes - and those are interchangeable.
Barrister chat up line? 'I'm a barrister. I'm trained to get you off'.
Why did the barrister cross the road? To sue the chicken.
How do you get 100 barristers in a Mini? You make 1 a High Court Judge and the other 99 will crawl up his arse.
What do you get when you cross a barrister with a demon from hell? A barrister.
What's the difference between a barrister and a trampoline? You take your shoes off to jump on a trampoline.
What's the difference between a cat and a barrister? One is an arrogant creature which will utterly ignore you unless you can do something for it. The other is a pet.
On holiday with their respective families Joe meets Max who he hasn't seen for years. 'What are you doing with yourself these days' he asks. 'I'm a barrister' whispers Max, 'but don't tell my wife. She thinks I'm still a pimp'.
What's the difference between a barrister and an onion? You cry when you cut up an onion.
A client comes to Chambers for a conference and is told that her barrister has died. The next day she comes back and asks to see that same barrister. The receptionist says 'He's dead and you know that. Why are you asking to see him?' The client replies, 'I just love hearing it'.
A pupil was sent to a far-away town to represent a long-term client accused of robbery. After 3 days he won the case and the client was acquitted. Excited about his success, the pupil texted his pupilmaster "Justice prevailed." The pupilmaster replied in haste: "Go back in and ask for permission to appeal."
A London Silk goes shooting in Yorkshire and kills a pheasant, which falls into a field on the other side of a fence. As he climbs the fence, an elderly gentleman asks him what he's doing. The Silk responds, “I shot a pheasant and it fell in this field, I’m going into retrieve it.” The old farmer replies, “This is my property, and tha's not coming in.” The indignant Silk says, “I am in Chamber's Guide and the Legal 500. If you don’t let me get the pheasant, I’ll sue you!" The farmer smiles and says, “Tha' don’t know how we do things 'ere in Yorkshire. We settle disagreements like this wit' Three-Kick Rule.” The Silk asks, “What's that?" The Farmer replies “Fust I kick thee three times, then tha kicks me three times, and so on, back and forth, until one of us gives up.” The Silk quickly decides that he can easily take the old farmer and agrees. The farmer slowly walks up to the Silk. His first kick plants his heavy work boot into the Silk’s groin and drops him to his knees. His second kick nearly wipes the man’s nose off his face. The Silk is flat on his belly when the farmer’s third kick to a kidney nearly causes him to give up. But he summons every bit of his will power and manages to get to his feet and say, “Okay, you old bastard, now it’s my turn.” The old farmer smiles and says, “Nay lad, I give up. Tha can have t'pheasant.”
What's the difference between God and a Barrister? God doesn't think He's a barrister.
What's the difference between a barrister and a broken watch? Neither of them work - but the watch is right twice a day.
What's the difference between a BVC student and a mobile phone? A mobile phone comes with a plan.
What's the difference between a pupil and a mushroom? No difference, they're both kept in the dark and have loads of shit shovelled on them.
How many barristers does it take to change a lightbulb? How many can you afford?
The Barrister wakes up after surgery and asks; 'why are the curtains drawn?' The nurse says, 'there's a fire across the street and we didn't want you to think the operation was a failure.'
Why can't barristers have sex with their clients? To prevent double billing.
What happens to a barrister when he takes viagra? He gets taller.
What's the difference between a barrister and a duck? Once in a while the duck will stick its bill up its arse.
Why do surgeons love barristers? Because they're easy to operate on: gutless, with no organs except lips and arseholes - and those are interchangeable.
Barrister chat up line? 'I'm a barrister. I'm trained to get you off'.
Why did the barrister cross the road? To sue the chicken.
How do you get 100 barristers in a Mini? You make 1 a High Court Judge and the other 99 will crawl up his arse.
What do you get when you cross a barrister with a demon from hell? A barrister.
What's the difference between a barrister and a trampoline? You take your shoes off to jump on a trampoline.
What's the difference between a cat and a barrister? One is an arrogant creature which will utterly ignore you unless you can do something for it. The other is a pet.
On holiday with their respective families Joe meets Max who he hasn't seen for years. 'What are you doing with yourself these days' he asks. 'I'm a barrister' whispers Max, 'but don't tell my wife. She thinks I'm still a pimp'.
What's the difference between a barrister and an onion? You cry when you cut up an onion.
A client comes to Chambers for a conference and is told that her barrister has died. The next day she comes back and asks to see that same barrister. The receptionist says 'He's dead and you know that. Why are you asking to see him?' The client replies, 'I just love hearing it'.
A pupil was sent to a far-away town to represent a long-term client accused of robbery. After 3 days he won the case and the client was acquitted. Excited about his success, the pupil texted his pupilmaster "Justice prevailed." The pupilmaster replied in haste: "Go back in and ask for permission to appeal."
A London Silk goes shooting in Yorkshire and kills a pheasant, which falls into a field on the other side of a fence. As he climbs the fence, an elderly gentleman asks him what he's doing. The Silk responds, “I shot a pheasant and it fell in this field, I’m going into retrieve it.” The old farmer replies, “This is my property, and tha's not coming in.” The indignant Silk says, “I am in Chamber's Guide and the Legal 500. If you don’t let me get the pheasant, I’ll sue you!" The farmer smiles and says, “Tha' don’t know how we do things 'ere in Yorkshire. We settle disagreements like this wit' Three-Kick Rule.” The Silk asks, “What's that?" The Farmer replies “Fust I kick thee three times, then tha kicks me three times, and so on, back and forth, until one of us gives up.” The Silk quickly decides that he can easily take the old farmer and agrees. The farmer slowly walks up to the Silk. His first kick plants his heavy work boot into the Silk’s groin and drops him to his knees. His second kick nearly wipes the man’s nose off his face. The Silk is flat on his belly when the farmer’s third kick to a kidney nearly causes him to give up. But he summons every bit of his will power and manages to get to his feet and say, “Okay, you old bastard, now it’s my turn.” The old farmer smiles and says, “Nay lad, I give up. Tha can have t'pheasant.”
Count the Omer
And Counting...
| Get a free hit counter here. |
24 comments:
Nice One
A heartwarming tale.
When this girl's daughter appears before you, in 20 years time for similar charges, you can sentence her more certainly in the sure hope that the sentence will work.
It is likely that the young lady would have died from the consequences of her addiction had you passed a sentence of immediate imprisonment. You had the judgment (and the courage) to ignore the official guidelines and, perhaps, popular opinion. She is right. She owes her life to you.
P
Mr P - thank you. Philip - thank you too. Although I still think that overstates it a little I don't deny that it's a nice thing to hear. GL - a healthy dose of cynicism to keep me focussed. In 20 years time I shall be retired.
Retired?
I'm actually disappointed you aren't considering joining Lords Bingham and Hoffmann et al.
You could go on forever.
Did you know that your fame now extends all the way down to the big smoke? That's right, you've managed to get into today's Metro. I daresay into some proper newspapers as well, but I haven't bothered to read any today.
Actually, I've just done a search and the BBC website reported on the case yesterday. Bah, the Metro has let me down again.
Hmmm. I'm very impressed you were so honest about the lack of science in sentencing, i.e., it basically turning on intuition and hunches (which is all you can go on).
When sitting as a Recorder Mr Myerson *is* only required to "have regard to" the sentencing guidelines; they need not be followed slavishly.
Hey Solemn....the thing about the guidelines is that they are there and will be referred to (along with cases reported) by the Court of Appeal.
Judges dont like to be appealed and would rather play it cautious
I don't actually see why judges don't like to be appealed. In certain cases, they are doing the only thing they can do when that happens: namely, following a dubious precedent which only the higher court (on appeal, of course) has the power to overrule.
The criterion for interfering with a sentence is that it's "manifestly excessive," and I think the Court of Appeal maybe needs to bear that in mind. (It should also then only cut the sentence to take away the manifest excessiveness, even if the appeal judges themselves would have sentenced far more leniently than that.) Trial judges have a particular familiarity with the case and with local conditions, as well as being the decisionmaker basically trusted to exercise a discretion with very little science to it.
Indeed, in the US there was no appellate review at *all* of sentencing discretion prior to the Sentencing Reform Act 1984 (and after that put a rigid guidelines system in place, you could still not challenge a trial judge's selection of a sentence within the bracket yielded by the guidelines).
The US? What relevance is that.
Judges - they do in fact take umbridge at being appealed (at least some of them)- it's a human nature - to have your judgment criticised and then overturned is not something that is welcomed. Surely you can see that.
Simon, A simple application of the "but for" test proves causation as far as your sentence was concerned. You are one of the good guys,
"The US? What relevance is that."
With respect, you're very last century. :) Their Lordships in committee room whatever absolutely love comparative law, from what I gather.
Hey Solemn...the US - what relevance? My point exactly. One Nil to the Pineapples.
As for their Lordships and the love of the committee room.....do'know - I think you're right...they do love it...very good tea in that room.
But old Solemniser - it's the individual judge who's sentence is being appealed who does not like the room as much.
Catch-ma-drift?
Last century? You little flatterer you.
As someone who spent their final year of undergrad writing a dissertation on prison law, I often grapple(on a personal level of interest rather than professional) with the problem of whether harsher sentences or leniency is the best course of action to take on the question of re-offending and impact on society.
As your story shows, it all depends on the circumstances. Sometimes, often even, rules cannot dictate for hunches. Or for human behaviour.
I'm not just glad that lady managed to use her time to rebuild her life, but that she had the manners and grace to thank you for the part you played.
I didn't say that their Lordships on the Appellate Committee love the committee room! Rather, they love comparative law, and the US is a frequent point of comparison.
I was merely pointing out that the fact the United States permitted *no* appellate review of sentences *at all* prior to the federal sentencing guidelines demonstrates how little science there is in sentencing. It is very rarely fair to say that a judge's sentencing decision was "wrong."
For instance, while I was sitting in on the Court of Appeal yesterday there was the case of a man convicted of affray for holding a hunting knife to the throat of one of a group of youths who had suggested his friend's ears were manifestly excessive in size. The Recorder had imposed a prison sentence of 12 months (despite a pre-sentence report recommending probation). A terrifyingly severe-looking judge called Sir Paul Kennedy read out a two-minute judgment saying they agreed "those who hold knives to the throats" of people should "expect to spend a period in custody," but had decided 12 months was too long and were substituting a sentence of 6 months. They didn't even articulate a reason why the Recorder's sentence was "manifestly excessive." Rather, the prison term they plucked out of the air simply differed from the one the Recorder imposed. (And frequently sentencing *is* little more than plucking figures out of the air - hence the historical US practice.)
The "manifestly excessive" test is still there in name, but essentially what the Court of Appeal seem to do frequently is simply to re-sentence the appellant and override the judge's discretion. It certainly does not mean the lower judge was "wrong" in any meaningful sense.
Hey Solemniser...ah....got-chaaso the US is relevant after all?
Super.
When you say "sitting in on the court of appeal" - you mean "sitting in on a seat at the bag munching my crisps 'cos I had nothing better to do...for the day..."
Got-cha
I don't think their Lordships would take very kindly to muching crisps in the gallery ...
Yes, the US is relevant to draw comparisons with. On the other foot, Justice Breyer specifically referred to the UK's system of review for "manifest excessiveness" in oral argument in United States v. Booker, where the federal sentencing guidelines were made advisory-only and the Court of Appeals told to review sentences for overall "reasonableness" in future (rather than compliance with the guidelines).
The concern at the moment seems to be that in reality, the Court of Appeal actually routinely substitutes its own judgment for that of the sentencing judge, as opposed to reigning in manifest excessiveness.
Another case I saw, incidentally, was an appeal by way of case stated from the Crown Court on appeal from the magistrates. The judge had specifically welcomed guidance from a higher court on the matter at issue. So assuming they even find out (which I am not sure is too likely), it simply is not true that an appeal constitutes some sort of insult.
Solomisor....wow...you certainly know how to party.
So does Mr Myerson, Q.C., by the sound of it. ;)
Hey Simone - P sees that you have joined another set - 42 Bedford Row? I know one of the geezers in that set quite well.
Good luck.
Though I didnt know they did crime!!
I thought I left a post here - perhaps it was the product of a febrile imagination! I'm considering application to 42BR, they strike me as a Very Nice Set - whether or not they will have me is, of course, a matter of some speculation!
Really the story and the fiction is awesome and brilliant and the fact about the very touched that this young lady had taken the trouble to write,is superb and gives great sort of pleasure to read otherwise the details about the fiction in such great sort of pleasure,so this is great to see and feels great and like a treat to read all the things which are absolutely beautiful.
This is a nice article! We can share with you more interesting and intriguing articles - just go to this college essay editing service to see what we can do for your entire blog!
Post a Comment