Barrister not present at sentencing
Notifications OFF
Just looking for some information not sure if anyone has been in any similar position before.
I have only just found out from my persons parents that on the day of sentencing the barrister who had handled their case throughout the court proceedings was absent due to illness and someone else was sent. Prior to this sentencing court date another earlier sentencing had been cancelled due to this same reason but this one seemed to go ahead without the barrister.
My persons parents said that when speaking to them found out they were practicing in family law. I'm just wondering now whether my person was represented in the best way possible because how can someone represent you when they have only met you on the day? I know there will be more to it than that and they will have to go over every aspect of the case but it just feels as though the fairest trial would have been with the original barrister.
I have mentioned to the parents about potentially appealing if my person were to go for it (I really doubt they would at this stage) but wouldn't want it to do more harm than good xxx
I have only just found out from my persons parents that on the day of sentencing the barrister who had handled their case throughout the court proceedings was absent due to illness and someone else was sent. Prior to this sentencing court date another earlier sentencing had been cancelled due to this same reason but this one seemed to go ahead without the barrister.
My persons parents said that when speaking to them found out they were practicing in family law. I'm just wondering now whether my person was represented in the best way possible because how can someone represent you when they have only met you on the day? I know there will be more to it than that and they will have to go over every aspect of the case but it just feels as though the fairest trial would have been with the original barrister.
I have mentioned to the parents about potentially appealing if my person were to go for it (I really doubt they would at this stage) but wouldn't want it to do more harm than good xxx
You could only appeal the sentence, if you can show the barrister made a mistake and if it was on a point of law, which was central to the case.
Otherwise you could make a complaint about the service you received, but people do go sick and the only other thing they could have done in this instance, would be to postpone the sentencing for a second time.
Otherwise you could make a complaint about the service you received, but people do go sick and the only other thing they could have done in this instance, would be to postpone the sentencing for a second time.
Thanks for your reply edel2020.
The only way I would be able to go about proving there was a mistake made is if I knew what went on in the court room. I wasn't present by the wishes of my person who didn't want me there. I also had very little involvement with the representation they had. I think my person just wanted to face it all on their own and not burden anyone else with it. I know the initial barrister that should have been representing on the day was clearly clued up on it all and did manage to get some of the primary charges dropped but that's about all I know.
Yes I know you can't plan on some one being ill it's just one of those things in life. It's not even that the barrister was ill, it's that why would they postpone once due to this but not a second time if it was reason enough to postpone on a first occasion? And I don't know much about replacement barristers being issued but surely wouldn't a replacement barristers field be criminal law and not family law? I can't imagine being able to supply a good defence when you know very little of the person you are representing and are practicing in a whole different field.
Sorry maybe it's just me not seeing things right but from someone who knows very little about the legal process in all this it just seems off.
The only way I would be able to go about proving there was a mistake made is if I knew what went on in the court room. I wasn't present by the wishes of my person who didn't want me there. I also had very little involvement with the representation they had. I think my person just wanted to face it all on their own and not burden anyone else with it. I know the initial barrister that should have been representing on the day was clearly clued up on it all and did manage to get some of the primary charges dropped but that's about all I know.
Yes I know you can't plan on some one being ill it's just one of those things in life. It's not even that the barrister was ill, it's that why would they postpone once due to this but not a second time if it was reason enough to postpone on a first occasion? And I don't know much about replacement barristers being issued but surely wouldn't a replacement barristers field be criminal law and not family law? I can't imagine being able to supply a good defence when you know very little of the person you are representing and are practicing in a whole different field.
Sorry maybe it's just me not seeing things right but from someone who knows very little about the legal process in all this it just seems off.
Honestly I don't think it matters. There wasn't much input from the barrister for sentencing in our case. All the work was prior to that point. The barrister didn't attend in person as he had another court hearing elsewhere and sentencing had already been postponed once as the judge hadn't been available but he was online and spoke for about 15 seconds.
Thanks loulou74 for your reply.
I didn't think it would to be honest just wanted to know if anyone else had similar experiences with legal representation.
I think it's that I know very little of what went on with the proceedings that's got me questioning things.
I didn't think it would to be honest just wanted to know if anyone else had similar experiences with legal representation.
I think it's that I know very little of what went on with the proceedings that's got me questioning things.
Post deleted by user
This happened to my partner. His first hearing was delayed and then on the actual day he had someone who seemed 'new'. It was unfortunate because my partner had about 30 mins to run through everything and didn't have any rapport with the new person. It didn't help that there were issues with the charges (wrong dates listed for the arrest) and we were not told the SHPO could have been challenged.
My partner had legal aid tho, so I get he impression that swapping solicitors isn't something that can be prevented. I wish we complained- I was at the hearing and I was shocked at how disorganised both defence and prosecution was.
My partner had legal aid tho, so I get he impression that swapping solicitors isn't something that can be prevented. I wish we complained- I was at the hearing and I was shocked at how disorganised both defence and prosecution was.
Post deleted
My OH had a different barrister on the day as well. So only just met.
You can apply for a copy of the transcript very easily online if that helps. They charge per folio so Di decide if you want the whole trial or just the sentence. This sums up the case and the judges thought process.
With regards to appealing the sentence you have to show that something had been missed which the transcript will tell you. Otherwise you have to prove the sentence is excessive. On this you need to check the sentencing guidelines.
Our new barrister checked out our case and although agreed the result seemed tough to us it did sit within the guidelines so would not advise trying to appeal as there is no good reason apart from we don't like the sentence.
Hope this helps you
You can apply for a copy of the transcript very easily online if that helps. They charge per folio so Di decide if you want the whole trial or just the sentence. This sums up the case and the judges thought process.
With regards to appealing the sentence you have to show that something had been missed which the transcript will tell you. Otherwise you have to prove the sentence is excessive. On this you need to check the sentencing guidelines.
Our new barrister checked out our case and although agreed the result seemed tough to us it did sit within the guidelines so would not advise trying to appeal as there is no good reason apart from we don't like the sentence.
Hope this helps you
The transcript is very informative. Even with being in the court, I applied and got the transcript and it was very informative. Told me more than I heard on the day but court can be over whelming especially when it is personal facts about children
Post deleted