Northpod Law & UKCLB Podcasts

Have a listen to this week's show right here. In the light of the recent verdicts and sentence in Rolph Harris' case, Kirstin goes through the Sexual Offences Act 1956, looking at what offences are contained in it and how amendments have affected the law. Given that we are on the subject of how the law changes over the years and that retrospective legislation is dangerous territory, we thought it would be worthwhile to take a peek at the decision of the High Court in Reilly (No.2) as the Government gets a bloody nose for playing dirty with JSA claimants. Both hefty legal matters this week so next week we will hopefully be being chatty on the subject of experts and looking at our postbag from the CPS, MoJ and Home Office.  Doesn't look like fan mail.... Also, PLEASE RATE/REVIEW US: wherever you subscribe, please take two seconds as we start this series, to give us some stars and a few kind words.  We'd be e'er so obliged.  It helps us get up the search rankings, ya see.

We are back for Series 13 (!) of the podcast and we are raring to go with some law this week.  Many thanks to the good folks at UK Criminal Law Blog Podcast and thanks again to Lyndon Harris for having both Kirstin and Ben on this series.   As always, you can hear this week's show by clicking here. Also, PLEASE RATE/REVIEW US: wherever you subscribe, please take two seconds as we start this series, to give us some stars and a few kind words.  We'd be e'er so obliged.  It helps us get up the search rankings, ya see. And now, on with the show notes: When can the Attorney-General have the CA review a sentence? We often talk of defence appeals but if the AG thinks that a sentence is passed he can refer it to the CA (with leave) but only in some cases.   What are they? - The Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Reviews of Sentencing) Order 2006 amending Part IV of the CJA 1988.   Recent addition? - CJA 1988 (Reviews of Sentencing)(Amendments) Order 2014 {IN FORCE 21st July but laid before Parliament today} Thoughts on why we have that system? Is it only sentences or can the Crown have another pop at conviction when they fail the first time? Why only certain offences? Searching questionsSweeney -v- Westminster Magistrates’ Court and London Regional Asset Recovery Team and Environment Agency 2014 EWHC 2068 Experts and their dutiesThe BBC’s Panorama recently covered the behaviour of expert witnesses to criminal proceedings.

Listen to the show here. This week, our plans went to ruin. We had intended on interviewing Karl Turner MP, former criminal barrister, about some topical legal issues. Unfortunately he was called back to his contituency ooop north and so that has had to be postponed. We had also intended on all getting together to record the show in one go...as has often happened, diaries conspired against us.  Lyndon talks about the latest MoJ ploy to fool the electorate into thinking they are doing something worthwhile policy idea - raise the levels if fines in the Magistrates' Court. To be fair this had been in the offing for some time. But Lyndon has a closer look. Is it worth it? Will it make any money? Will it make a difference? Dan then - responding to a request on Twitter - gives a very brief introduction to expert evidence. What is it? When can it be used?  Links Law Commission report on expert evidence Magistrates' Court fines to increase Fines - general principles

Listen to the show here. This week Lyndon and Kim discuss the contents of the Queen’s Speech and…slurry. Lyndon runs (very quickly) through the proposed offence of assisting a criminal organisation - is it necessary? is it covered by other offences? who is it designed to catch? And then he hands over to Kim who takes us through the proposed amendment to the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 in relation to emotional neglect of children. More criminal justice legislation; an improvement? or just the same old rubbish? Finally, with the magic of podcasting…there’s a pre-recorded discussion of a peculiar case involving a man who likes to masturbate whilst covered in slurry. I know what you’re thinking, but it is in fact interesting for other reasons… Links CYPA 1933  HC Briefing note Queen’s Speech announcements (Law Soc Gazette) Blog post on the slurry case Post on a dodgy solicitor who helped a criminal gang

Listen to the show here. This week, Kim and Lyndon take a look at two recent cases, the first of which involves a calamitous murder plot involving the conspirators getting lost and crashing their car whilst on a quest to find Joss Stone’s house (only she doesn’t live there anymore). The appellants have their sentences reduced rather substantially. Kim skims over the facts and the reasoning of the court.  Lyndon has a brief look at judicial appointments and how minor motoring convictions can put the brakes (sorry!) on your judicial career.  Finally, Kim interviews barrister Michael Bowes QC about the fascinating case of Danilo Restivo, which without giving too much away involves two murders, conspiracy theories, appeals and the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Links Joss Stone - Sentence appeal Judicial appointments judicial review Danilo Restivo - Wikipedia entry

Listen to the show here.Dan and Kim discuss a number of cases featuring in the news this week. Stuart Hall’s conviction and acquittal provided much to talk about, but Dan and Kim examine the case in the context of the way in which juries work – the fact Hall’s bad character evidence (previous convictions) were put before the jury and the fact he didn’t give evidence yet was acquitted on all but one of the counts demonstrates that the jury system works, does it not? Moving on, Danny Nightingale (remember him?) was back in the news this week, wasting more taxpayer’s money. He was refused permission to appeal against conviction for possession of a prohibited firearm. Dan takes a quick look at that and asks whether it is now, finally, the end of the line for the tabloid sweetheart Nightingale. What would the podcast be without a little sex? Well not wanting to disappoint, Dan and Kim look at the recent case of Golding, concerning sexually transmitted diseases and criminal liability flowing from that. The case poses a number of interesting questions including ‘When is consent not consent?’ One of the bigger stories of the week was Operation Cotton. In the Court of Appeal for a consideration of the decision to stay the proceedings. Dan takes a look at the judgment and its consequences. And finally, as it is election week, we thought we’d do something topical. After an interesting discussion on twitter, the question of whether taking a selfie in the polling booth would constitute a criminal offence was raised. Dan and Kim consider the issues. Links: Stuart Hall Our summary of the case Danny Nightingale Our summary of the case Herpes - when can you be criminally liable? R v Golding  When is consent not consent R v McNally Operation Cotton  UK Criminal Law Blog report Election selfie The legislation

Listen to the show here.  This week, Lyndon and Kim are in the ‘studio’ and roving reporter Dan is out and about. Kim introduces the changes to the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 and discusses, amongst other things, why the offence was widened to include places which are not public places. Lyndon discusses a peculiar case from 2009 which is back in the news - a woman was sent prison for 6 months for protecting an abused dog. Confused? All becomes clear.  Dan talks about Operation Cotton in the Court of Appeal and what the consequences might be for the criminal bar. Lyndon discusses the Max Clifford sentence and the problems around concurrent and consecutive sentences, touching on the potential problems created by the judge come the inevitable Court of Appeal hearing.  Dan explains costs in criminal cases in light of the Huhne/Pryce costs judgment and explains that crime certainly doesn't pay - in any sense.  Links: Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 Imprisoned for contempt Max Clifford sentencing Concurrent and consecutive sentences Costs in criminal cases Operation Cotton 

The cake and bourbon show is upon us again.  Our 72nd episode can be heard right here. In this week's show, we take a look at Sir Bill Jeffrey's review of independent criminal advocacy in England and Wales.  It may be reopening an old front in the war between barristers and HCAs but the conclusions give considerable grounds for taking stock of the effects of all the reforms over the last 10 years.  They also present a potentially chilling view of the future for anyone who fears change.  Find the full report in the links below - along with the responses by the Bar Council and Law Society. The Land Registry might be next in terms of selling the family silver - at the very least, there are problems with the reform plans for the Keepers of the Plans. A pretty important costs case which confirms that the CPS and police cannot just blame each other to avoid costs orders and, more importantly, SNAFU is not a defence and neither is simple mistake.  You're going to want to bookmark this one.  The link is polite. We also take a quick scoot the rest of this week's legal news and a couple of other cases.  Take a listen and find the links below. PLEASE RATE/REVIEW US: wherever you subscribe, please take two seconds as we come to the end of this series, to give us some stars and a few kind words.  We'd be e'er so obliged.  It helps us get up the search rankings, ya see. LINKS: The review of independent criminal advocacy in England and Wales by Sir Bill Jeffrey has been published. http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/about/jeffrey-review/jeffrey-review-criminal-advocacy.pdf Bar Council response: http://www.barcouncil.org.uk/media-centre/news-and-press-releases/2014/may/bar-council-to-consider-jeffrey-report-into-criminal-advocacy Law Society response: http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/news/press-releases/law-society-responds-to-jeffrey-report-on-criminal-advocacy/ Land Registry http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/legal-action-threat-over-land-registry-plan/5041123.article R (ex. p. Singh v Ealing Mags and CPS) http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2014/1443.html 4 in 10 lawyers suggest you look elsewhere for a career… but who was asked? http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/dont-choose-law-as-career-say-4-in-10-lawyers/5041120.article  Biometric data and crime report case: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2014/585.html Prison Governors’ Association say it’s getting to “tipping point” as Grayling carries on regardless. http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2014/05/07/prison-governors-grayling-s-regime-is-driving-us-to-tipping Apple v Samsung - the results are in.  Kinda: http://www.claimsjournal.com/news/national/2014/05/05/248430.htm http://bgr.com/2014/04/23/2014-apple-vs-samsung-lawsuit-google/ Johnny Foreigner to be denied legal aid by Lord Chancellor - but is he relying on nonsense figures?  Never!  (But even the press can’t decide if it’s £3m or £10m): http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10812723/No-more-legal-aid-for-foreigners-to-sue-MoD-says-Chris-Grayling.html Or a more balanced piece from the Daily Mail (!?!?) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2621672/War-crimes-lawyers-specialise-suing-serving-soliders-received-10MILLION-legal-aid-three-years.html AND FINALLY… A bit of fun: Personal Injury and the ambulance-chasers of yesteryear.  Aviva’s archives of claims reveal that we were a compo-culture country long before the Yanks got involved! http://injuryclaimsnationwide.co.uk/article/history-of-injury-claim?src=tab That’s a wrap for series 12

It's NorthPod Law 4 - MoJ and the Home Office 0 as (oh dear) Kirstin Beswick and Jonathan Holt have a lot of fun at the expense of those two ministries - you can Listen Here. First up is the total collapse of a five-handed serious fraud involving the exploitation of members of the public, including rather vulnerable people. And why? Well, because as the MoJ has discovered that if you pay peanuts, sometimes you can't even get monkeys. It doesn't help does it, Mr Grayling, when it's the Prime Minister's brother who's making the application...and doing it for free.http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/r-v-crawley-others.pdf Next, Jonathan reports a bit more Lord Chancellor-bashing courtesy of the Joint Committee on Human Rights.  It's not just left-wingers saying you're wrong, Mr G. Who'd have thought?JCHR Report on JR Changes 1JCHR Report on JR Changes 2 Then, more fun for Jonathan as he looks at a case where the Home Office sought to bolster its position and thus handed the applicant the weapons with which to successfully fight.http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2014/1310.html And finally the Secretary of State learns what the term "no cogent reason" actually means. Listeners may think the clue is in the words.http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2014/477.html

On this week's show, which you can listen to by clicking these very words, Ben and Kirstin talk their way through the so-called "revolution" in the family courts. It is something of an oddity that reforms that actually do very little in terms of changing the status quo and, instead, assume that lawyers have been doing it wrong for all of this time, should be heralded as a "revolution" by a political judge.  Check out the government hype in the links below. Not content with having a pop at the President of the Family Division's self-congratulation, Ben finds the High Court utterly objectionable as it gives a litigant in person a raw deal and seems to object to justice being done. Knife crime guidelines get the sharp tongue of Kirstin as we celebrate another Court of Appeal decision that is a little lacking in purpose. In addition, we have a little look at the cost of getting judicial review wrong - or rather, not turning to the silver bullet that is ADR. Yes, you may be able to tell that we are feeling more than a little snarky this week.  It might pass.  It might not. Links: Law students in divorce courts and putting the children first. Sir James Munby’s Oscar Speech: http://flba.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/2014view11-2.doc.docx http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2610014/Law-students-drafted-help-resolve-divorce-cases-shake-family-justice-system.html http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/04/23/law-studentstrusted-counselling-divorcing-couples_n_5197804.html http://www.adjacentgovernment.co.uk/local-government-news/family-justice-reforms-put-childrens-need-first/ http://www.tayloremmet.co.uk/blogs/new-family-court/ THINK OF THE CHILDREN (or “How to use children to push a government austerity agenda" video): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA99gui758I https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/217343/family-justice-review-final-report.pdf Knife crime guidance. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2014/747.html The cost of getting it wrong: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2014/11l97.html Medical excuses and litigants in person getting steamrollered. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2012/332.html

On this week's show, which you can hear by clicking here, we are joined by lap-dancer-turned-law-student, Vanessa Knowles to talk about how a law student making good money from being very visible online might encounter problems in a future career.  It turns out things are not as bleak as you might think. We talk about how not to deal with the Court of Appeal when it comes to having a pop at a client's previous lawyers and how the Court uses its rarely-wielded power to dismiss a case without a hearing of any sort. We look at a rarely-used power to have a witness deposed - US-style!  Is it about to be used more often after being on the statute books for many years? We also take a look at the Legal Aid position in relation to awkward forensic experts holding on to evidence until a fee is paid by defence lawyers.  No spoilers, but it turns out that things are not quite as they seem. All of that and we have a quick glance at the sad plight of Nigel Evans MP, the PDS and Nick "Mr Loophole" Freeman. Check out the links below for the sources used and for additional material we thought you might like to read. Have a good Easter break. The links: No charge allowed for prosecution expert labs to show all to the defence - Keith Borer Consultants make a FOI request to the Forensic Regulator. http://www.keithborer.co.uk/uploads/assets/files/KBC%20April%202014%20Newsletter%20E&W.pdfhttps://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/171649/response/425409/attach/html/3/84617%20Final%20response.pdf.html You have an appointment to be deposed! http://northpod.openshadow.com/asset_docs/Power%20of%20justice%20to%20take%20depositions.pdf R v Achogbuo http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2014/567.html http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/19/pdfs/ukpga_19680019_en.pdf £3,000 for a splinter in the bum. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2606125/Parents-sue-school-3-000-seven-year-old-son-got-splinter-sat-wooden-bench.htmlCroydon Guardian tells it slightly differently again: http://www.croydonguardian.co.uk/news/11148736.Boy_with_sore_bottom_wins_payout_after_school_bench_gives_him_painful_splinter/ Law student stripper http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2605809/Lap-dancing-webcam-work-teach-transferable-legal-skills-Law-student-set-scoop-funds-degree-stripping-online-earns-50k-year-it.htmlhttp://www.independent.co.uk/student/news/as-many-as-a-third-of-women-strippers-are-students-trying-to-pay-for-their-education-9158808.html and for lawyers already working at the CPS:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/2463005/CPS-lawyer-works-as-nude-model-while-on-sick-leave.htmland those BPP boys are in demand (or they were before the agency went belly-up):http://www.rollonfriday.com/Blogs/ReadBlog/tabid/144/id/25891/Default.aspxIn case you’re wondering what that test is for solicitors, here it is: http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/handbook/suitabilitytest/content.page “More rigorous tests to be applied by CPS and police says Scotland Yard Chief” http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2606080/Historic-sex-abuse-allegations-subject-stricter-tests-prosecutions-says-Scotland-Yard-chief.htmlTwitter coverage https://storify.com/anyapalmer/a-tax-on-innocence The PDShttp://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/public-defender-service-hires-11-advocates/5040880.article Nick Freeman and the ASA. http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/5040872.article?utm_source=dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=GAZ160414

The Way(a) to listen is to click here! Enough with the awful title and dreadful pun - is it a pun?  This week we transport you to the sunny shores of Cape Town via a fascinating interview with barrister David Pojur, telling us all about the legal system that's currently trying Oscar Pistorius. We come closer to home although no further from scandalous trials to look at the Nigel Evans trial in Preston.  Ben's promised link to the Code for Crown Prosecutors is here. Kirstin discusses Re G a family case with wider importance to absent fathers and Ben tells you why the glimmer of hope we had in POCA cases turns out to be fools gold due to R v King whilst Jonathan saves the day with some good news and a quote from Simon Spence QC. We urge you to reply to the BSB consultation - Possibly the most important thing you will do this year. If you would like to know more about Legal Hack Minnesota you can find out here. We do hope they're going to come and tell us more in person.

Listen Here Welcome back.  It's the glorious Twelfth! In week one, we talk to Family Barrister Joe Lynch about the proposed changes to the child cruelty laws to add in emotional abuse.  Should it be done?  Can it be done?  How's it done in the rest of the world?  The Action for Children report can be found here We exclusively reveal how much the Lord Chancellor's car costs - STOP PRESS!! And we confuse you completely with the proposed theft sentencing guidelines - don't forget to engage with the consultation to try at least to make it less complicated.  You can read about it, confuse yourself and contribute here. Your extra reading material can be found here (POCA Case) and here (Solicitor) Nice to have you back.

Listen to the show here. Joining Lyndon this evening is Kim and Kirstin (from our sister show, the Northpod Law podcasts). Kim talks about the societal impact of the legal aid cuts (as distinct from the financial impact upon the legal profession) in the context of judicial review.  Lyndon, Kim and Kirstin then discuss whether women get more lenient sentences than men, with reference to a recent case. Loren Morris was imprisoned for sexual activity with an 8 year old child. Why wasn’t it charged as rape? Well the law doesn’t permit a female to be charged with rape - why? Is it outdated? Does that go some way to explaining why in some cases, the sentences women get seem more lenient than for men?  Finally, the three look at cyber bullies and tougher sentences. In an amendment to the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill, the government have backed calls for greater sentencing powers for internet bullies. Is it necessary? Or is it just considered a vote winner? If we are changing the law in relation to cyber bullies, should we re-write it completely? Links Blog story (Loren Morris) An MP claiming men are discriminated against Guardian article Evening Standard article

Listen to the show here. Lyndon talks about the new Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 which when in force will repeal ASBOs, SOPOs and various other orders, and replace them with things that look mighty similar. There are a few things to watch out for such as the different tests to apply under the new orders but one is left with the feeling that it may have been better to amend the existing legislation rather than tear it up and enact very similar provisions. But such is Parliament’s wont. He also discusses two cases in the news this week – another Twitter prosecution, this time for breaching the anonymity afforded to complainants in sexual offence cases in relation to the Michael Le Vell trial last year, and the mysterious case of a murder, committed during a burglary, which seemingly did not attract the 30 year starting point usually appropriate for a murder ‘done for gain’. On top of that, there is a quick discussion about the victim surcharge and the question as to whether the cut in fees means lawyers can’t prepare their cases properly. Links: Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 Michael Le Vell Murder done for gain