Who should lead JB's defence at his third appeal hearing?

[Holly Goodhead]

Just reading a book by William Clegg QC 'Under The Wig':

William Clegg QC is a lawyer in England specialising in serious crime.  He is head of chambers at 2 Bedford Row and has fought more than 100 murder cases - more than anyone else currently practising at the English Bar.

The book is an autobiography of sorts interspersed with chapters dedicated to his high profile cases. 

I've thought for some time that a significant feature of miscarriages of justice is an incompetent and negligent defence and this book has just reinforced the view.  For example WC tells he always makes a point of visiting the soc to understand the evidence and speak more authoritatively in court.  JB's defence did not visit the soc but I believe prosecuting counsel did. 

Based on how WC conducted other high profile cases eg Barry George, Colin Stagg, and Vincent Tabak I am sure JB's trial would have taken a very different direction!

Hopefully William Clegg QC might still be around to represent JB at a third appeal hearing!

[Angelo222]

Posters are reminded to stay on topic. Irrelevant postings will be removed.

[Amanda3266]

Just reading a book by William Clegg QC 'Under The Wig':

William Clegg QC is a lawyer in England specialising in serious crime.  He is head of chambers at 2 Bedford Row and has fought more than 100 murder cases - more than anyone else currently practising at the English Bar.

The book is an autobiography of sorts interspersed with chapters dedicated to his high profile cases. 

I've thought for some time that a significant feature of miscarriages of justice is an incompetent and negligent defence and this book has just reinforced the view.  For example WC tells he always makes a point of visiting the soc to understand the evidence and speak more authoritatively in court.  JB's defence did not visit the soc but I believe prosecuting counsel did. 

Based on how WC conducted other high profile cases eg Barry George, Colin Stagg, and Vincent Tabak I am sure JB's trial would have taken a very different direction!

Hopefully William Clegg QC might still be around to represent JB at a third appeal hearing!

Thank you Holly for a book recommendation there..sounds worth a read.

Was it standard practice to visit SOC back in the 80s do you know?

Obviously the prosecuting counsel did but.I wonder if it was a common practice at the time...as in recommended practice.

[Holly Goodhead]

Thank you Holly for a book recommendation there..sounds worth a read.

Was it standard practice to visit SOC back in the 80s do you know?

Obviously the prosecuting counsel did but.I wonder if it was a common practice at the time...as in recommended practice.

Hi.  I have no idea what the criteria was for the defense and/or judge/jurors to visit soc 85/86.  I will take a look at other high profile cases from that era. 

I have recently been posting on the Madeleine McCann board.  The soc was quickly released, as was WHF, and forensic scientist, Dave Barclay, said on occasions British police have purchased a property to preserve the soc.  He gave the example of how blood stains were recovered from a ceiling and that it put a completly different perspective on the case. At the time of JB's trial blood stain analysis was in its infancy.  Pity as it would have been very revealing IMO! 

[Holly Goodhead]

It has recently been said JB would struggle to find legal representation for his 3rd appeal.  William Clegg QC explains how the cab rank rule works @ 48 mins in.

https://youtu.be/BLJLwID6Tso

[Caroline]

It has recently been said JB would struggle to find legal representation for his 3rd appeal.  William Clegg QC explains how the cab rank rule works @ 48 mins in.

https://youtu.be/BLJLwID6Tso

Not sure how that's favourable to Bamber.

[Nicholas]

It has recently been said JB would struggle to find legal representation for his 3rd appeal.  William Clegg QC explains how the cab rank rule works @ 48 mins in.

https://youtu.be/BLJLwID6Tso

?

Had already posted the secret barristers interpretation on the cab rank rule

Yes have seen their BS on the cab rank rule too - ‘In practice, the rule has been watered down since its inception’  ergo it’s a fallacy

“The fundamental principle that a barrister, like a cabbie, has to take the first “fare” that arrives. The obvious rationale being to ensure that no-one simply cherrypicks the plum cases (to mangle a fruit metaphor), and to maintain the cherished independence of the bar.
https://thesecretbarrister.com/glossary/