BBC (again)

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

BBC (again)

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 313 of 435 < 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 >

Badger11 Beckenham 20 Jul 23 5.38pm
Originally posted by Part Time James For the layman, Grindr is like Holmesdale.net but with less football chat and less unsolicited touching. Don't you mean North Stand Chat? One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 20 Jul 23 5.38pm

Originally posted by Part Time James

For the layman, Grindr is like Holmesdale.net but with less football chat and less unsolicited touching.

Don't you mean North Stand Chat?

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

PalazioVecchio south pole 20 Jul 23 7.43pm
Originally posted by Badger11 Don't you mean North Stand Chat? Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford
Alert a moderator to this post

PalazioVecchio

south pole 20 Jul 23 7.43pm

Send a Private Message to PalazioVecchio

Originally posted by Badger11

Don't you mean North Stand Chat?

Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford

Alert a moderator to this post

cryrst The garden of England 20 Jul 23 8.25pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle I was imagining that both might have been inpatients. It's not unusual for drug abusers to need physiatric help and we know Edwards has too. I'll take your word on Grindr. You obviously know a lot more than I do, which is nothing at all. Bet you’ve googled it by now though
Alert a moderator to this post

cryrst

The garden of England 20 Jul 23 8.25pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I was imagining that both might have been inpatients. It's not unusual for drug abusers to need physiatric help and we know Edwards has too.

I'll take your word on Grindr. You obviously know a lot more than I do, which is nothing at all.

Bet you’ve googled it by now though

Alert a moderator to this post

HKOwen Hong Kong 21 Jul 23 12.18am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle As that seems to confirm, rather than deny, what I suggested, it appears you are being deliberately pedantic. Which isn't unusual. That would be a no, never change Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance.
Alert a moderator to this post

HKOwen

Hong Kong 21 Jul 23 12.18am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

As that seems to confirm, rather than deny, what I suggested, it appears you are being deliberately pedantic. Which isn't unusual.

That would be a no, never change

Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance.

Alert a moderator to this post

HKOwen Hong Kong 21 Jul 23 12.23am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle I have had much more experience with the legal system in the UK than ever I wanted to. In fact I had a meeting with a solicitor this morning. I was the MD of a business, and owned two of my own. It's impossible to avoid having to aquire some legal knowledge in those circumstances. So yes, I do and of course I am being serious. No solicitor, let alone a barrister, would risk telling an untruth. They will ensure they know the truth by asking detailed questions of the client and then decide how best to present it. That will involve what to emphasise and what to ignore, so that the overall picture is seen in the most postive way for their client. In this case there was a simple, straightforward denial. That must be true. Putting aside all your waffle , you seem to think that no solicitor would ever issue a statement that was untrue. Let's just look at that for fits and giggles. So when a solicitor issues a statement such as " my client denies all allegations " and subsequently the client is convicted you would class that as the solicitor lying. Never change Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance.
Alert a moderator to this post

HKOwen

Hong Kong 21 Jul 23 12.23am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I have had much more experience with the legal system in the UK than ever I wanted to. In fact I had a meeting with a solicitor
this morning. I was the MD of a business, and owned two of my own. It's impossible to avoid having to aquire some legal knowledge in those circumstances. So yes, I do and of course I am being serious. No solicitor, let alone a barrister, would risk telling an untruth. They will ensure they know the truth by asking detailed questions of the client and then decide how best to present it. That will involve what to emphasise and what to ignore, so that the overall picture is seen in the most postive way for their client.

In this case there was a simple, straightforward denial. That must be true.

Putting aside all your waffle , you seem to think that no solicitor would ever issue a statement that was untrue.

Let's just look at that for fits and giggles.

So when a solicitor issues a statement such as " my client denies all allegations " and subsequently the client is convicted you would class that as the solicitor lying.

Never change

Alert a moderator to this post

Part Time James 21 Jul 23 6.37am
Originally posted by Badger11 Don't you mean North Stand Chat? I wouldn't know. I've rinsed Grindr but North Stand Chat is too outrageous for me.
Alert a moderator to this post

Part Time James

21 Jul 23 6.37am

Send a Private Message to Part Time James

Originally posted by Badger11

Don't you mean North Stand Chat?

I wouldn't know. I've rinsed Grindr but North Stand Chat is too outrageous for me.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 21 Jul 23 6.20pm
Originally posted by HKOwen Putting aside all your waffle , you seem to think that no solicitor would ever issue a statement that was untrue. Let's just look at that for fits and giggles. So when a solicitor issues a statement such as " my client denies all allegations " and subsequently the client is convicted you would class that as the solicitor lying. Never change Are you for real? When a solicitor makes any statement on behalf of their client they aren't making any statement on behalf of themselves. They are stating what their client has said as positively as they can. They would never say anything knowing it to be untrue. They might have very grave doubts but that's not the same thing. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 21 Jul 23 6.20pm

Originally posted by HKOwen

Putting aside all your waffle , you seem to think that no solicitor would ever issue a statement that was untrue.

Let's just look at that for fits and giggles.

So when a solicitor issues a statement such as " my client denies all allegations " and subsequently the client is convicted you would class that as the solicitor lying.

Never change

Are you for real?

When a solicitor makes any statement on behalf of their client they aren't making any statement on behalf of themselves. They are stating what their client has said as positively as they can.

They would never say anything knowing it to be untrue. They might have very grave doubts but that's not the same thing.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 21 Jul 23 7.34pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Are you for real? When a solicitor makes any statement on behalf of their client they aren't making any statement on behalf of themselves. They are stating what their client has said as positively as they can. They would never say anything knowing it to be untrue. They might have very grave doubts but that's not the same thing. Unless their client adheres to the old adage, "Never lie to your brief". Many defenders go into court knowing they are defending a guilty person.
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

21 Jul 23 7.34pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Are you for real?

When a solicitor makes any statement on behalf of their client they aren't making any statement on behalf of themselves. They are stating what their client has said as positively as they can.

They would never say anything knowing it to be untrue. They might have very grave doubts but that's not the same thing.

Unless their client adheres to the old adage, "Never lie to your brief". Many defenders go into court knowing they are defending a guilty person.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 21 Jul 23 11.14pm
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle Unless their client adheres to the old adage, "Never lie to your brief". Many defenders go into court knowing they are defending a guilty person. I once asked a solicitor how they slept at night knowing that their client was guilty. What I was told surprised me. I was told that every accused has the right to be represented as effectively as possible and be regarded as innocent until proven guilty. They therefore suspend any misgivings and do their best, but if they know for sure something is untrue they withdraw from the case. They also try to anticipate outcomes and try to encourage a guilty plea if the evidence is overwhelming and the defence weak. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 21 Jul 23 11.14pm

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Unless their client adheres to the old adage, "Never lie to your brief". Many defenders go into court knowing they are defending a guilty person.

I once asked a solicitor how they slept at night knowing that their client was guilty.

What I was told surprised me. I was told that every accused has the right to be represented as effectively as possible and be regarded as innocent until proven guilty. They therefore suspend any misgivings and do their best, but if they know for sure something is untrue they withdraw from the case. They also try to anticipate outcomes and try to encourage a guilty plea if the evidence is overwhelming and the defence weak.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

HKOwen Hong Kong 21 Jul 23 11.17pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Are you for real? When a solicitor makes any statement on behalf of their client they aren't making any statement on behalf of themselves. They are stating what their client has said as positively as they can. They would never say anything knowing it to be untrue. They might have very grave doubts but that's not the same thing. "No solicitor, let alone a barrister, would risk telling an untruth. They will ensure they know the truth by asking detailed questions of the client and then decide how best to present it." So when you wrote the above, you stated no solicitor would risk saying anything unless they had checked the veracity of what they said ? You seem confused about the different roles a solicitor from for example issuing a media denial to public allegations to, say, preparing the basis of an evidential defence for a barrister. How about the solicitors who assist in asylum cases knowing full well their " clients " do not have a valid claim but are still happy to take the public's money Edited by HKOwen (21 Jul 2023 11.18pm) Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance.
Alert a moderator to this post

HKOwen

Hong Kong 21 Jul 23 11.17pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Are you for real?

When a solicitor makes any statement on behalf of their client they aren't making any statement on behalf of themselves. They are stating what their client has said as positively as they can.

They would never say anything knowing it to be untrue. They might have very grave doubts but that's not the same thing.

"No solicitor, let alone a barrister, would risk telling an untruth. They will ensure they know the truth by asking detailed questions of the client and then decide how best to present it."

So when you wrote the above, you stated no solicitor would risk saying anything unless they had checked the veracity of what they said ?

You seem confused about the different roles a solicitor from for example issuing a media denial to public allegations to, say, preparing the basis of an evidential defence for a barrister.

How about the solicitors who assist in asylum cases knowing full well their " clients " do not have a valid claim but are still happy to take the public's money

Edited by HKOwen (21 Jul 2023 11.18pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 21 Jul 23 11.44pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle I once asked a solicitor how they slept at night knowing that their client was guilty. What I was told surprised me. I was told that every accused has the right to be represented as effectively as possible and be regarded as innocent until proven guilty. They therefore suspend any misgivings and do their best, but if they know for sure something is untrue they withdraw from the case. They also try to anticipate outcomes and try to encourage a guilty plea if the evidence is overwhelming and the defence weak. But they don't withdraw do they? However they justify it to themselves they often get paid to get guilty people off.
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

21 Jul 23 11.44pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I once asked a solicitor how they slept at night knowing that their client was guilty.

But they don't withdraw do they? However they justify it to themselves they often get paid to get guilty people off.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 21 Jul 23 11.52pm
Originally posted by HKOwen "No solicitor, let alone a barrister, would risk telling an untruth. They will ensure they know the truth by asking detailed questions of the client and then decide how best to present it." So when you wrote the above, you stated no solicitor would risk saying anything unless they had checked the veracity of what they said ? You seem confused about the different roles a solicitor from for example issuing a media denial to public allegations to, say, preparing the basis of an evidential defence for a barrister. How about the solicitors who assist in asylum cases knowing full well their " clients " do not have a valid claim but are still happy to take the public's money Edited by HKOwen (21 Jul 2023 11.18pm) I suggest you read the comment above yours. Any solicitor representing someone applying for asylum must possess the belief that a valid claim can be established or they couldn’t accept the brief. They might think it to be a very weak case and likely to fail. They might privately expect, or even hope, it will fail, but their job is to know the law and present their client’s position in the most positive way available. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 21 Jul 23 11.52pm

Originally posted by HKOwen

"No solicitor, let alone a barrister, would risk telling an untruth. They will ensure they know the truth by asking detailed questions of the client and then decide how best to present it."

So when you wrote the above, you stated no solicitor would risk saying anything unless they had checked the veracity of what they said ?

You seem confused about the different roles a solicitor from for example issuing a media denial to public allegations to, say, preparing the basis of an evidential defence for a barrister.

How about the solicitors who assist in asylum cases knowing full well their " clients " do not have a valid claim but are still happy to take the public's money

Edited by HKOwen (21 Jul 2023 11.18pm)

I suggest you read the comment above yours.

Any solicitor representing someone applying for asylum must possess the belief that a valid claim can be established or they couldn’t accept the brief. They might think it to be a very weak case and likely to fail. They might privately expect, or even hope, it will fail, but their job is to know the law and present their client’s position in the most positive way available.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 313 of 435 < 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

BBC (again)

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors