You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Jonathan Reynolds and the "Solicitor" row
This has rumbled on for quite a while now. And pretty much everybody is not telling the truth.
As I am sure many people know, I used to be a Solicitor. The reason I am not now is that I am no longer on the Roll of Solicitors. Entirely my choice. But I would never give anybody the impression that I am still a Solicitor. Because that would be a Criminal Offence. There are titles that you get to keep once qualified (like Chartered Accountant). Solicitor is not 1 of them.
It is clear to me that Mr Reynolds may have committed a Criminal offence. If he has knowingly held himself out to be a Solicitor when he is not. But-and it is an important but-the rules are there for very important reasons. And he does not appear to have broken those.
A solicitor must have substantial (£2 million+) Professional Indemnity Insurance in private practice to protect the public. In addition, there are various "reserved activities" which can only be done by a Solicitor or under the control of a Solicitor (or other legal professional).
The Criminal cases almost invariably involve someone pretending to be a Solicitor to con either the public or a court. And that has not happened here.
When Farage says Mr Reynolds has never had a "proper job", of course he has. Including as a Trainee Solicitor. But he never completed his Training. Should he be prosecuted? IMO, no. But the chances of him ever being admitted as a Solicitor look to be zero.
Reminded me of the time I was "crossing over to the dark side" (the then-QLTT, when Barristers took an exam to cross over to be Solicitors). Invigilator called time at the end. Guy carried on writing. Invigilator insisted he stop immediately-and the guy carried on. Invigilator took his exam paper away, said he was not a fit & proper person to be a Solicitor, had been disqualified and would be reported to the SRA for cheating, with a recommendation of a permanent bar from being admitted as a Solicitor
As I am sure many people know, I used to be a Solicitor. The reason I am not now is that I am no longer on the Roll of Solicitors. Entirely my choice. But I would never give anybody the impression that I am still a Solicitor. Because that would be a Criminal Offence. There are titles that you get to keep once qualified (like Chartered Accountant). Solicitor is not 1 of them.
It is clear to me that Mr Reynolds may have committed a Criminal offence. If he has knowingly held himself out to be a Solicitor when he is not. But-and it is an important but-the rules are there for very important reasons. And he does not appear to have broken those.
A solicitor must have substantial (£2 million+) Professional Indemnity Insurance in private practice to protect the public. In addition, there are various "reserved activities" which can only be done by a Solicitor or under the control of a Solicitor (or other legal professional).
The Criminal cases almost invariably involve someone pretending to be a Solicitor to con either the public or a court. And that has not happened here.
When Farage says Mr Reynolds has never had a "proper job", of course he has. Including as a Trainee Solicitor. But he never completed his Training. Should he be prosecuted? IMO, no. But the chances of him ever being admitted as a Solicitor look to be zero.
Reminded me of the time I was "crossing over to the dark side" (the then-QLTT, when Barristers took an exam to cross over to be Solicitors). Invigilator called time at the end. Guy carried on writing. Invigilator insisted he stop immediately-and the guy carried on. Invigilator took his exam paper away, said he was not a fit & proper person to be a Solicitor, had been disqualified and would be reported to the SRA for cheating, with a recommendation of a permanent bar from being admitted as a Solicitor
Comments
I await education.
Is that someone who makes coffee?
actorbaristaReminded me of a funny story about my grand daughter, I took her to a professional recording studio when she was young as she was into singing in a big way. Where she would record a song and it would be edited,mixed & shown how a studio works then given a CD of the finished result (which turned out great).
During the editing the producer started a conversation with her, asking what she wanted to be when she was older. She replied a Barrister, he looked impressed and said "well done, but you'll have to study hard for that as it takes a long time to qualify to be a Barrister"
She looked at him confused and said no I'll leave school and get a Barrister job straight away, then get my own business after a few years.
We both looked at her bewildered and said, no it takes years to qualify as a Solicitor, she then replied with "I don't want to be a Solicitor, I want my own coffee shop"
Fast forward 10 years and she's soon off to university to pursue a Criminal Forensics career, with no doubt plenty of visits to the local Barista shops.
A Barrister has to pass the Bar Exam, is self employed, and is paid per brief.
A Solicitor is usually employed, and is paid a salary.
A Barrister has rights of audience in the Crown Court and above.
A solicitor doesnt, and they dont wear wigs.
So if you committed a criminal offence tonight, and asked for legal representation, you would be sent a Solicitor.
If it was a minor offence that could be dealt with in the Magistrates Court, the Solicitor would represent you.
If it was a more serious offence that the Magistrates were unable to deal with, your Solicitor would engage a Barrister to represent you in the higher court.
What is true is that there is a perception that Barristers are superior. Again, not true. There was a time when a solicitor was a Generalist, and a Barrister a Specialist-those days are long gone. Everyone thinks of Barristers as being massively well paid. In reality, while the top 5-10% may well be, the bottom 30-40% are poorly paid. There are plenty of Barristers on Benefits.
Barristers are (mostly) self-employed. And "who you know" is certainly much more important for Barristers-because you are mostly reliant on people referring work to you. Similarly, if a Senior Barrister is sick of being self-employed, becoming a Judge becomes more attractive.
@HAYSIE is mostly right, though some things have changed since he went to school. Solicitors can be "Solicitor Advocates" when they gain the Rights of Audience at Crown Court, etc.
If at the Magistrates, there were occasions when I would have sent a Junior Barrister to act. Whisper it quietly-sometimes they will work for less money. Also all serious matters start in the Magistrates, and wise to have a Barrister there for those...