Read on Twitter
Just the Legal Aid Agency casually insisting that a child is capable of running his own defence in a criminal court, cross-examining police officers and dealing with any arguments of law that might arise.
Legal aid therefore refused. Nothing to see here.
#TheLawIsBroken
Legal aid therefore refused. Nothing to see here.
#TheLawIsBroken
External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @robedward90 view original on Twitter
So to recap: a child will be forced to defend themselves at a contested criminal trial - examining witnesses, analysing the applicable law, arguing legal applications and making speeches.
The child will be up against a fully legally qualified prosecution solicitor or barrister. All decisions at trial, including any legal arguments, will be decided by a bench of three non-legally qualified magistrates.
If the child loses the case, he could be incarcerated for up to 4 months.
How, you ask, in a civilised society has it come to this?
Well, it’s because justice minister after justice minister has spun lie after lie about how “expensive” legal aid is to the taxpayer.
How, you ask, in a civilised society has it come to this?
Well, it’s because justice minister after justice minister has spun lie after lie about how “expensive” legal aid is to the taxpayer.
So the public supported huge cuts to legal aid. And now, people who desperately need it can’t get it.
Like this child. Who is, by presumption of law, innocent. But whose life might be destroyed because we begrudge the few hundred quid it would cost for him to be represented.
Like this child. Who is, by presumption of law, innocent. But whose life might be destroyed because we begrudge the few hundred quid it would cost for him to be represented.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
