Law Society members are shielded by secrecy from FOI. When the law is twisted against people by those in the legal profession who use the law as a business model to make profit, and conceal activities that would be regarded as criminal activity if a member of the public did the same, the law itself is discredited.
This is currently the case in the Scottish legal services market, where many solicitors & law firms are milking the public and their clients for vast sums of money for poor services, even fleecing clients at-will, and getting away with it due to the influence of the Law Society of Scotland in closing down any public interest reforms to regulation, access to justice, or attempts to consider cases of the past. Indeed things are currently so bad, you don't even have a right to know if your own lawyer has a criminal record !
The situation is, one could say, a mirror image of the battle which Westminster fought to keep everyone from finding out as we have now, that our politicians have been paying their expenses with our money and if it had not been for Freedom of Information, and the intervention of the national press, we would have been none the wiser because secrecy, can conceal anything.
So. If you want to stop these people (who received £2.5million from the taxpayer)
getting away with this level of secrecy :
and if you want to stop the Law Society of Scotland from using their immunity from Freedom of Information to protect lawyers from complaints, criminal investigations and fully independent regulation
email or write to this man, Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill :
at : scottish.ministers@scotland.gsi.gov.uk or Kenny.MacAskill.msp@scottish.parliament.uk
or write to him at : Kenny MacAskill MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Justice,The Scottish Government,St Andrew’s House, Edinburgh EH1 3DG.
… and ask him to do his job to see Scots get a fairer deal in access to justice and transparency in legal services, which can be achieved in some part by removing the legal profession’s exemption from Freedom of Information legislation and making them more accountable to us.
Great stuff as always Peter.
ReplyDeleteMay I also suggest your readers send my letter (below) to our Cabinet Secretary FOR JUSTICE (allegedly!) too ... and to post his replies to both letters on your excellent injustice blog.
All the best to you ... and all those seeking justice in Scotland today.
__________
Kenny MacAskill MSP
Cabinet Secretary for Justice
Scottish Parliament
Edinburgh
EH99 1SP
Kenny.MacAskill.msp@scottish.parliament.uk
Dear Kenny
A short letter from your fellow Scots ...
Scotland’s People – Population c.5,100,000.
Scotland’s Lawyers – Population c.10,000.
There are 5,090,000 reasons why you must put aside any loyalties you still harbour for your former legal “profession”, and henceforth put your Edinburgh constituents and the people of Scotland FIRST – that’s the 5,090,000 non-lawyers.
If you want to remain a mouthpiece for Scotland’s legal profession, then you must resign immediately and return to being one of the gang of 10,000.
No “conflicts of interest” JUSTICE Secretaries are welcome, or should be allowed to continue, by the people of Scotland.
Conflicts of interest = Protection of sacred cows = Conspiring to defeat the ends of justice. Ever thus.
So, Kenny. What is it to be?
Looking forward to your response in early course.
Yours aye,
The People of Scotland
(The 5,090,000 non-lawyers)
Tell him to do his job !
ReplyDeleteI cant imagine why lawyers shouldnt be covered by foi along with their Law Society
I support your campaign.
and DONT forget the Faculty of Advocates !
ReplyDeleteSpot on!
ReplyDeleteRather disturbing that even when required to comply with the FOI the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission goes to the same lengths as their paymasters in Parliament to 'cover things up'.
Still no word I suppose from another Govt. employee - Mr Kevin Dunnion FOI Commissioner - on the 'selective editing' of documents presented to you by the SLCC while the same documents were given complete and uncensored to others.
Why did that lot get the 2.5m from us to blackwash complaints about lawyers ?
ReplyDeleteMore with the black out papers !
ReplyDeleteLawyers have no right to be immune from freedom of information.They harp on about it enough so they should also be covered by it.
Good campaign !!
Between the slcc the Law Society and Parliament they will have used up all the black ink in the universe !
ReplyDeleteBloody crooks the lot of them and what a surprise they are all mostly lawyers !
It strikes me there might be some problems implementing foi for the 'entire' legal profession as opposed to just the law society (who I agree should not be exempt from foi).
ReplyDeleteWhat would you say if a defender makes an foi request to a pursuers solicitor asking for disclosure or vice versa ? how would that be handled ?
After all the revelations with MPs I think your idea about lawyers and FOI is a must do.
ReplyDeleteGood luck and I salute you for your bravery in campaigning on this stuff!
Catchy campaign Peter hope you succeed !
ReplyDelete# "Dear Kenny" @ 12.56pm
ReplyDeleteAn excellent idea !
# Anonymous @ 1.18pm
Yes, of course ... them too.
# Anonymous @ 1.22pm
With the level of corruption in the legal profession, I imagine the SLCC and the Law Society would find it hard to justify their explanations for doing nothing against those complained against, if they didn't have the level of secrecy they currently enjoy.
Certainly time to make the Law Society accountable to FOI and bring in external oversight for the less than impartial SLCC.
# Anonymous @ 2.33pm
There would be no problem with implementing FOI against individual law firms & solicitors in that way because their obligations under FOI would still have to respect the confidential nature of both parties legal affairs, particularly in such instances as you mention.
# Anonymous @ 2.55pm
Thanks.
# Anonymous @ 4.20pm
You are more than welcome to join, and spread the aims of the campaign !
ex cops and lawyers at the slcc ? FAT CHANCE anyone will get a fair hearing with them ! Was it MacLawyer who gave them their jobs and why did they get 2.5m ?
ReplyDeleteWell I guess that answers that !
ReplyDeleteHow your lawyers have got away with this I will never understand.Scotland was always a nice wee place for me but now its just a corrupt little sh*thole like the rest of the world.
Maybe a little revolution is needed ..
The Law Society is a secretive protection racket for Scotlands legal crooks. Mr Kenny MacAskill, prove you are the Scottish People's justice minister by applying the FOI Act to the Law Society.
ReplyDeleteAt the moment you are not sitting on the fence, you are on the wrong side. If you want to stay there we demand your immediate resignation, and replacement with a non lawyer who will put the needs of the Scottish legal consumer first. The present situation is like a modern army fighting civillians armed with sticks. There is no balance, and lawyer crooks can do what they want, but your days are numbered.
Good idea but I think Kenny will resist it.
ReplyDeleteTheres just too much dirty info stored by lawyers to make them accountable to anyone and probably a bit of dirt on MacBuckfast himself !
short and to the point - I like it.
ReplyDeleteYou don't need to argue too much in favour of your goal Peter - the black ink from the slcc letter says it all.These people are as bad as mps and deserve no place in public life if all they are going to do is black out their little secrets
The Law Society of Scotland
ReplyDeleteDear Mr MacAskill,
I write to express my concern that the above regulatory body is currently exempt from the Freedom of Information Act. The crisis at Westminister has heightened public awareness of the importance of Freedom of Information Laws, and it is tantamount to injustice to allow the current situation to continue.
A member of my family wanted her case investigated and we wrote to the Law Society. At that stage we were unaware how corrupt the Law Society was. They refused to investigate and advised of the legal services ombudsman. We felt this was unnecessary because we had strong evidence on a number of professionals. A colleague at work told me he knew a number of people who had complained about their solicitor and got nowhere with the Law Society and the ombudsman.
Cathy Jamieson, your predecessor had documents sent out to everyone who had complained to the Law Society about their lawyer. Reforming complaints handling, Building consumer confidence was about the regulation of the Legal Profession in Scotland, and resulted in the discredited Scottish Legal Complaints Commission. In my view Mr MacAskill a complaints body will not work as long as lawyers are involved in the complaints handling process. It is essential that you make a commitment to apply Freedom of Information Laws to the Law Society of Scotland. Currently your professional loyalty is overriding your duty to the people of Scotla nd, and your constituents. If you feel that you cannot apply the laws to the society you should stand down, and make way for a less biased MSP.
Lawyers have too much power for self regulation to continue. Removing the exemption of the Law Society will be a good start to help ensure we have a justice system that serves, not enslaves the people of Scotland.
Mr Cherbi's website A Diary of Injustice in Scotland has a letter you should read. It states
Scotland’s People – Population c.5,100,000.
Scotland’s Lawyers – Population c.10,000.
There are 5,090,000 reasons why you must put aside any loyalties you still harbour for your former legal “profession”, and henceforth put your Edinburgh constituents and the people of Scotland FIRST – that’s the 5,090,000 non-lawyers.
If you want to remain a mouthpiece for Scotland’s legal profession, then you must resign immediately and return to being one of the gang of 10,000.
No “conflicts of interest” JUSTICE Secretaries are welcome, or should be allowed to continue, by the people of Scotland.
I look forward to your response.
Yes Peter more black ink
ReplyDeleteBlack ink symbolises only one thing : CORRUPTION
The lawyers secret society, The Law Society of Scotland is not fit to deal with complaints from lawyers victims.
ReplyDeleteThe society have decided the outcome of all complaints before victims post them. The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission has lawyers staffing it to destroy complaints from the public.
It is injust that the people of Scotland have a spineless justice secretary who belongs in the Law Society of Scotland.
Mr MacAskill knows the Law Society is corrupt, and he cannot bear to remove FOI Act exemption, because it will make it more difficult for the society to be corrupt.
ReplyDeleteYou cannot take the lawyer out of the man, that is why he is unfit to serve in his current post. His loyalties remain with other lawyers, and he should stand down immediatley.
The Medical and Dental Defence Union of Scotland, a crooked Union set up to protect crooked doctors & dentists.
ReplyDeleteMDDUS Medical Advisory Team
The MDDUS has medical members from a variety of specialities across the NHS and private practice throughout the UK.
The MDDUS Medical Advisory Team pride themselves on providing a personalised doctor-to-doctor service of support and medico-legal advice. Yes
look after each other, patients have nowhere to go. Lawyers look after lawyers, doctors look after doctors. Are MDDUS insured by Marsh UK Royal Sun Alliance, the same as The Crooked Law Society of Scotland, Yes.
If you are an MDDUS member, don't hesitate to contact us as soon as you think you may have a problem. We will cover everything up and keep you clean. We self regulate so we can do what we want, just like the MP's at Westminster and MSP's in Edinburgh.
MDDUS members can contact the advisory team for advice on a wide range of topics including:
Dealing with patient complaints, cover ups.
Medical record keeping, even if you lie about your patients we will protect you, because we all do that when required.
Issues of confidentiality, we will confidentially cover up everything you do to patients.
Consent to treatment.
Expert guidance on the interpretation of relevant legislation, our lawyers can advise you and like doctors self regulate so we can do what we want.
Medical ethics, you can do what you want, as long as your are not like Shipman, because we would be found out.
Members can also seek assistance and representation in disciplinary matters, General Medical Council (GMC) proceedings, fatal accident inquiries and coroner's inquests.
In the case of a claim against a member for medical negligence, MDDUS advisers provide expert guidance and, where necessary, engage legal representation. We will cover everything up because Marsh UK Royal Sun Alliance insure us all, and we cannot have our insurers paying compensation to victims of lousy doctors or dentists, can we.
Claims of medical negligence can be extremely complex. We are all doctors so we can cover everything up for our members. As a member, you can rest assured that a fellow professional will guide you at each step, to get you out of the shit. The Medical and Legal Defence Union of Scotand, Crooks protecting crooks.
Simply to say I agree with the sentiments already expressed.Good luck Peter and I will support your campaign.
ReplyDeleteBBC NEWS
ReplyDeleteBaby P doctor sues over dismissal
Baby P died after months of abuse despite being monitored by officials
A doctor who failed to spot that Baby Peter had a broken back and ribs days before his death is suing her former employers over her dismissal.
Dr Sabah Al-Zayyat missed the injuries after deciding she could not perform a full check-up because he was "cranky".
===================================
Everyone involved in this case should have been dismissed, no wonder this little boy was cranky, he must have been in agony, and this doctor should fail in her dismissal case. Shocking.
or write to him at : Kenny MacAskill MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Justice,The Scottish Government,St Andrew’s House, Edinburgh EH1 3DG.
ReplyDeleteI have, it will be interesting to see if he answers me.
Lawyers are more secretive than the KGB or MI6. You cannot trust any lawyer, slimy vermin parasites.
ReplyDeletePopulation of Scotland 5,100,000
ReplyDeleteLawyers in Scotland 10,000
Each of these crooked bastards have 510 potential victims if their share is equal. This is another reason the public need to be informed. One day one of the 5,100,000 will deal with a lawyer the way they dealt with Mr Cummings. Avoid the rats where possible, better to share things amicably that risk your assets to one of Scotlands mafia.
How can legal professionals purport to stand for justice, when self regulation exonerates them when they do wrong. Exonerating themselves is their kind of justice, they neither see or care about their victims. How could we summarise these people? Distributors of Nazi justice.
ReplyDelete# Anonymous @ 8.59pm
ReplyDeleteAn excellent letter.
Many thanks for including most of mine within yours.
Please do let us all know how Mr MacAskill responds to you.
I am sure Peter will be happy to post all the responses received from Mr MacAskill to our letters calling into question the serious matters of the public accountability of his fellow 10,000 lawyers and his undoubted loyalty to his colleagues in the legal "profession" ... instead of his loyalty to his constituents (who voted him into the position of power, privilege and TRUST he now holds) and his 5,090,000 fellow Scots.
Hardly acting "in the best interests" of your countrymen, now is it Mr MacAskill?
We await your responses to our letters and hope you will now start to do the right thing for your 5,090,000 fellow Scots ... and all those who have approached you over the past two years of your tenure, often pleading for your "help" with their cases of wrong-doing and injustice at the hands of the Scottish legal establishment, the Scottish "justice" system, and the Scottish authorities as a whole.
Do the right thing Mr MacAskill ... or be gone ... for the good of your 5,090,000 fellow Scots.
http://petercherbi.blogspot.com/2009/06/freedom-of-information-campaign-make.html?showComment=1245700795238#c7806352836359128712
http://petercherbi.blogspot.com/2009/06/freedom-of-information-campaign-make.html?showComment=1245671784471#c4409677813682552479
Glad to see you have supporters Peter and I hope you all win this campaign.Good luck to everyone for a marvellous effort !
ReplyDeleteLaw Society members are shielded by secrecy from FOI. The resistance from MacAskill mirrors the resistance from the Law Society. Keep everything secret and no one is accountable for their actions, simple but unjust and it should be illegal.
ReplyDeleteMacAskill idea of justice is protecting lawyers.
Its a bit strange to me the law society are not covered by freedom of info and why they are not must also be answered.I dont want to hear any of that confidentiality mumbo jumbo either because this is clearly all about protecting bent lawyers and covering up scandals instead of anything to do with interests of their clients!
ReplyDeleteSLCC = Westminster corruption with added black ink !
ReplyDeleteLook at the corruption at Westminster, ministers and MP's resigning but THEY DID NOTHING WRONG.
ReplyDeleteThe Law Society is the same, a lot of vexacious documents hidden in the archives, they may have a fire like Hitler in the Reichstag.
The Law Society see clients as vexacious individuals. They are terrified from FOI, because they know they are crooks. They will be ordering five gallon drums of black ink for their printers, (from the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission) Yelland will be ordering a blackout of documents, because he will do what the Law Society is best at, COVERING UP WHAT HIS CRIMINAL MEMBERS DO TO THEIR THEIR CLIENTS.
Every person who has complained to this society about their lawyer should get together and have rallies warning the public we have ten thousand professional criminals in Scotland with biased criminals overseeing their activities. If you do have a bonfire Yelland make MacAskill your Guy Fawkes.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteBMJ. 2002 March 2; 324(7336): 547.
PMCID: PMC1122461
Copyright © 2002, BMJ
Dishonest doctors should not continue to practise
Nigel Dudley, consultant in elderly medicine
St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF
Editor—Dishonesty and fraud are not acceptable behaviours in the NHS, and doctors should not be held to a lower standard than lawyers, who cannot be dishonest and continue to practise. IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A LAWYER WHO WROTE THIS STATEMENT. CLEARLY MR NIGEL DUDLEY DOES NOT KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE STANDARDS LAWYERS MAINTAIN, OR HE WOULD NOT HAVE WROTE THIS. JOHN O'DONNELL STILL PRACTICES, AND I HOPE MY DOCTOR IS HELD TO THE OPPOSITE STANDARD OF LAWYERS, BECAUSE LAWYERS ARE EVIL SCUM WHO SHOULD BE ADMINISTERED HYDROGEN CYANIDE, OR PRUSSIC ACID. THIS WOULD BE A GREAT BENEFIT TO CLIENTS.
Today there are many corrupt doctors in the NHS and private who I would never let treat my cat. The most evil professionals are the self regulators, because they have no one to answer to except themselves. They can do what they want.
Glasgow Office
ReplyDeleteThe Medical and Dental Defence Union of Scotland (MDDUS)
Mackintosh House
120 Blythswood Street
Glasgow
G2 4EA
London Office
The Medical and Dental Defence Union of Scotland (MDDUS)
1 Bell Yard
London
WC2A 2JR
The Legal Defence Union Ltd
a Company Limited by Guarantee
Registered in Scotland
Company No 106696
Professor David O'Donnell
Athas House
Inchbare
By Edzell
Angus
DD9 7QL
People of Scotland these are the people who will take legal action against you if you upset their members. There is a Legal Catch 22 here, they can take you to court, but you cannot take them to court because you will need a lawyer who is a paid up member of the crooked Law Society of Scotland.
So doctors and lawyers can basically treat you any way they want. This arrangement ensures they are licenced for corruption because they know they are immune from prosecution. Think about this the next time you book an appointment. I can tell you if you want to warn patients or clients about a corrupt professional you will need to do this yourselves. These criminals are quite happy to leave their criminals working with you.
# Anonymous @ 8.59pm
ReplyDeleteAn excellent letter.
Many thanks for including most of mine within yours.
Please do let us all know how Mr MacAskill responds to you.
Good Morning Kenny,
Thanks for your comments. I look forward to MacAskill's response too. His responsibility is to the people of Scotland, and his constituents, and at the moment he is failing us. He cannot remain on the lawyer side of the fence and retain any credibility. We fight on and continue to spread the word.
Mr MacAskill is like the captain of a battleship and his crew are the Law Society/SLCC.
ReplyDeleteHe will not fire any salvos toward his own side, so he is in the wrong job. Imagine if the Bismark sunk the Tirpitz, that is what MacAskill cannot do because he would be a traitor to his own legal profession. Salmond is a traitor to Scotland for appointing MacAskill. The latter would be sent to Coventry. That is his dilema, that is why he must resign today, because he cannot and will not fulfill his duties to the Scottish people.
A very clear cut campaign article Peter.More of these would be welcome as I'm sure the people in your slcc picture will be squirming today linked with the same level of secrecy mps tried to hide their expenses from us with.
ReplyDeleteGood work !
lots of dirty tricks going on behind that black ink
ReplyDeletedid any of them buy a duckhouse on our money I wonder and why are the snp so in love with protecting lawyers ?
I agree its a good idea but I think MacAskill will retreat into the bloody mindedness you wrote about him before.
ReplyDeleteHe is unfit to be Justice minister clearly.Maybe he should go back to lawyering although I heard he wasnt terribly good at that either.
Editor—Dishonesty and fraud are not acceptable behaviours in the NHS, and doctors should not be held to a lower standard than lawyers, who cannot be dishonest and continue to practise.
ReplyDelete=====================================
Doctors are as bent as lawyers. A GP from South Lanarkshire who was caught lying in medical records by his patient worked for four years until that patient went public.
NHS Primary Care allowed him to keep working, so dishonesty is acceptable in the NHS. There are Local Resolution documents to prove this. Once they realised how dishonest this GP was they took no action, like the Law Society of Scotland. The people of South Lanarkshire know who he is. The Medical Defence Union is as corrupt as the GP in question. A lot of self regulating corrupt self protecting bastards. That is what these people are. You the patient or client are powerless unless you go public, because you have evidence which supports your allegations. Fuck the Medical Defence Union, criminals all of them, the legal defence union, and the Law Society Scottish Legal Complaints Commission. They should all have the same mission statement.
"To protect our professionals irrespective of their conduct and criminality, because we are like them"
The simple argument is good and with all the black ink they are using its clear they are their own worst enemy !
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good work !
I have a problem you might be able to help me with.
ReplyDeleteMy solicitor was holding a £30,000 settlement for me but after I went in last Tuesday to uplift the money he refused to hand it over.
There are no legal fees to be paid (expenses were part of the settlement) and the money was supposed to be paid in full into my bank account when the cheque was issued.That did not happen and it looks like my solicitor has kept it in his own account.
I called the Law Society in Edinburgh last Friday to be given the run around and told to contact the SLCC athough they did ask for my solicitors name & firm details.
Today I get a letter from my solicitor saying there are £22,000 of fees to be paid ! but I have another letter from him telling me the money was mine in whole and the other side had paid all my expenses and his fees.
I dont like the look of this SLCC after reading what you have written and wonder how to move on this.Help !
WARNING READ WHAT PETER SAID BEFORE YOU GO TO A LAWYER
ReplyDeleteBasically it comes down to this : Solicitors pay around £650 a year to the Law Society of Scotland to be kept out of jail.
While that might sound a strong comment to solicitors, it is, what clients feel to be the case.
The £650 a year to the Law Society of Scotland in annual subscriptions, and the £400 complaints levy to the SLCC keeps self regulation of the legal profession going, which allows solicitors to fleece clients at will, mostly without fear of a criminal prosecution because the Law Society, or as we see now, the SLCC, will cover up the evidence which the Police & Crown Office would have to rely on to prosecute solicitors for stealing from their clients.
Its as simple as that - pay £650 a year and you can go do what you please, overcharge, embezzle, steal, anything, and not get sent to jail - that is the reality of self regulation, nothing more than a cover for criminality.
If anyone feels like arguing with that, go take a walk round some MP's moats, duck houses and third & fourth homes, which funnily enough, is what's been going on in the legal world for years.
Thanks for your continued comments, ideas and emails on this campaign.
ReplyDeleteI will certainly print all letters & replies received from anyone who gets involved in this campaign.
The legal profession should be fully accountable to the public under Freedom of Information and it is up to us to force the issue, since Mr MacAskill seems to be doing nothing about it for reasons he best knows himself, but the rest of us can assume to be of sympathy for his colleagues in the legal profession - which he has admitted many times favouring over the interests of the public ...
# Anonymous @ 4.49pm
I have heard of similar cases recently, all have ended up as fraud cases, so it sounds like your solicitor may be engaged in some kind of fraud against you. Please contact me with more information and we can try and do something re publicity etc ...
Given the business downturn in the legal sector, I would advice anyone not to allow settlements to be paid directly to their solicitors and to be very careful with law firms and client holding accounts.
I agree.
ReplyDeleteComment at 449pm it sounds like you are the victim of fraud so dont waste any time naming & shaming your lawyer as well as reporting him to the Police so he gets nailed.
If hes defrauding you he will be doing the same to others so its your responsibility to do something about it !
BBC NEWS WEBSITE
ReplyDeleteNew laws target rule-breaking MPs
Harriet Harman: Abuses have caused a high level of public concern
MPs who break the rules could face up to a year in jail under plans for new criminal charges for Parliamentarians. (We hope it is retrospective).
Harriet Harman outlined three new offences targeting false claims, registering interests and payments to MPs for raising issues in Parliament.
She also pledged to "look again" at the issue of blacking out details on MPs' published expenses claims.
Shadow Commons leader Alan Duncan said last week's heavily edited publication had been an "unmitigated PR disaster".
===================================
YES MR DUNCAN, JUST LIKE THE SCOTTISH LEGAL COMPLAINTS COMMISSION, A LOT OF BLACK INK USED LIKE MP'S EXPENSES. WE WANT POLITICIANS REPRESENTING US, NOT STEALING OUT MONEY SO THEY CAN BANK THEIR SALARIES.
THE ERA OF SELF REGULATION MUST END FOR ALL PROFESSIONS BECAUSE IT IS SIMPLY A COVER FOR CRIMINALS TO EXPLOIT PATIENTS, TAXPAYERS, CLIENTS ETC. SELF REGULATION IS SINISTER, A COVER FOR ALL EVILS. MR KENNY MACASKILL KNOWS THIS ONLY TOO WELL.
BBC NEWS
ReplyDeleteMPs pay back £500,000 in expenses
The amount of money repaid is set to increase.
-------------------------------------
The MP's would pay nothing if we had not found out. They would still be screwing the system
A point to note, lawyers, doctors, accountants are taxpayers. They have been be as furious as the rest of us when the press lifted the lid on this expenses crisis. They want Freedom of information Laws to apply to parliament. I am sure they would want more accountability, transparency. The public want freedom of information to apply to all professions. Now we can see the hypocrisy, doctors, lawyers, accountants want to keep self regulation. That is because they want to have the power to self protect, but do not want politicians to have the same power. Total hypocrisy. I rest my case.
sounds like the lawyer is taking the 30k for himself
ReplyDeletenail his ass into a jail !
Gordon Brown and opposition leaders welcomed the appointment of Mr Bercow, who stood on a platform of reform and pledged to heal public "anger".
ReplyDelete(Well Mr Bercow I did not know you knew Paul Daniels, because you will need some magic to accomplish this).
BBC News The Speaker.
ReplyDeleteThe Speaker controls the proceedings of the House of Commons, chairing debates, keeping order and calling on MPs to speak.
The Speaker is also responsible for the running of much of Parliament - including the Fees Office. Michael Martin looked after MP's expenses.
The Speaker represents the House of Commons' independence in dealing with the monarchy.
Speakers are elected by MPs in a Commons vote, traditionally remaining in the role until retirement or death and re-elected automatically after general elections. A job for life. This is wrong, no one has a job for life nowadays.
I have also emailed MacAskill and will let you know what I get back (if anything)
ReplyDeleteForward for FOI compliance for crooked lawyers !
Young lawyers shown the door as downturn hits top Scottish Firms.
ReplyDeletePublished Date: 22 June 2009
By CHRISTOPHER MACKIE
DOZENS of young lawyers are being cast adrift at the end of their training contracts, The Scotsman can reveal.
As the recession bites into some of Scotland's biggest law firms, one legal recruitment agency has reported a threefold rise in the number of newly qualified solicitors on its books.
-----------------------------------
This is wonderful fewer criminals to rob clients, lot of bastards.
I read about this on the Shirley McKie forum and agree its a good idea.
ReplyDeleteAll the best to you all and I will write into Mr MacAskill on the subject and paste his reply here.
A quick look at Scotland Against Crooked lawyers www.sacl/info and Mr Cherbi's website, and watching the press demonstrates one fact. No lawyer can be trusted by any client.
ReplyDeletePeople have devastating accidents, and their compensation stolen, trusting clients get their life savings stolen and these human maggots take everything. That is why people hate lawyers. The disease that allows this to happen is SELF REGULATION. They are self protecting thieves, beware you may be next. The only lawyer that can be trusted is in the cemetary. That is the place they can do you no harm, unless one of their colleagues takes over your case should your lawyer die.
To all of Scotlands 10,000 lawyers. YOU ARE SCUM.
We have right on our side. The numbers of blanked out documents proves that fact.
ReplyDeleteOnly self regulators need to blank everything out on documents, because they have a lot to hide. They do not want you to see what they have been doing to you.
"Scots Against Injustice" commends Peter's Freedom of Information campaign and backs his efforts 100%.
ReplyDeleteVery well done as always Peter ... a great pity there weren't more like you out there.
Let's all start to put the pressure on MacAskill by writing to him about this as Peter suggests ... and post any replies you receive here.
Let all injustice victims come together to show MacAskill, Salmond and this SNP Government that we have had enough of their inaction and protection of those sacred cows and we want the reforms that Peter has been fighting for, for many years ... along with many others out there who are not as well-known as he is.
Enough is enough Messrs MacAskill and Salmond. Stop treating your 5,090,000 fellow Scots with utter contempt and disdain and do the right thing ... or be gone with you both and the SNP for good ... who have miserably failed their fellow Scots on justice issues and reforms over the past two years of their governance.
http://shirleymckie.myfastforum.org/sutra3657.php#3657
# Anonymous @ 10.41pm
ReplyDeleteYes, I agree with you entirely ... the SLCC are acting just like any other self regulator in their approach to FOI ... but of course, the hard habits of being tethered to the Law Society are hard to shake, and with the SLCC having no external oversight, other than possibly a run to the Court of Session by a client, which would be blocked anyway because no legal representation could be secured ... these people can get away with what they want .. for now.
#"Scots Against Injustice" @ 11.01pm
Thanks.
I would encourage as many people to join the campaign, even make it your own campaign, and do something about the level of secrecy in the Scots legal profession.
If it is left to Mr MacAskill, Scotland will continue to face injustice on a huge scale, simply because the current Justice Secretary is too close to his colleagues in the legal profession to proceed reforms solely in the public interest over those of the vested interests of the Scots legal establishment.
Put the public first this time and ensure Justice is delivered for all, as is our right.
To all of you people like myself, who are writing to Kenny MacAskill, if he does not write to us, he will be demonstrating that he belongs in The Law Society.
ReplyDeleteHis silence on a subject as serious as this, will demonstrate he is not fit for the office he currently holds. He was elected by his constituents and is accountable to those people and all Scots. If he remains silent he will show that we are not getting what we are campaigning for, and he should resign and go back to a law firm.
Hi Peter
ReplyDeleteIt seems totally mad to me we are even having this discussion after all the scandals at Westminster with the black ink and their expenses claims !
Why are the SNP defending lawyers imunity from freedom of information and why are they hiding behind all that same black ink the mps down in London used to cover up their own fiddles ?
Just disgusting really and even though I will email MacAskill I am not expecting much back but I can tell you this I will never vote SNP ever again in fact I will probably never vote again unless people such as yourself stand up and get into politics because every single one of them are just in it to line their own pockets.
Thanks for this.I will join in too.Anything to make the right to know wider available to everyone is a good idea
ReplyDeleteYes, I agree with you entirely ... the SLCC are acting just like any other self regulator in their approach to FOI ... but of course, the hard habits of being tethered to the Law Society are hard to shake, and with the SLCC having no external oversight, other than possibly a run to the Court of Session by a client, which would be blocked anyway because no legal representation could be secured ... these people can get away with what they want .. for now.
ReplyDeleteYes Peter I agree, what we are dealing with is JUDICIAL DICTATORSHIP, BUT THEY WILL NOT KEEP THINGS THIS WAY.
Scandal grows over suspect body parts
ReplyDelete31 August 2006 by Peter Aldhous and San Francisco.
Have you heard the saying "Trust me I am a doctor"?
If you are scheduled for reconstructive orthopaedic surgery, or need a new heart valve, you might want to check where the tissue you are given has come from. For the second time this year, a firm supplying body parts for surgery has been shut down by the US Food and Drug Administration, and more safety scandals are expected to emerge from this booming industry.
The latest scare surrounds Donor Referral Services, based in Raleigh, North Carolina, which harvested body parts, including bone, tendons and heart valves, from corpses in funeral homes. FDA inspectors found numerous safety breaches, including a failure to follow procedures intended to prevent bacterial contamination, and errors in the medical histories of the donors. The FDA is still investigating, and will not comment on how many patients received tainted tissues.
This incident follows a scandal surrounding Biomedical Tissue Services of Fort Lee, New Jersey, which closed in February after similar safety breaches. Company staff were called "bodysnatchers" in media reports, after harvesting tissues from donors without proper consent, and four men now face criminal charges.
Retrieving, processing and distributing body parts is a massive industry, with annual revenues in the US exceeding $1 billion. Yet the safety regulations breached by the two firms did not come into effect until May last year. "We're now peeling the onion and finding where it's rotten," says Areta Kupchyk, a lawyer who helped write the regulations while at the FDA.
The European Union has also started regulating the tissue industry. Since April this year, organisations handling human tissues for use in surgery must be licensed and are subject to inspection. So far, no major problems have emerged with European operators. (Thank Christ for that).
The US scandals may have a global reach nonetheless. Australian patients were among those given tissues harvested by Biomedical Tissue Services. Also, Don Keenan, a lawyer in Atlanta, Georgia, is representing patients in Germany and Austria who claim they were infected by other tissues exported from the US.
Keenan's firm has already won damages for American victims of tainted tissues, including the family of Brian Lykins, who died in 2001 from a massive infection of Clostridium bacteria. His knee was rebuilt using cartilage from a corpse left unrefrigerated for at least 19 hours.
The FDA's inspectors face a huge task, as hundreds of organisations in the US handle human tissues for use in surgery. One way forward would be to require them all to be accredited by the American Association of Tissue Banks, which would open them up to additional inspections. Registration takes months, and neither Biomedical Tissue Services nor Donor Referral Services went through this process, which is still voluntary. Similarly, CryoLife of Atlanta, which processed the tissue that killed Lykins, was not accredited at the time.
You see some humans will do anything for money. Getting a new heart valve is like playing Russian Roulette.
By ALASTAIR TAYLOR
ReplyDeletePublished: 12 Apr 2006
A JUDGE let a paedophile walk free after asking the parents of his seven-year-old victim to “understand” the attacker.
Judge John Walford’s decision outraged the mum and dad ? and was blasted as “mad” by children’s groups last night.
And now the Attorney General is set to look at whether the sentence was unduly lenient - and could refer the case to the Court of Appeal.
Pervert Anthony Lindus, 27, carried out two sex attacks on the little girl, a distant relative.
She was left “badly affected, anxious and emotional,” Teesside Crown Court heard.
But Judge Walford described Lindus as “vulnerable” and declared that his problems would increase if he was sent to prison.
He gave him a suspended 12-month jail sentence.
And referring to the girl and her family as he spoke to Lindus, he said: “I just hope they will find it within themselves to understand your limitations and accept my conclusion that a custody setting might be in fact even more likely to produce in you a problem in the future than if you were treated within the setting of the community.”
But last night the child’s parents told how she was now terrified to go outside.
Her distraught mother, aged 24, said: “This is not justice, he should have gone to jail.”
The girl’s 41-year-old stepfather said: “The judge got it badly wrong. Any parent would understand our bitter anger and disappointment.
“Surely our little girl is the one who was vulnerable. This man exploited that and should be behind bars, not a free man.” The court heard the parents left the child and her two younger sisters with Lindus, who they trusted, while they went out to bingo.
He was found in the girl’s bedroom when the stepdad returned early. She later revealed she was also attacked 18 months before.
Lindus, of Darlington, Co Durham, admitted two counts of indecent assault.
A report on him said he was “immature” and had never had a sexual relationship. Judge Walford said he was guilty of a serious breach of trust but had no previous form.
Shy Keenan, of victims group Phoenix Survivors, said she would appeal to the Attorney General against the leniency of the sentence.
She added: “Sex offenders should be getting jail, not tea and sympathy.”
Nikki Kerr, of children’s charity Kidscape, said: “The judge acknowledged it was serious, then let him walk out. This man is a danger and was aware of what he did because he attacked her twice. The parents must be shocked the judge seems more concerned about him than their daughter.”
A Barnardo’s spokeswoman said: “The judge is wrong in asking the parents to understand his reasons for not jailing this man.
“Why should they be expected to understand?”
Judge Walford, 58, is no stranger to controversy.
Last year he deferred sentence on a serial thief so the crook could watch his favourite football team, Hartlepool, in the League One promotion playoff.
But Lord Goldsmith is set to review his decision not to jail Lindus.
A spokeswoman for the Attorney General said: "He will look at all the evidence that was put before the court
"If he decides that the sentence was below reasonable expectations he can refer the case to the Court of Appeal."
Judge claims paedophile victim 'dressed provocatively'
ReplyDelete5:30am Monday 25th June 2007
By George Gaynor »
A child protection charity has attacked a decision to save a paedophile from a long jail term after a judge said his 10-year-old rape victim dressed "provocatively".
Window cleaner Keith Fenn, of Starwort Path, Blackbird Leys, could be free in just four months after admitting twice having sex with the child.
Kidscape has branded the sentence dished out by Judge Julian Hall as a "disgrace" and called for him to be axed from the bench.
Judge Hall, who hit the headlines after telling another paedophile to buy his child victim a bicycle, could have jailed Fenn for at least five years.
At Oxford Crown Court on Friday, Judge Hall described the rape in a park in Henley-on-Thames, as an "absolute crime", but insisted it was an "exceptional" case because of the girl's perceived maturity.
Fenn, 25, was given concurrent two-year and 18-month sentences, but could will be free in months after spending eight months in jail on remand.
His friend Darren Wright, 34, was given a nine-month jail term for inciting the girl to engage in a sex act on the same night on October 14, last year. Unemployed Wright had also served eight months, so was immediately freed.
Judge Hall said: "It is an absolute crime because she was only 10.
"In my experience this has been the most difficult sentencing exercise I have ever had to decide on. The circumstances in this case are exceptional.
"It is quite clear she is a very disturbed child and a very needy child and she is a sexually precocious child. She liked to dress provocatively.
"Did she look like she was 10? Certainly not. She looked 16, that was a matter that was accepted."
The court was told the girl approached the two men in Henley-on-Thames.
"They started chatting in the street and she told them she was 16.
After making their way to a recreation ground in Luke Avenue, the girl - who cannot be named for legal reasons - had oral and full sex with Fenn.
In a police interview, when asked about whether she gave consent, she said: "I'm in the middle, I don't actually know."
Later Wright forced the girl to commit a sexual act on him at his home in Mount View, Henley-on- Thames.
Fenn had admitted two counts of rape of a child aged under 13 years and Wright admitted one charge of causing or inciting sexual activity with a child aged under 13 years.
Michele Elliot, from Kidscape, said: "This particular case really took my breath away because I cannot imagine a 25-year-old man not realising how old she was.
"This sentence is a disgrace.
"What message does this send to anyone considering doing the same?
"He should be off the bench.
"A decision like that is utterly ridiculous.
"Clearly, some judges seem to be a law unto themselves."
Both men were placed on the Sex Offenders' Register for 10 years.
Lawyer quizzed in £350k fraud probe
ReplyDeleteApr 20 2008 By Derek Alexander
More Scottish News Brief's £350k Cash Quiz
A LAWYER is at the centre of a £350,000 fraud probe after legal aid bosses called in police.
Ian Robertson, 54, was quizzed by detectives over an alleged three-year swindle centred on visits he made to clients in Peterhead Prison.
The company boss - who was once convicted of head-butting his wife - and a lawyer who works for him were last week told they cannot claim any more legal aid.
Bosses at the Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB) also froze payments for work already done.
Paisley-based Robertson and Ross raked in £832,800 in payments last year.
A source said: "Fraud allegations are taken very seriously.
"Solicitor firms have the potential to make a substantial amount of money each year and there has to be accountability.
"If there is a suspicion of fraud then they have to make sure it is properly investigated."
Ten years ago, Robertson was fined £200 for butting his cheating wife in the face.
He flipped when he found out he had paid for a foreign holiday for Fiona and her lover Brian Beacom.
It is understood fraud squad officers moved in to question Robertson this month after an anonymous letter to the SLAB.
Legal aid pays for people on low incomes to get help from lawyers. The SLAB is responsible for managing the system in Scotland and is funded by the taxpayer.
A SLAB spokesman said it would be "inappropriate" to comment on the case."
Robertson said: "We are co-operating fully with the inquiry but I am disappointed details have been leaked.
"My position is that all work which we have claimed for has been carried out and I am confident that this will be resolved satisfactorily and quickly."
SUNDAY EMAIL
d.alexander@sundaymail.co.uk
Solicitor Probed Over Home Scam
ReplyDeleteFeb 24 2008 Exclusive by Norman Silvester
A SOLICITOR is being investigated after buyers lost thousands of pounds on dream homes that were never built.
Tony Murphy faces a Law Society probe over his role in the collapse last month of Glen Isla Homes, which cost 29 people up to £300,000 in lost deposits.
Bentley-driving builder Stephen Connelly raked in the money - plus £185,000 of taxpayers' cash - before he flogged the site in Wishaw, Lanarkshire, for £700,000 and his company went under.
Connelly's lawyer Murphy, of Hamilton, will be asked why he charged £50,000 in fees to the firm before it went to the wall.
The Law Society will also probe his role in the transfer of £230,000 from Glen Isla to another of Connelly's firms, 1st Access Rentals.
Liquidator Wyllie and Bisset are trying to get creditors' money back.
They found that Murphy, who lives in a £400,000 house with wife Janice, had a Glen Isla credit card and signed cheques - even though he is not listed as a director.
The Law Society said: "A number of reports are being investigated."
I think the question must still be asked why and how did the Law Society manage to secure immunity from FOI and an investigation of that too but I do support your campaign Peter.Keep up the good work !
ReplyDeleteLawyers, doctors and Satin, same thing
ReplyDeleteThis is such an excellent idea Peter.I wish you all the best for its success and everyone who takes part.
ReplyDeleteGood luck everyone.
Very well put Peter.There is no justification for such a level of secrecy at the slcc especially given their receipt of so much public money.
ReplyDeleteThe Law Society too should be made compliant with freedom of information and backdate it.
This more than any of your recent stuff has the Law Society worried - I was talking to a colleague today who said the LSS will be going full out to kill any idea they should be made foi accountable.
ReplyDeleteExpect some dirty tricks which I'm sure you will be ready for.
# Anonymous @ 10.21pm
ReplyDeleteGood to hear it ... and dirty tricks come as part of the package when it comes to dealing with the Law Society.
I'd encourage everyone so inclined to post up a copy of the Law Society/exempt from FOI image and get writing to the Justice Secretary as others have already done.