Monday, January 15, 2007

Corrupt Insurers of the Scottish legal profession linked to Scottish Executive

INSURERS Royal & Sun Alliance PLC & Marsh UK (a subsidiary of Marsh Inc , of scandal fame in the US & international financial markets) - who also happen to be the same insurers of Scottish lawyers, in the infamously corrupt Professional Indemnity insurance scheme known as the Master Insurance Policy of theLaw Society of Scotland, have been identified in answers given to a question in the Scottish Parliament, as insurers also to Government Departments & many public services..

These revelations have left the Scottish Executive somewhat embarrassed, and unwilling to release much information on exactly how extensive these companies ties to Government are ... and pose new questions on why the Executive has stood by for so long while clients claims against crooked lawyers & other crooked professionals insurance policies have failed against a tide of corruption in the handling of such cases by professional regulatory bodies & insurers.

The revelations came in answers from the Scottish Executive Minister for Finance and Public Service Reform -Tom McCabe to a question from John Swinney MSP (SNP) on the subject of business between Government & the same insurers of the legal profession :

The Question : Mr John Swinney (North Tayside) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what contracts and arrangements for the provision of insurance services it holds with (a) Royal and Sun Alliance and (b) Marsh UK.

The Answer : (S2W-30261)

Mr Tom McCabe: The Scottish Executive does not hold a central record of contracts and arrangements for the provision of insurance services.

The Executive’s finance system (which covers core Executive departments and many Executive agencies and non-departmental public bodies) shows that some payments have been made to Royal Sun Alliance and Marsh UK. However, details of the contracts and arrangements which relate to those payments could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

As a general rule commercial insurance would only be justified in constituent parts of the Scottish Administration if the cost of claims, including in-house and contracted-out administration costs, was calculated as likely to exceed the cost of insurance premiums. However, in certain circumstances there are special factors which may justify commercial insurance being taken out.

So, it would appear from Tom McCabe's response, the Scottish Executive are incompetent at keeping track of public expenditure .. but that's definitely not the case here, because as we all know full well, when it comes to details involving companies who share business & lobbying interests with the professions - particularly the legal profession, the truth, is never easy to determine.

Further enquiries by Mr Stewart Mackenzie, a constituent of John Swinney MSP, have now revealed the amounts of public money paid by the Scottish Executive to Marsh & Royal & Sun Alliance PLC in the last 12 months, are in the area of : £157,000 to Marsh and £16,000 to Royal Sun Alliance.

While the Scottish Executive are definitely not forthcoming in terms of detail on just which Departments or which members of staff are insured by Royal & Sun Alliance & Marsh UK .. certain Scottish Executive Ministerial appointees such as the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman, who is responsible for investigating complaints against the Law Society of Scotland, is known to be covered by these same insurance companies, which also insure lawyers against negligence claims from client complaints ... and this certainly leaves open charges of a clear conflict of interest when an Ombudsman to an industry, is insured by the same insurers. Little wonder then, the Executive are cagey about revealing the information.

These insurance arrangements have thought to have been in existence for some time, although in the late 1990's, Civil Servants at the Scottish Office claimed in similar inquries made at the time, that the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman had no insurance for professional negligence of the type which has now been revealed to be the case ...

It seems to be a foregone conclusion then, that the Scottish Executive's Justice Department, and indeed, most Departments, including Departmental Ministers, are probably insured under these same insurance arrangements, for just about everything under the sun, to protect against any eventuality of liability .. but it is thought many more parts of Scottish Government, including the Police, Health, & other public services, right down to Local Government, have most probably fell under the spell of such insurance arrangements linked to 'questionable companies' which the Executive seem determined to keep secret.

McCabe is purposely evasive in his response, not giving any detail away at all .. probably because as I know full well, the tentacles of these insurance firms are quite extensive throughout Government & the public sector. To quote McCabe directly :

"As a general rule commercial insurance would only be justified in constituent parts of the Scottish Administration if the cost of claims, including in-house and contracted-out administration costs, was calculated as likely to exceed the cost of insurance premiums. However, in certain circumstances there are special factors which may justify commercial insurance being taken out."

Let's have a few examples of this to enlighten the public ...

If a Chief Constable is sued by a member of the public for negligence, or any other matter .. the CC is generally insured against such a claim ... so, is it RSA & Marsh UK again ? .. or have the claims been farmed out to some other organisation to keep people from linking up the dots and drawing conclusions of giant conflicts of interest ... when in such a case, the lawyers who would be pursuing the Chief Constable for a client, would be insured by the same insurers.

Try this one for size ... A Doctor is negligent, and allows your family member to die. You engage lawyers to sue the Doctor & the local Health Authority for negligence .. but unbeknown to you, your lawyer is insured by the same insurers, who insure the Health Authority, and possibly even the Doctor ... How about that ? Well, it happens .. and I can attest to that one myself, from my experience with crooked lawyer Michael Robson in the case of the death of my mother at Borders General Hospital.

Housing Associations are also a favourite of Marsh UK it seems, with perhaps the RSA not far behind ? ... I have read of cases where tenants have tried to make claims of negligence, or other kinds of damages claims against their Housing Association landlords, and had the most horrible time of it, with every dirty trick used against them, from even filing false information with Police, the Benefits Agency & other organisations in an attempt to knock their claim out of court, but all the while, the same insurers insure the tenant's lawyer.

Same goes for Scotland's other infamously crooked body - the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland, whose 'CA" (Chartered Accountant) members can be as crooked & criminal as they like - a good example of this being the crooked Borders accountant Norman Howitt who ripped my father's estate off and stole my mother's pension & Bank books for himself ... ICAS were so secretive on their insurance arrangements for professional negligence, they refused to identify the company responsible (I was later told by a Journalist it was Marsh & RSA again) .. and the carefully worded ICAS report into Howitt avoided any mention of negligence .. just as what happens with Law Society reports into crooked lawyers.

The same applies for many other public services, and also the commercial sector, as Marsh Inc & the Royal & Sun Alliance claim themselves to be one of the biggest providers of insurance cover for professional indemnity to virtually every walk of life .. and particularly the financial sector .. where all of those who have been trying to make negligence or other kinds of claims against Banks & other financial institutions, may have failed to realise, the same insurers who insured the Bank, also insured their lawyer .. who perhaps .. failed to progress the case very much .. or fail to win such a settlement as what should have been awarded ...

However, some say there may be much more to this secrecy than just the Executive wanting to keep it's insurance arrangements secret just because they link up Government to the same crooked insurance companies which have prevented thousands of cases from ever getting near the courts, through using the most dirty tricks possible & prevaricating the public in negligence claims against the likes of crooked lawyers, while the Scottish Executive stood by, knowing all the time the reasons these cases would never be successful.

Not to mention another lurking factor in this .. well .. these same companies are known for making political donations in the USA .. obviously to the party which best represents their business interests .. and as we have seen over the years, with the complex arrangements of donations to political parties, which may well have brought business in and held onto established markets .. certainly such as the legal & financial sectors. Could it be perhaps, that New Labour have had a few donations from the insurers to maintain their business interests ? ... It may be so.

So, could this be the holy grail of links between the likes of crooked lawyers & our Scottish Executive, which have prevented for so long members of the public, such as myself and many many others, from getting anywhere near a court to make a negligence claim ? Could this be one of the main reasons that the Law Society of Scotland has been allowed to fiddle it's way through tens of thousands of client complaints against crooked lawyers over the years .. while the Executive and many politicians have stood by and done nothing ?

I think it may well be the case that we are looking at one of the major reasons why many claims against the likes of crooked lawyers, negligent medical staff, the Police, Courts, and all sorts of so-called professions, Government Departments, etc , have failed over the years - because the Government has been using the same insurance services to defend themselves against such claims. Quite a simple answer there .. and quite realistic.

One could almost call this cosy arrangement of using the same insurers a 'partnership against the public' .. certainly at the very least, it shows a gigantic conflict of interest when it comes to members of the public trying to get justice in their cases against those referred to above .. all the while, our legislators are using the same insurance services .. and offer us no help at all in cases where help is certainly required.

Time for this 'partnership against the public' to be ended ... we don't need the same corrupt financial & insurance companies insuring the professions and Government, do we ? No wonder no one can progress their claims to court .. everyone from the lawyers we use, to the Court staff, to the Judge, to the Government, seems to be insured by the same cartels of insurance companies.

It's time for an investigation into why this has gone on for so long ... and time for those in Government to admit their guilt in standing by for so long, while the public have begged for help and received none against the likes of crooked lawyers & other crooked professionals ..

How about also asking why the Government has been paying public money to a knowingly corrupt insurance company for so long ? .. and not bothered to investigate it's insurance practices in the UK .. when so many reports of corruption have been made by members of the public in dealings with these companies and claims against their insured clients ...


Poirot said...

I'm guessing those figures from McCabe are made up.He isn't known for telling the truth, just like his Ministerial colleagues.

From what I know, both Marsh UK & Royal have extensive business with the Executive and Local Authorities.

Do an FOI, but I'm sure you will never get the true figures, which must I'd say be well over 500k

I would love to give you a job Mr Cherbi, but I'm sure your friends at Drumsheugh Gardens would come down on us like a ton of bricks.What a good interface with the clients you'd make !

Anonymous said...

getting to the heart of it all now Peter, follow the money, thats where its at.

Anonymous said...

no wonder lawyers are allowed to get away with it. their bloody insurers insure the government too.What a bloody scandal

Archie said...

I cant see Pete ever working in a lawyers office LOL

Anonymous said...

Marsh Inc are well known in the US for corruption - just ask the NY District Attorney's Office.
They should have been prosecuted for a lot more, and it wouldn't surprise me if they have been up to more of the same in crooked old Scotland.

flute said...

Saw what you said in the Scotsman and agree

The paper must be scraping the barrel to allow all those fucking lawyers a whole edition of slobbering over themselves.

Anonymous said...


crooked lawyer said...

Thats just the way it happens, Peter.You certainly have our number !
Now will someone cripple that bloody Master Policy so we don't need to keep paying into it ?

Poirot said...


Something you might be interested in :

Petition by Derek Cooney calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Executive to allow anyone with grounds to lodge an objection prior to the appointment of a new Sheriff by advertising the proposed appointment in the area in which the applicant practised; and to prohibit Sheriffs from being appointed to the Sheriffdom in which they practiced.

Have fun

toffee apple said...

Officials from the Law Society have been asking around who in the legal profession have read/commented on your blog.

Mr Mill seems extremely upset even at the mere mention of your name !

Anonymous said...

You have an unhealthy dislike of lawyers, Mr Cherbi.Go do something else & leave us alone.

jinx said...

hey anonymous fucker

u lawyers ruined this guys family and killed off his mom.If that happened to me Id come after u rats with a lot more than a blog or protest.
arrogant bastards and killers the lot of you.

GregScott said...

Now I know why my home & car insurance is so high subsidising all these bent lawyers

wen said...

im reading all thise & thinking there are more than Mr Cherbi affected in these problems with scotlands lawyers.
the government should clean up these legal problems or the industry can never be trusted.
its a warning to companies outside scotland not to deal with scotlands lawyers i tthink

Anonymous said...

sounds like a nice little mafia the lawyers and insurers are running in scotland

ad said...

Those S.O.Bs at Marsh tried to frighten Spitzer off the investigation into the insurance sector corruption.
He's the Governor of NY State now !

Anonymous said...

Were Royal or Marsh mixed up in the bank manager Donald Mackenzie fraud ?

He got his sentence reduced if you are following it.What did he know and on who ?

Anonymous said...

I have not read so much conspiracy trash in a good few years. You are in danger of turning yourselves into a laughing stock.

Ham. said...

I agree with others.

The amounts for the insurance sound a wee bit low and anything from McCabe is fishy.

Peter Cherbi said...

#anonymous 6:06 PM

Well, there's no 'conspiracy trash' here .. only the facts. "Conspiracy trash" is the speciality of the Law Society - visit Douglas Mill for more on that one please.

Here's an example, although the same applies if you go up against many other professionals - who are insured by the same insurers, Marsh, RSA & the remainder of the group who comprise the Master Insurance Policy.

If you try and sue a lawyer, you will find your lawyers are insured by Marsh & RSA, your crooked lawyer and their lawyers will be insured both by Marsh & RSA, the Sheriff or Judge in your case is a subscribing member of the Law Society of Scotland and this is also be insured by Marsh & RSA, and several of the Scottish Courts Service staff, as well as the Auditor of the Court, have similar insurance arrangements.

I think anyone would agree there is a problem in that - a client is fighting a system where everyone excempt the client, pays into the same insurance arrangement the client is trying to claim against.. There is certainly a conflict of interest, which time & again, prevents negligence claims against crooked lawyers from ever getting a fair hearing. How can a member of the client go into court when everyone except themselves is insured by the same insurers and all except themselves will benefit if their claim & case are dismissed ... Most peoplw would call that a fit-up.

As for the rest of it, well, the investigations in the US uncovered political funding by the Insurers to ensure their 'business ideals' (profits) were met & protected by those who got elected (so what can & has been done in the USA, can & will be done here) the Scottish Executive have already admitted they hold insurance with Marsh & RSA in key areas which overlap with the legal system .. and if David McLetchie had answered my complaint in January 2005 on his failure to declare certain interests, including the financial benefits which come from being in the Master Policy, he might still have been Tory leader - but he didn't, Jim Dyer closed the investigation, the Parliament covered it up,.. so it all went to the media and that was that.

How's that for conspiracy.

oh one small piece of news for you all .. since writing the story, some papers came to light on the insurance arrangememts of certain politicians who voted on the LPLA Bill. there could be a few 'favourable' insurance deals .. with .. guess who ? .. and guess who arranged it for them ? .. Don't worry though .. the material is already off to the press to see what others make of it.

Peter Cherbi said...

# Poirot, thanks for that tip .. quite topical that petition, particularly with regard to who is in sured by whom and who is still a member of the Law Society.. I wonder ...

Maybe we could even force Sheriff appointees to declare their regulatory history in full .. for example, what kinds of client complaints they faced when they were lowly solicitors .. what happened to those complaints etc ....

Archie said...

Pete, you certainly answered that one !

Looks like the only thing the lawyers friends have against your stuff is to try and rubbish you.

Doesn't work though !
Only makes ur position stronger and gives u bags more credibility !

Anonymous said...

The only laughing stock is the Scottish legal system for allowing all these bloody crooks to rip us off

a friend said...

funny you should mention this.

Did you know those lawyers on the Scotsman who pose as journalists also pay into Marsh ?

Great way to get your industry's point of view across to the public, isnt it - but you know that already, didn't you Peter.

Anonymous said...

Dont rise to the conspiracy tag bait, Peter.
Clearly you are writing about something which you have gone through yourself and by the sounds if it many others before & after you.
Its good to see you have support in the press but I a kind of surprised to read there are newspapers over there allowing the legal profession to promote its views against public campaigns for independent oversight.
I will be reading your blog from now on.

Dave, Chicago said...

had to check your definition of a Sheriff.

So in Scotland a Sheriff is an attorney promoted by the bar association to being a judge who is then insured by the same company which insures the prosecution & defense teams ?

How can anyone get justice in that ? How long has that been going on ?No wonder all you guys get nowhere with these crooked attorneys

wet wet wet said...

Upsetting the lawyers again Mr Cherbi ? thats fine with me.

Mcletchie is just as bad as the rest.Dyer is useless along with that Standards Committee.Much better to go public.

The Law Society should have done something about him bringing the profession into disrepute !

Anonymous said...

I take it is you are continuing on this line of conspiracy you will have highlighted the issue to the FSA?

Anonymous said...

I work with a small insurance company and it is obviuos that you have made an error in not distinguishing between an insurance broker and an insurer. Brokers do not insure.

A broker acts like an independent financial adviser and as such does not supply the financial products.

I am also sure that the OFT, FSA and the European Competition Commission have investigated the master policy and given it a green light.

Anonymous said...

No big cospiracy here. Cherbi is only reporting the protection racket of the Master Insurance Policy.It's a business and its BIG money.

I can't think of many institutions which are allowed to lie to Committees of Parliament and get away with it but Marsh & the Law Society did exactly that.

Peter Cherbi said...

Anonymous said...
I take it is you are continuing on this line of conspiracy you will have highlighted the issue to the FSA?

11:59 AM
Anonymous said...
I work with a small insurance company and it is obviuos that you have made an error in not distinguishing between an insurance broker and an insurer. Brokers do not insure.

A broker acts like an independent financial adviser and as such does not supply the financial products.

I am also sure that the OFT, FSA and the European Competition Commission have investigated the master policy and given it a green light.

12:04 PM

Dear #anonymous @ 11:59am & 12:04pm.. you are obviously the same person in both, as I have only just checked in at 4pm to publish your two posts.

I am well aware of the differences between Brokers & Insurers, thanks. I take it you don't dispute anything else - such as the same firm of Brokers & the same firms of insurers who insure all the members of the Court, against the interests of the poor client.

For evidence on what the Brokers - Marsh UK can get up to when negligence claims try to get to court against crooked lawyers, read here : Law Society of Scotland claims success in gagging the press over Herald newspaper revelations of secret case memos

Marsh - the Brokers, were found in one case to have been collating evidence& information against a claimant - to delay and kill off the negligence action against the lawyers they brokered insurance for. Marsh UK colluded with the Chief Executive of the Law Society of Scotland to delay and destroy a claim of negligence against a several legal firms in the Mackenzie case. This practice is widespread, as the Scottish Parliament Justice 2 Committee heard from members of the public who have similarly been victimised by the 'Brokers' and the 'insured' lawyers.

The FSA and OFT both have full knowledge of this. There was no green light given for this kind of conduct. Rather, the Law Society of Scotland lobbied for the investigation to be closed - in the public interest.

It's commonplace for lawyers or their allies to claim the FSA give the green light to their actions - read this : Chief Executive of the Law Society of Scotland branded a liar after FSA denies claims of intervention to block complaints body

In that article, even Douglas Mill was caught out lying about what the FSA would or wouldnt do. What a liar. Can we believe anything from the legal profession after that ?

The European Competition Commission have similarly been lobbied by the legal profession, the Brokers & several other professional "Defence Union" bodies, to halt any investigation into business practices .... Why ? well, it's obvious there is rampant corruption just waiting to be discovered, and sadly, we don't have an Eliot Spitzer here in Europe ...

Here is a good example of how lawyers perform under the Master Insurance Policy : TOP LAWYER AT THE CENTRE OF 12 NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS

Now .. I can't think of any instances other than when crooked lawyers & other crooked professionals are involved when someone is allowed to carry on working like that ... a motorist can only get so many points on his driving license before its taken away .. lawyers can carry on being as negligent as they like .. and the Brokers & the Law Society keep covering up for them.

I'm glad there's quite a bit of reaction to my article on the Insurers & Brokers. Now perhaps, more people will understand what clients of lawyers are up against when they catch their lawyer fiddling the books.

Oh .. incidentally - it has just been revealed - the Scottish Parliament carry insurance arrangements also with Marsh UK .. It certainly seems this firm has wormed its way into many places of power .. could that be why it's officials were allowed to lie before the Justice 2 Committee in the LPLA Bill inquiry ?

Lee said...

I think we are seeing why the Law Society told the press to stay away from Peter Cherbi.Too many answers to the difficult questions and no afraid to take on the bad boys.

Anonymous said...

Great debate !

Proves the point of Scottish lawyers being a bunch of corrupt bastards along with their insurers and all those fuckers who protect them.

The world would be better off if they all went on a one way trip into the sun !

Anonymous said...

If you want a piece of earth shattering news, someone proposed a settlement offer to get rid of you in the 1990s due to the headlines you attract.
I was told there was a meeting, and Douglas Mill vetoed it, with prejudice.
Another one of your enemies, James Ness, was also very much against it, and you.

Anonymous said...

That o'donnell has got away with it every time.
Royal Sun Alliance and Marsh have protected him and all his kind from clients for years.
Glad the paper had good sense to ask you for a c omment because you are the only one I know of who can write about this stuff properly.

Anonymous said...

The unstoppable Peter Cherbi.
How did you find out about McLetchie ?

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the info on small claims and Digby Brown.
Obviously Douglas Alexander will be happy for them since he used to work there before making the leap to chum of Gordon Brown.

Anonymous said...

I am staggered to read what you write.There hasnt even been one denial from the law society or the execitive or anyone at all on whatever you have said.
Obviously you are telling the truth but how could all this be allowed to go on for so long ? Was it just the money or much more

Anonymous said...

I've been though this too with the Law Society.I made a complaint the lawyer who was dealing with my mothers estate stole possessions and heirloom jewelry from the house and sold them to an antiques dealer he knew.I had photos of the stuff actually in the shop but nothing was done of course.Lawyer threatened me and my wife similar to what you write and no compensation from crooked client relations office.No lawyer will take us on to represent in anything now so we must be on a blacklist too.

Anonymous said...

Marsh collect all the details on the complaints against lawyers.

I found that out when the lawyer I tried to complain against sent a letter to my lawyer telling him his insurance premuims would go up if my claim was successful.He also said he had 'knowledge' of family's medical records through his insurers.
I cam mail you a copy of the letter.

Anonymous said...

saw what you said in the Scotsman about what the judges and their pals get up to in Edinburgh at night.You are dead right!

Perverts the lot of them.Wish a tablid would go round with a few cameras to catch the married lawyers and the rent boy crowd.

I wonder if the Marsh insurance will cover the cost of that !

Anonymous said...

There is a bit of a witch-hunt from the Law Society going on to find out who is talking to you.

Anonymous said...

My god ! no wonder the legal profession are scared of you Mr Cherbi ! Too scared to take you on and too guilty to deny your articles !

GeorgeD said...

Good point

Why is the Scottish Executive dealing with the likes of Marsh after the scandals in America.

Has Marsh and Royal and Sun Alliance been sponsoring politics here too so they can keep reforms at bay ?

Brilliant stuff, keep it up mate

Anonymous said...

very interesting

wont be using lawyers if i can help it after reading this. hope you and everyone else get your day in court and expose these crooked bastards

Peter Cherbi said...

Thank you all very much for your comments & emails on this article.

I am still trying to get through all the cases reported to me on issues relating to Marsh & complaints against lawyers, so please bear with me as I have been on a wee bit of a break for a week.

There are upcoming events which I'm sure will be beneficial to all of you (not to crooked lawyers though) .. so keep reading !

Anonymous said...

All professionals insured by the same insurance companies.
I am not surprised then in cases where an individual has been injured by their employer and their injuries are not visible litigation always goes the employers way.
If the individual starts litigation proceedings they will need medical reports, (The Law of Delict). The doctors who provide the medical reports have Legal Privilidge (they cannot be sued for giving a medical opinion).
These cases all go the same way, the doctors and lawyers get paid and there is no medical evidence against the employer.
So the individual who has been injured gets nothing.
I know from personal experience if you want to expose corruption in any of these professionals you will have to do it yourself. Primary Care, The General Medical Council and the Law Society do not want to know.
Once exposed a doctor or a lawyer have twelve months to bring an action for defamation, which can be extended if their solicitors apply to the courts.
If you have strong written evidence as I had against my GP your defence is Veritas which means you can prove your accusations against the doctor are true.
The GP in my case (was caught lying in my medical records during litigation). All his evidence favoured the defenders and varied depending on where documents were being sent. My employer also had another GP employed as their medical officer. Very cosy.
My GP's reputation was ruined by me and she could do nothing about it because there was strong written evidence against her.
Members of the public do not get injured at work because your lawyer will work with the defence team to ensure you get nothing. Perhaps the professionals get a brown paper bag as an additional bonus on top of their fees, or a reduction in their insurance premiums for protecting their insurers.
Litigation solicitors and doctors you are priviliged criminals who are protected by a corrupt justice system.
Employers know that money placed in the right hands kills litigation against them dead.

Anonymous said...

Superb work Peter, we all have to fight to stop these criminals being investigated by their own. There are too many members of the public who have been solicitor barred because these criminals will not expose corrupt colleagues.
Their idea of justice is keeping dishonest lawyers fully protected from prosecution. Protect the lawyers career that is their sole objective.
The courts are quick to hold people in contempt if they show disrespect during a trial. The reality is that the system which demands respect has contempt for the Scottish people. This will remain so as long as LAWYERS INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS AGAINST LAWYERS. Perhaps we should rename the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission?

Anonymous said...

So the Sheriffs Association would use article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights to protect their impartiality. Well Sheriffs of Scotland what happened to the human rights of your clients when you were practising lawyers.
You Sheriffs are also CRIMINALS but I cannot say that in court as I would be held in contempt.
Sheriff B A Lockhart's letter to the Justice 1 Committee (27th August 2001) will be seen for what it is. Sheriffs leaning on the impartiality principle as a smoke screen to PROTECT THEIR CRIMINAL PAST.
When I am called for jury service in Hamilton I sit in the court listening to the proceedings. I look at the lawyers and sheriff and study the legally untouchable criminals. I wonder how many have been reported to and protected by The Law Society of Scotland.
Yes Sheriffs of Scotland, your peers and your subordinates evidently have much to hide. It is one thing having power, but power without wisdom has backfired on you.
Scotland Against Crooked Lawyers have shown some of you are criminals. Mr Cherbi and SACL are honourable human beings. Their are on a moral crusade against an evil profession, and the people of Scotland support them in this vital work.

Anonymous said...

Simply becoming an embarrassment all of this. 'Closed Shops' were made illegal in the UK some time ago. Were Lawyers exempt? Of course its to the insurers' benefit (big time) but our small minded little legal fraternity can't even understand that they have made a mockery of our justice system. For what? They sold us out for a cheap policy? I think not?

All you lawyers out there must be getting sick thar all of you are being tarred with the same brush. Many of you lawyers must be p'd off at the closed shop the law society is able to operate via an insurance policy! Well open your mouths and shout about it then. This situation is benefiting only the very few, but increasingly common (sadly), number of small minded, career/cash orientated, self interested at the expense of......everyone else. That is just sooo a 20th Century. Such old hat! It's the 'noughty's' now - not the 'naughty's'. Behave.