Pride and prejudice

Walking near the Old Bailey the other day I was pleased to read the sign on the back of a lorry that read: 'Proud to be an independent aggregates supplier.' I thought this was rather good '“ I hope it made the lorry driver feel good, and the person who filled up the back of the lorry with aggregates, and the person who operated the weighbridge, and so on.

It must be nice to be proud of what you do and feel so good about it that you want to tell the world. There is of course a difference between pride and arrogance, conceit and self-respect. It might look a bit dodgy proclaiming oneself in that way, but, unless a lot of other aggregate suppliers feel differently, I thought it was nice.

We should be proud of what we do, and we should be proud of our independence. If we are doing our jobs properly we are doing them independently '“ we are acting in our client's best interest and we are not worried about who we may be upsetting along the way.

It is also right that those who brief us '“ solicitors from the criminal defence firms, the CPS or other prosecutors '“ should be proud of our independence, as it means we are doing the job well, even when it might lead to a 'robust exchange of views'. Being independent should normally mean doing the right thing.

Rough justice

It is a shame then that people can get the wrong end of the stick. We may be thought to be soft, lazy, bullying or just plain incompetent. Why do prosecutors drop cases? Why do prosecutors persist with cases? Why will the defence insist on pleading not guilty? Why has the prosecution disclosed a lot of damaging material? The real reason behind all of these frustrating occurrences is our independence of everything except the law and our duty to the court.

It would all be much easier if we could have trials in the back of a cab or in the hairdressers, or during a radio phone in. We would have swift and terrifying justice, inconsistent justice and oppressive justice '“ rough justice indeed. One of the great modern day eye-openers is to read in the papers a report on something that you happen to know something about and realise that half the time what is being written is just plain wrong or dreadfully unfair. The kicking that goes on is terrible and would not be tolerated in a court because there would be no evidential basis that would stand up to scrutiny to come to the conclusions that are reached.

Line in the sand

We currently have the potential for unrest and disturbances on our streets, we have cyber wars and worldwide leaking of secret communications. We have governments up in arms all over the globe, and we have talk of revenge and retribution.

Everybody has a different perspective on what they would like to see happen.

Some want riots and other want demonstrators punished; some want the US government's gossip and laundry aired in public and some want proceedings for treason to be brought. Some honour a prisoner for his conscience and others want the man to be treated as a criminal.

Everybody wants something '“ and rarely do we want the same as everybody else. It will be the lawyers who will make sure that at least the avoidable worst does not happen and that what does happen occurs according to the law, not according to a phone poll or the stroke of a pen in a bureaucrat's office.

It is a lot easier in the aggregates world, I dare to suggest. I want four tonnes of building grade sand and I order it and it comes on the back of a lorry and hopefully gets deposited approximately in the right place.

If I don't get what I want I send it back and the right stuff comes. Most other jobs are like that, when you think about it: I want a building and I get one from the architect. I want a hip replacement and the surgeon gives me one. I want a box of cornflakes and the shop sells me one. But in the world of law almost everything we are seeking to achieve for our client is not what at least one other person wants '“ and normally they want the precise opposite.

No wonder we are loathed from time to time, despised, misunderstood or considered immoral. It would be a much quieter life for all of us if we just did what people wanted us to do '“ not bother fighting the trial, or continue to prosecute when the evidence is dodgy and so on. But quickly the whole system would fall into disrepute and then we would truly be despised for being no more than lackeys to our masters and mistresses who only want what they think is right.

So we should be proud of being independent justice deliverers '“ after all, we are not otherwise liked, or respected, or applauded for the most part. As Millwall's football supporters sing: 'No one likes us, we don't care.' It is a bit like that being a criminal lawyer sometimes '“ nobody loves us, but we should not care. But just like the cheery chaps in their aggregates lorry '“ we can certainly be proud of our independence.