Call me cynical, but if you’re wealthy and well-connected, you can get away with anything; it’s the same story everywhere across the world.
If you are poor – then you’re guilty. No money, no rights. Humans and animals are treated exactly the same.
The only time most people would use a lawyer is for, a divorce, a death, or buying a house. In fact, all the most difficult, and stressful times of one’s life seem to require a solicitor to be there,
As with brewers and bookmakers, pimps and pushers – there’s a lot of money to be made from misery.
But that’s all chicken feed to a top corporate lawyer or a good criminal barrister. These people can earn fortunes while making it possible for heinous criminal acts to go unpunished.
We have the super-rich with their super-injunctions, and ‘Non-Disclosure Agreements’, signed by all parties who are likely to witness their immoral and possibly illegal acts. No-one can testify against these people, without themselves breaking the law, and so the wickedness continues – a widely recognised, but seldom exposed – murky area of private/public life.
Not in the public interest
Not in the public interest, my arse. I think you should let the public decide whether or not it’s in their interest.
If someone wants to stand for parliament, or stand on a stage, or on a pedestal, or in any way promote themselves to the public, then we have a right to know about them. The more powerful they become, the more we have a right to know.
If some pop-star or footballer cheats on his missus, I don’t care. A dickhead behaving like a dickhead – who’d have thought it? He didn’t win the X-factor because of his economic promises.
However if an m.p. cheats on his wife, then he has betrayed a person to whom he has made solemn vows. How can we, the electorate, trust a man/woman who deceives their life partner. You have to ask yourself ‘would this person lie to me?’
Then there are Corporations constantly breaking moral law as well as Criminal Laws. They retain teams of sharp lawyers, who twist the legal loopholes to the requirements of their Corporate masters.
There are dreadful acts committed every day against the common good. From polluting the environment to tax evasion, none of which could be accomplished without teams of lawyers, whose job it is to find ‘legal’ ways of cheating us, the people.
I suppose the cost of a brilliant and completely immoral person is totally prohibitive to all but the major corporations and the super-rich.
To represent that which they know to be evil, is wickedness itself.
But these justice perverters are regularly employed by psychopathic corporations*, and by incredibly wealthy and powerful individuals.
These incredibly wealthy and powerful individuals. are the only people who benefit from – and who stand above – the compartmentalised, pyramidal, hierarchical, structure which envelopes the rest of us.
Their greatest asset is the ‘amoral genius’, and if a genius isn’t born amoral; they are ‘only human’, and are therefore corruptible, and probably blackmailable.
So how did we come to this sorry state of affairs?
A very brief and uneducated run down of English Law is required, I think.
It’s all down to hierarchies again.
In pre-Norman England, the law was administered by local courts, largely by custom. There was no centrally controlled system. William the Bastard (a.k.a. William the Conqueror) claimed the English throne in 1066 and changed all that.
Why is 1066 the best known date in history?
Royal Courts emerged from the King’s Council, and in order for the law to be standardised across the land, judges were appointed by the King.
These judges went to the local courts, to find the ‘best’ local laws, and then these were applied across the country. These local laws had developed over hundreds of years and were based on precedent. Precedent is a principle or rule, which has been established in a previous legal case.
This evolved into what became known as ‘Common Law’, and this, in turn, became the basis for legal systems across the British Commonwealth.
This system evolved and The House of Lords became the court of final appeal in the U.K. These appeals are dealt with by 12 judges.
So the highest Law in the land is a club of 12 judges, who are members of a bigger club (the House of Lords). These Lords are either hereditary peers, with inherited wealth, land, and power; or they have been of particular service to the Queen or Prime Minister – usually acquiring wealth, land and power in that service. There are a further 28 Peers, and these are the Bishops in the Church of England.
Equal rights and justice?
What chance does a common man have against such an institution, with the super-rich so completely reliant on wealth and privilege, and absolutely dependent on maintaining the status quo?
For those immersed in the Law, it’s all an intellectual game of one-upmanship. They are seldom attached to the outcomes. However, a trip to court for the average person, is a massive ordeal, usually with life-changing consequences. But to a lawyer, it’s just another day at the office.
*Corporation by Joel Balkan?