Defence Counsel Quotes

So, then, the best of the historian is subject to the poet; for whatsoever action or faction, whatsoever counsel, policy, or war-stratagem the historian is bound to recite, that may the poet, if he list, with his imitation make his own, beautifying it both for further teaching and more delighting, as it pleaseth him; having all, from Dante’s Heaven to his Hell, under the authority of his pen.

Because he has bright white teeth, Egnatius whips out a tooth-flash on all possible (& impossible) occasions. You’re in court. Counsel for defence concludes a moving peroration. (Grin.) At a funeral, on all sides heart-broken mothers weep for only sons. (Grin.) Where, when, whatever the place or time – grin. It could be a sort of ‘tic’. If so, it’s a very vulgar tic, Egnatius, & one to be rid of. A Roman, a Tiburtine or Sabine, washes his teeth. Well-fed Umbrians & overfed Etruscans wash theirs daily. The dark Lanuvians (who don’t need to), & we Veronese, all wash our teeth.… But we keep them tucked in. We spare ourselves the nadir of inanity – inane laughter. You come from Spain. Spaniards use their morning urine for tooth-wash. To us that blinding mouthful means one thing & one only – the quantity of urine you have swallowed.

One year later the society claimed victory in another case which again did not fit within the parameters of the syndrome, nor did the court find on the issue. Fiona Reay, a 33 year old care assistant, accused her father of systematic sexual abuse during her childhood. The facts of her childhood were not in dispute: she had run away from home on a number of occasions and there was evidence that she had never been enrolled in secondary school. Her father said it was because she was ‘young and stupid’. He had physically assaulted Fiona on a number of occasions, one of which occurred when she was sixteen. The police had been called to the house by her boyfriend; after he had dropped her home, he heard her screaming as her father beat her with a dog chain. As before there was no evidence of repression of memory in this case. Fiona Reay had been telling the same story to different health professionals for years. Her medical records document her consistent reference to family problems from the age of 14. She finally made a clear statement in 1982 when she asked a gynaecologist if her need for a hysterectomy could be related to the fact that she had been sexually abused by her father. Five years later she was admitted to psychiatric hospital stating that one of the precipitant factors causing her breakdown had been an unexpected visit from her father. She found him stroking her daughter. There had been no therapy, no regression and no hypnosis prior to the allegations being made public. The jury took 27 minutes to find Fiona Reay’s father not guilty of rape and indecent assault. As before, the court did not hear evidence from expert witnesses stating that Fiona was suffering from false memory syndrome. The only suggestion of this was by the defence counsel, Toby Hed­worth. In his closing remarks he referred to the ‘worrying phenomenon of people coming to believe in phantom memories’. The next case which was claimed as a triumph for false memory was heard in March 1995. A father was aquitted of raping his daughter. The claims of the BFMS followed the familiar pattern of not fitting within the parameters of false memory at all. The daughter made the allegations to staff members whom she had befriended during her stay in psychiatric hospital. As before there was no evidence of memory repression or recovery during therapy and again the case failed due to lack of corrobo­rating evidence. Yet the society picked up on the defence solicitor’s statements that the daughter was a prone to ‘fantasise’ about sexual matters and had been sexually promiscuous with other patients in the hospital. ~ Trouble and Strife, Issues 37-43

I had to move on to my next case, and I knew that defendant would need an advocate. When the clerk called the next case, the file was already in my hand. I waited for the defendant’s attorney to make his way to the table. His defence counsel had to be nudged awake after his case was called a second time. As he walked through the swinging door, you could see that his client’s file was practically empty. The marshals escorted his shackled client to the defence counsel’s table. When it was time for the defendant’s attorney to identify himself and announce his client’s presence for the record, he mispronounced his name. The defendant had no family, no champion, no ability to pay for an attorney, and I had no confidence in the ability of the attorney who had been appointed to defend him to effectively advocate for his client. Today’s sentencing would seal his fate, but there was no eloquent victim impact statement or zealous defence attorney coming to save him. There was only me today. So I spoke, “Laura Coates, on behalf of the United States of America”. And this defendant.

The First Blast. Entitled A Harbour for Faithful and True Subjects, it was published anonymously in Strasbourg in April 1559. It was certainly not intended as a defence of women. In Aylmer’s opinion, although ‘some women be wiser, better learned, discreeter, constanter than a number of men’, most were ‘fond, foolish, wanton, flibbertigibbets, tattlers, trifling, wavering witless, without counsel, feeble, careless, rash, proud, dainty, nice [meaning pernickety], tale-bearers, eaves-droppers, rumour-raisers, evil tongued, worse-minded and in every way doltified with the dregs of the devil’s dunghill’.

One counsel’s questioning brings out testimony as to the resemblances, the defence brings evidence to show dissimilarity.

The psychic situation of the individual is so menaced nowadays by advertising, propaganda, and other more or less well-meant advice and suggestions that for once in his life the patient might be offered a relationship that does not repeat the nauseating “you should,” “you must” and similar confessions of impotence. Against the onslaught from outside no less than against its repercussions in the psyche of the individual the analyst sees himself obliged to play the role of counsel for the defence.

c) Taking a view as to whether there is any need to keep the delinquent employee under suspension (d) Taking a view on the preliminary investigation report and deciding about the future course of action thereon, such as warning, training, counseling, initiation of major or minor penalty proceeding, prosecution, discharge simpliciter, etc.(e) Consultation with the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) where necessary (f) Deciding whether there is any need to issue of charge sheet or penalty may be imposed dispensing with inquiry under the appropriate provision (g) Issue of charge sheet where necessary - Rule 14(3) (h) In the case of minor penalty proceedings, deciding, either suo motu or based on the request of the delinquent employee, as to whether it is necessary to conduct a detailed oral hearing.(i) In the case of minor penalty proceedings, forming tentative opinion about the quantum of penalty based on the representation of the delinquent employee, if any, and ordering for a detailed oral hearing where necessary.(j) After issue of charge sheet, deciding as to whether there is any need to conduct inquiry, or the matter may be closed, or the penalty can be imposed, based on the unambiguous, unconditional and unqualified admission by the delinquent employee.(k) Passing final order imposing penalty or closing the case, based on the response of the delinquent employee (l) Appointment of Inquiry Authority and Presenting Officer, where necessary (m)Taking a view on the request, if any, of the delinquent employee for engagement of a Legal Practioner as Defence Assistant (n) Making originals of all the listed documents available to the Presenting Officer so that the same could be presented during the inspection of documents.(o) Examination of the inquiry report to decide as to whether the same needs to be remitted back to the inquiry authority - Rule 15(1) (p) Deciding as to whether the conclusion arrived at by the Inquiring Authority is acceptable and to record reasons for disagreement if any – Rule 15(2) 6

accidental case.' This is a significant phrase; we often hear it. Well, not long since everyone was talking and reading about that terrible murder of six people on the part of a—young fellow, and of the extraordinary speech of the counsel for the defence, who observed that in the poverty-stricken condition of the criminal it must have come naturally into his head to kill these six people.

accidental case.' This is a significant phrase; we often hear it. Well, not long since everyone was talking and reading about that terrible murder of six people on the part of a—young fellow, and of the extraordinary speech of the counsel for the defence, who observed that in the poverty-stricken condition of the criminal it must have come naturally into his head to kill these six people. I do not quote his words, but that is the sense of them, or something very like it. Now, in my opinion, the barrister who put forward this extraordinary plea was probably absolutely convinced that he was stating the most liberal, the most humane, the most enlightened view of the case that could possibly be brought forward in these days. Now, was this distortion, this capacity for a perverted way of viewing things, a special or accidental case, or is such a general rule?