Comments by "Bond25" (@Bond2025) on "R v Alex Belfield - Reporting on Live Cases? Barrister Explains" video.

  1. There always seem to have been two storylines running in parallel with a lot of cases you see reported in the news and most follow the same template, so this is not about the name you mention, but what people often do and it applies to many cases that have been reported previously and concluded. The best advice is if you have done something, prolonging the agony of not just holding your hands up and admitting it makes you look worse. You also waste a lot of your own money, or that of other people. Anyone donating money that later claims to have been misled will then be against others. Think of the following fictional people A,B,C,D,E and fictional Company F and fictional Police in a case that is not real, but the wording used as an example only and bearing no resemblence to anyone named here or elsewhere or any case open or closed. Person A complained bitterly that Company F had a vendetta against them for no reason, picked them at random and had used/influenced police to arrest them for no reason, search property, take possible evidence away and make up false things between them to accuse Person A of as they think they are such a threat, they are best silenced. Person A tells everyone this as fact and finds a common ground or similar thing people do not like about Company F or police and works on that to steer everything away from them, on to police and Company F. That can lead to people being asked for a petition, campaign or even donation to fight the horrible police and Company F when it might really be used to cover their own legal fees or financial needs, particularly if they were in any debt. Persons B,C,D,E don't know each other and maybe complained to police that Person A had somehow behaved in a way that made them feel threatened and reported it to police with evidence and/or witnesses resulting in investigation and action. Person D was more annoyed, wanted to be left alone and went to the high court and got some sort of proceedings issued and suggested a huge figure and a promise to leave them alone and say no more or the action would continue against Person A. Person A then confused the police action for what they found themselves accused of for a completely different thing! They tried to twist it by claiming to be a victim and being attacked by random people from Company F and police. People will use all sorts of tricks to deflect a situation.
    2
  2.  @stevie6340  I am just looking up what the rules are around legal aid now, how much you are allowed to have in the bank etc. It is means tested. Usually only very poor or very rich people can have access to fair justice, people working on a average income often have to pay monthly contributions of £600-£800 a month. There is no guarantee you get any of this back if you are not convicted either - so this is why people hate false accusers. A Judge wouldn't direct a QC on legal aid to help with a case like this. That's not the way it works. A person would need to find his own representation, then make applications for legal aid and then make a further application for a QC. Why would they even need a QC on a relatively easy case. It's almost sounding as bad as when people will say "we have London Counsel" thinking everyone is going to be scared. They are no better qualified than Counsel from any other Area. Judges are way more clever than a lot of people and see the same things all the time.
    2
  3.  @lucee2261  No one is guilty of anything unless it was proved and they were convicted by a Court.
    1
  4. That I really doubt. No one would sit through a case knowing they could not hear or follow what was going on, they would say something and a Judge would order a fix of the system or alternative system or appointment of someone such as a lipspeaker or sign language person. The loop system in a courtroom is via infrared to stop people sitting outside and using devices to listen in. The headphones you would have been given would have been tested each day and batteries charged overnight and faults fixed within a day, there are many alternative items to use and if you HAD said you were unable to hear, the Judge would have simply moved to a new courtroom and tested the equipment again. Most is Sennheisser equipment, so not cheap. If the problem was with your hearing and you did not have any devices to correct it, such as hearing aids, then you would have been asked if you had any special needs well before any hearing and arrangements made. If you could provide no medical evidence of this, then you would be seen as just using this as an excuse to delay proceedings or to try and avoid justice. Defendants WILL use any excuse they can think of, including "I didn't understand", "couldn't hear", "didn't follow" etc etc. Most would not have all their self diagnosed problems if they were found not guilty. If there are genuine needs, they are catered for. People do NOT lose a case because of a GENUINE disability or medical condition, everyone is given fair and full access to justice, often at great expense to the public to allow that person to be treated fairly. I don't actually believe a word of what you say.
    1
  5. I'm not sure if people just invent things in order to post - anyone with knowledge of what goes on will spot the people doing this within minutes. Jury people are provided with notebooks and pens to USE DURING A HEARING, some will get assistive technology if they want it. It's a standard thing in England. The only request is that they are not taken out of the Courtroom or Jury Room and any written or stored information/material is disposed of by the Court at a time they request. Memebers of the public can make notes, but have to check first and be advised about what they can and can not be used for.
    1
  6. All Courtrooms have audio recording with times, so when you request a transcript, you get all that. The system is accessed by an Independant company and they are paid by the hour to sit and type out everything said. It is not in their interest to miss bits off. If the equipment breaks, handheld devices are used and that is all logged and stored after being added to the recording system. If you feel Barristers are taking their time to try and get extra pay - you try representing yourself in a case. You will not last 5minutes. I have seen many loudmouthed little cretins go screaming and shouting and almost convict themselves within minutes, because they are thick. That's often why they were caught, but that's a different story!
    1