Mini-pupillage - Day Two

Visited a Crown Court today with a different barrister from Chambers: Nick. I was told to meet Nick at the Crown Court. Its been nearly five years since I last stepped foot in a Crown Court. On arrival, I was asked by the security staff whether I was a witness or something (can't remember what exactly; surely they didn't say 'defendant', did they?). "No", I replied emptying out my pockets before passing through a metal detector, "I'm shadowing a barrister who is expecting me here".

I ended up waiting for about twenty five minutes in the entrance area. A security guard had made it known to Nick that I had arrived after about five minutes. This was all getting very tiresome. There I was seated in the main entrance watching people come and go. Whilst checking out the court announcer each time she passed me by, I began playing guess-what-the-person-who-just-walked-through-the-metal-detectors-is-here-for. I found that with the younger unknown people who walked passed me, it was quite telling to see what their reaction was to me sitting there. If they smiled and wanted to high-five me, they were obviously a defendant. If there was a group of such people, the one that acted in either of the aforementioned ways was the defendant and the others were his family or friends. The people that ignored me, I believe I am correct in saying were witnesses. The people that came in groups in dazzling white shirts and flashing silver badges were constables. If they were over-forties and chatted politely with the security guards, they were witnesses. Then there was a sixteen year old in a suit wearing geeky glasses and carrying a notebook - the work experience student, of course!

Nick then suddenly turned up.

"Are you Lacklustre Lawyer?" Yes.
"Hi, I'm Nick."
"Nice to meet you." (shake hands)
"You too. Allow me to explain why I haven't been able to see you until now. I had this case thrust into my hands just this morning and I got called into court in short notice without having any opportunity to grab you".
"No problem", I replied, "I figured something like that must have happened".

Then we continued up the stairs to the advocate's suite.

"So what was the case about that you got given this morning?"
"....". I'm afraid I don't actually recall what he said at this point. I do remember it being quite interesting though.

So in the advocate's suite we talked about the cases that he would be in court for soon. They were mostly probation breaches in which he was prosecuting and only one in which he was for the defence. We had well over an hour before he was going to be back in court for these. During this time we talked to some of the other advocates there on topics including: the facts of the cases before them, changes to the criminal justice system, the usefulness of some defences in criminal law. I read some interesting case files of defendants my age doing things which are unpleasant: getting into fights, dealing drugs with the wrong people, committing criminal damage and so on. All very riveting to read, I might add.

Then we went into court. All the people that I had first encountered in the entrance to the court were there and were exactly who I thought they were. At this point I wondered whether any of them had been thinking what I was doing in the Court and, dare I say, they thought I was there as one of them. This me made smile uncontrollably.

That all took us to lunch time. I headed back to Chambers with Nick. At this point we began talking about pupillage, my career and the BVC. We stopped at a place where he bought me lunch - which was delicious. We talked some more about our extra-curricular interests and life at Chambers and as a barrister.

Then we headed back to Chambers. Nick had some interesting case-files for me to read. One was for a negligence claim and was conditional fee arrangement in which Nick had written guidance on the claimant's chances of success on two separate occasions. I should explain: the negligent act was the not keeping of a dog on his leash, the victim was an electrician doing work at the dog owner's house. The two guidance notes were written in between one favourable and one unfavourable medical report in which the medical practitioner had talked about causation - the dog's bite being the cause of the claimant's dizziness and prolonged headaches. Nick had asked me whether he should take the case or not. In other words: this is a CFA case - what chances have I got of winning before a judge and actually earning something. My initial answer was pedestrian somewhat. Nick said: "You're not answering a legal problem question in a university course" or words to that effect. I tightened up; tried to sound more interesting and complete; and succeeded, I think!

Aside from meeting some of Chambers' other members and doing some research in its library that was it for Day Two.