The current version of the SPR came into force in 1990. I don't know what the rules were like before then, however, I suspect Boreham was very close to breaking the rules, though judging by what's written above it sounds like he may have managed to stay inside them on a technicality eg. his not cross examining Carol Hanson/making a closing speech.
Withdrawing from the case would have probably been a more proper course of action, however, given that he only learnt of Hanson's guilt in the middle of the trial it may have been his decision that it was in Hanson's best interests for him to continue to represent him (constrained as he was as to what he could say) than for Hanson to find a new lawyer at that point.
Also... why does anyone guilty who wants to plead "not guilty" ever confess to their lawyer?
Because they're young or not very well educated or have mental health problems or are very stressed would be my best guess. If you're a newbie criminal and you don't know that your lawyer is restrained in what he can do if you admit your guilt then yes, you might well do so by accident.
You've actually given me a good idea for a post - a 'what to do if you're arrested' post might be a good idea. If you are arrested you have the right to call a lawyer - there ought to be a list of local solicitor's firms available - use the list and select a firm that has funding to provide criminal defence services. If you use a firm that has that funding all the advice you receive at a police station is free of charge regardless of means.
If you're charged with something you can get public funding towards the cost of your defence by obtaining a Representation Order from the Magistrates Court. This is an 'in the interests of justice test' not a means test. The test considers such factors as the likelihood of you losing liberty (if convicted of the offence - it doesn't consider the strength of the evidence), losing your livelihood, damage to your reputation, the need to have a lawyer conduct cross examination of witnesses because there are issues too complex to expect a litigant in person to do that, complex legal issues in the case etc. AIUI, it's very rare for public funding to be denied.
Another part of the SPR is that you must do nothing to interfere with someone's right to use the lawyer of their choice - so there are strict rules about accepting commission from third parties, and in circumstances like death bed wills eg. if a son asks you to go and take his dying mother's will, you've got to be absolutely certain that *she* wants you to act for her, not that her son does. Even when you're getting public funding you still get to choose your solicitor.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
baggyeyes
(no subject)
Date: 2005-01-27 04:54 pm (UTC)Withdrawing from the case would have probably been a more proper course of action, however, given that he only learnt of Hanson's guilt in the middle of the trial it may have been his decision that it was in Hanson's best interests for him to continue to represent him (constrained as he was as to what he could say) than for Hanson to find a new lawyer at that point.
Also... why does anyone guilty who wants to plead "not guilty" ever confess to their lawyer?
Because they're young or not very well educated or have mental health problems or are very stressed would be my best guess. If you're a newbie criminal and you don't know that your lawyer is restrained in what he can do if you admit your guilt then yes, you might well do so by accident.
You've actually given me a good idea for a post - a 'what to do if you're arrested' post might be a good idea. If you are arrested you have the right to call a lawyer - there ought to be a list of local solicitor's firms available - use the list and select a firm that has funding to provide criminal defence services. If you use a firm that has that funding all the advice you receive at a police station is free of charge regardless of means.
If you're charged with something you can get public funding towards the cost of your defence by obtaining a Representation Order from the Magistrates Court. This is an 'in the interests of justice test' not a means test. The test considers such factors as the likelihood of you losing liberty (if convicted of the offence - it doesn't consider the strength of the evidence), losing your livelihood, damage to your reputation, the need to have a lawyer conduct cross examination of witnesses because there are issues too complex to expect a litigant in person to do that, complex legal issues in the case etc. AIUI, it's very rare for public funding to be denied.
Another part of the SPR is that you must do nothing to interfere with someone's right to use the lawyer of their choice - so there are strict rules about accepting commission from third parties, and in circumstances like death bed wills eg. if a son asks you to go and take his dying mother's will, you've got to be absolutely certain that *she* wants you to act for her, not that her son does. Even when you're getting public funding you still get to choose your solicitor.