Press round-up

Crime continued to dominate over the last week, with corruption, murder and rape on the nationals' agenda.The papers were all over the trial of solicitor Bernard Ridsdale-Tombling for a legal aid fraud in which he claimed 1.25 million from the Legal Aid Board over four years for work that did not exist.

'Playboy lawyer in 1m legal aid scam,' screamed the Daily Star (27 May).

The solicitor, who pleaded guilty, 'blew the profits on a fleet of supercars, luxury holidays, dream homes, antiques and expensive jewellery for his wife and two lovers', the paper reported gleefully in the wake of Mr Ridsdale-Tombling being sentenced to four years in jail.To be precise, as most of the papers were, his 2.7 million fortune included eight homes and five cars.

He was ordered to pay 170,000 back to the board, plus 35,000 costs.

There will also be a hearing to determine whether any of his property should be confiscated.

This threat led the Daily Mail to report how the 'three blonde women' in the solicitor's 'tangled love life...

were facing an uncertain future'.

It quoted Detective Inspector Peter Jones: 'He was the most charming, coolest, most calculating customer I think I've ever come across.'Solicitor Sally Clark's fight to prove she is innocent of murdering her two sons is being supported by independent MP Martin Bell, reported The Express (23 May).

Mr Bell examined the evidence behind her conviction last year and visited her in prison.

'I have every sympathy with Sally and her family,' he was quoted as saying.

Ms Clark's husband, Stephen, who is also a solicitor, lives in Mr Bell's constituency.The Times had advanced coverage of a study of ten barristers with experience of rape cases.

'The behaviour of women rape victims and their past sexual history are the chief obstacles to successful rape prosecutions,' was how the paper summarised the findings.

One barrister was quoted as saying: 'The silly woman is prepared to be picked up by a stranger and go back for 'coffee', you know, what does she expect? If a woman does that, can she really be surprised that a jury will say that she may have consented to sex?'Lisa Longstaffe of Women against Rape told the paper: 'This just reinforces what we have been saying - that barristers are totally biased against women who have been raped and testify in court...

Barristers are able to play to juries' prejudices by trashing a woman's reputation.'Elsewhere, the Financial Times gave a broad welcome to government plans to introduce an offence of corporate killing, but was concerned that they went further than original Law Commission proposals (24 May).

It opposed the inclusion of unintentional killings that could not possibly have been foreseen on the grounds that it would be against natural justice, as well as powers to disqualify directors or charge individuals.

Corporate killing was different from offences committed by individuals, it said.

Neil Rose