Report comment

This is purely my unprofessional opinion, but speaking personally, if you had wasted 14 days of my life cross examining a couple of witness and, I imagine, boring the jury to death in the process, I would have probably convicted your client purely on spite.

Barristers seem to have little understanding of human behaviour - indeed, one of your compatriots in your chambers was also recently admonished by the judiciary in the Mark Duggan inquest for being overly combative. I can't see that it helps your causes, and I can imagine juries rarely respond favourably . I am only a lowly law student, but it seems to me that, if your chambers can't conduct itself mindful of the "sense" of a jury, the demise of Tooks might be a good thing?