Report comment

The barristers presumably acted in accordance with their instructions. If a defendant insists in the teeth of all the evidence that he is not guilty that is an end of it , and as legal professionals they are required to do their best for their clients and take whatever points a capable defendant could make for himself if he had the skill and knowledge. In my experience judges will not tolerate for very long inappropriate conduct on the part of advocates. More generally it is in the public interest that even the most unpopular defendants have capable representation because it tends to reassure the public that a verdict is fair and hence that they can have faith in the justice system. Otherwise people will tend to take matters into their own hands. On balance it has long been considered that this is not a price worth paying - even if it means letting a defendant waste time and money on what may appear to be a hopeless attempt to evade responsibility. And sometimes it turns out that an obviously guility person is actually innocent. I still remember the Guildford Four and Birmingham Six even if Anonymous doesn't.