Report comment

I have to agree with the gentleman on the top comment. Years ago your client would disclose a lot of stuff to solicitors and have seen evidence not properly put to the court,this however has nothing to do with Charlie's case as I think the press showed a total lack of respect. However what is alarming how the public are shouting about solicitors misrepresenting them,and apparently taking money from the client and the client holding proof of legal aid being used. This could send shock waves through the intire system if founded to be true. So one must ask ones self what are the lower doing in the civil courts. If this is the case where clients are being denied in the family courts ,it is a cause from concern. We all know there's no money in the criminal courts. If clients are being misrepresented surely the case should be heard. Personally myself I have been following a family and there seems to be a lot of evidence which wasn't heard and denied the appeal. I follow this for my own research as retired now. There are many I've seen misleading the case and judge by parties and was shocked it was allowed through after the judge choose to let it pass through and the clients asked the him to debar down and he refused. I'm not a barrister but surly this applies also in any courts. But we all agree on what he's saying,yes. As for Charlie the political parties shouldn't have commented to the media and basically turning everything upside down. Which really doesn't look good for barristers/solicitors and the public feel like they can't trust the bar. A apology should be made in my opinion,but we know that wouldn't happen.