MP's Get Legal Aid

[Brando7]

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/election2010scotland/2930018/Three-MPs-will-receive-legal-aid-for-their-expenses-trials.html

I think this an utter disgrace...£60k a year n they cant afford a lawyer..........bulls*it!!! :grr: :grr:

[Woody1985]

My understanding is that legal aid is based on ability to pay i.e. if you take home less than 10k or so after all expenditure per year from your salary then you are entitled.

They must have some major outgoings if they can't afford it. Even the Tory that is up in front of the court didn't apply for it, although I suspect that was another election ploy agreed with David Cameron or maybe some of them do have some shame.

If found guilty I hope they are stuck in the nearest jail but they'll probably end up with probation and a community service order. Ironically, because the jails have ended up too full under their leadership. Every cloud eh!

[lucky]

Being on a salary of £65k does not mean they can afford to pay legal costs which will run into tens of thousands of pounds. Personally access to legal advice is paramount in any judaical system. These 3 are innocent until proven guilty under the laws of the UK. Yet many as clambering for them to be denied legal representation and a fair trial.

[Hibs Class]

My understanding is that they are entitled to legal aid because they are being prosecuted on a charge that could lead to imprisonment. However, it also today seems likely that if they do receive legal aid then they will subsequently be expected to repay it.

[Woody1985]

My understanding is that they are entitled to legal aid because they are being prosecuted on a charge that could lead to imprisonment. However, it also today seems likely that if they do receive legal aid then they will subsequently be expected to repay it.

I don't think this is correct and why there is even more uproar.

The legal aid method for repaying the costs is being means tested but hasn't yet reached means testing at the level of court they are being tried in.

If they had have had the balls to face the music in a lower level court and take to the stand rather than attempting to hide behind their parlimentry 'priveleges' i.e. not being tried for crimes, then they would probably have had to repay the cost upon losing their cases, which I assume they will unless the can pull something spectacular out the bag. All extra salt in the wound.

As I understand, the evidence pretty much points to them having committed the crime without any justification for doing so, admittedly I've not looked at it that closely though.

[Hibs Class]

I don't think this is correct and why there is even more uproar.

The legal aid method for repaying the costs is being means tested but hasn't yet reached means testing at the level of court they are being tried in.

If they had have had the balls to face the music in a lower level court and take to the stand rather than attempting to hide behind their parlimentry 'priveleges' i.e. not being tried for crimes, then they would probably have had to repay the cost upon losing their cases, which I assume they will unless the can pull something spectacular out the bag. All extra salt in the wound.

As I understand, the evidence pretty much points to them having committed the crime without any justification for doing so, admittedly I've not looked at it that closely though.


I got the info from here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8617252.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8617252.stm)

Admittedly it does include a quote from Gordon Brown so you're correct that it may be wholly unreliable, but it was suggested that repayment would take place.

[Killiehibbie]

They must be in a position to pay from their wages. Can't imagine them having spent much over the years as everything you can think of and then some has been claimed in expenses.

[Beefster]

Being on a salary of £65k does not mean they can afford to pay legal costs which will run into tens of thousands of pounds. Personally access to legal advice is paramount in any judaical system. These 3 are innocent until proven guilty under the laws of the UK. Yet many as clambering for them to be denied legal representation and a fair trial.

I think any presumption of innocence for Devine disappeared when he inadvertently detailed how he committed his crime on Channel 4 News.

[PeeJay]

I've been away from the UK for so long I'm unsure of the situation there - here in Germany we, as individuals, are strongly advised to take out "legal expenses insurance" to cover any eventuality that may involve lawyers, court cases etc. Legal aid, as far as I'm aware, is only available to those on a very low income - people on regular to high incomes (such as the MPs mentioned in the OP) would have to pay lawyer fees etc. on their own if they had failed to take out any legal expenses insurance, otherwise the insurance itself steps in. So, do people in the UK take out something similar to this? If not what do you do to cover yourselves against lawyers/court fees? If so, why didn't the MPs?

[RyeSloan]

I think any presumption of innocence for Devine disappeared when he inadvertently detailed how he committed his crime on Channel 4 News.

What do you mean..soemone told him it was OK so it was!! Also it was only moving money from one account to another, called balancing the budget....the fact that this was done via totally fabricated receipts is neither here nor there cause as I have already pointed out someone soemwhere said it was OK!!

If there is any fault to be apportioned here it is that someones somewhere fault and definately not Devines, he is simply being used as a scapegoat and should never be held responsible for his own actions because as I have said time and again someone told him it was OK!!

:greengrin

[heretoday]

Being on a salary of £65k does not mean they can afford to pay legal costs which will run into tens of thousands of pounds. Personally access to legal advice is paramount in any judaical system. These 3 are innocent until proven guilty under the laws of the UK. Yet many as clambering for them to be denied legal representation and a fair trial.

Hear Hear! One in the eye for the lynch mob!

I hope they are found guilty mind......

[Betty Boop]

Being on a salary of £65k does not mean they can afford to pay legal costs which will run into tens of thousands of pounds. Personally access to legal advice is paramount in any judaical system. These 3 are innocent until proven guilty under the laws of the UK. Yet many as clambering for them to be denied legal representation and a fair trial.

Is it not the case, that if they are found guilty, they have to pay the the court costs, plus the costs of their legal team?

[J-C]

I'm sure Legal Aid can be given if the said person has been accused of something he/she may be given a custodial sentence, if the said person loses then he/she may be held to cover the legal costs if the the Crown so wishes.