Legal Cheek talks… the bar and beyond

Katie King and Tom Connelly chat about barrister turned personal trainer Eloise Le Santo and all things Judge Rinder

As the bank holiday weekend approaches, Legal Cheek’s Katie King and Tom Connelly cracked open a couple of cold ones and discussed the more popular legal news stories of the week.

First up, Eloise Le Santo. A single parent with two young children and no A-levels to her name, Le Santo went to university, bagged a first, and then landed a pupillage at one of the most prestigious commercial chambers in London.

Three years on, and now a personal trainer, Le Santos told Legal Cheek in an exclusive interview earlier this week that it was the best decision she’s ever made. But did she do the right thing?

In lighter news, criminal barrister Robert Rinder — now better known as Judge Rinder — revealed he will be competing in the BBC hit show Strictly Come Dancing. But having pursued a career in showbiz, can the 2 Hare Court tenant still be taken seriously as a barrister?

47 Comments

Anonymous

What the hell is this?! KK and Tom trying to be our mates with a beer?

(24)(6)
Anonymous

Talking bollocks rather than writing bollocks. A change I suppose even if not a welcome one.

(25)(7)
In a Generous Mood

I’ll no doubt get massively down-thumbed for this, but I have a lot of sympathy for the journalists at Legal Cheek.

They may not produce cutting-edge journalism, but to come up with several (albeit some of them tenuous!) stories a day is a lot more difficult than you’d think.

We can all be snobby about the Instagram stories, but ultimately the low-brow stuff is very readable and a welcome tonic to the high-mindedness and sobriety of the legal profession. Also, the website layout is pretty damn good.

So carry on guys, and don’t let the haters get you down!

(84)(10)
Cussell Rowe

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(1)(1)
Anonymous

They have Joshua Rozenberg writing for them. Can’t be all that low-brow.

(3)(1)
Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(0)(0)
Dr Bantz

Tommy looks like he aged 10^99 years since he joined LC.

Alex must be cracking the whip hard.

(12)(2)
Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(0)(0)
Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(0)(0)
Cussell Rowe

Oh dear, a live video with Tommy AND Katie King?

Let the bantz begin.

(6)(6)
Chestbro

Holy shit, check out those 22″ field artillery guns Tommy’s rockin!

That lad is gettin’ swooooole!!!

(9)(2)
Gus

All top bantz is banned from this one!

Expect comments closed and vid to be deleted soon.

(4)(1)
Random thoughts

Eloise, you bailed out too soon without considering all your options. It was clearly appropriate to leave the self employed Bar given that it was significantly affecting your health. I would have strongly advised considering a career move to the employed Bar. There are excellent opportunities in the Government Legal Service and your time at Matrix would have given you a great platform to apply for entry. I was a GLS lawyer for 20 years, after a short spell at the self employed Bar, and I had the opportunity to work as an advisory lawyer to Government Departments and to spent many years as a civil and criminal litigator preparing cases and appearing for the Crown in the Magistrates’ Court, the County Court and the Crown Court on a regular basis. The work was challenging but without many of the worries of the self employed Bar. The pay is lower but that is more than compensated for by the high level of responsibility at an early stage, 6 weeks paid holiday, sick leave, maternity benefits and the opportunity to work in a team with bright and challenging lawyers. I was a pupil supervisor for 10 years and had pupils of the very highest calibre, some of whom went on to rise to director level in the GLS and others returned to private practice after a number of years in the GLS.

I suspect that the GLS would have resolved many of the work-life balance issues which appear to have led to your decision. Several of my colleagues were single parents who chose to work flexibly, sometimes working 3 days a week (less pay but also less tax and other deductions) and others chose to work from home part of the week in the office for the remainder. The hours are generally normal office hours usually without the need to work late into the night and at weekends.

I had colleagues in the GLS who worked part time to provide their main income and used their free days to pursue other interests. You could have combined your work as a personal trainer with a challenging and rewarding part time legal career and have kept many other options, including opportunities in the judiciary, open. I know of several GLS lawyers who have made this choice in circumstances where they may otherwise have left the legal profession altogether.

(12)(4)
Just Anonymous

My honest feedback:

I think this was good, and I’d like to see you guys doing more of these segments. Now, there is room for improvement. While I generally found Tom very clear and focussed, Katie lacked clarity at times and was a little ‘waffly.’

Of course, given Tom’s advocacy experience, this difference is hardly surprising.

Now, I really don’t want my feedback to spark the vicious personal abuse that I am aware Katie sometimes gets in these comments. She plainly has intelligent things to say: the only issue is expressing them. So I would recommend that she takes a little more time beforehand to gather her key ideas regarding the topics to be discussed. And then, in the actual discussion, that she gets to the point as quickly as possible with no waffling, directly addressing the specific question asked.

With practice, I see no reason why Katie shouldn’t improve at this very quickly.

As for the substantive discussion, I do think that stress at the Bar is a very serious problem we don’t discuss nearly enough. But this comment is already too long without my detailed thoughts on the matter!

(12)(11)
Anonymous

I actually found Katie very impressive. She was articulate, thoughtful and analytical. Tom was also very good. Good luck to them both.

(16)(14)
Anonymous

Just Anonymous,
Is this how you normally compliment people? I bet you’re a great date.
Kind regards
Justly Anonymous

(9)(5)
Just Anonymous

I wasn’t aware Katie and I were on a date.

Anyway, the Bar is a very straight-talking profession. If we think you’re good, we’ll tell you. If we think you can improve, we will also tell you. I received similar feedback myself from a QC following a moot and it did me the world of good – because I listened to it.

This issue is obviously subjective and if you honestly disagree with me (like Anonymous at 6:38 pm) that’s fine. However, comments such as the above are, frankly, worthless.

(5)(8)
Anonymous

The video wasn’t an interview for a pupillage, so I have no idea why you felt the need to appraise it as such.

Personally, I found both Tom and Katie equally articulate and engaging, and the video was a welcome addition to my Friday afternoon browsing.

(7)(7)
Anonymous

Your soooo meeeeeeeeeean!!!!

😿😿😿😿😿😿😿😿😿😿

(1)(0)
Quo Vadis

Oh Katie what a pity you don’t understand
The articles you write are really really bland
Oh Katie, you’re so pretty, can’t you understand
It’s girls like you Katie
Oh, what you do Katie, do Katie
Don’t break my heart, Katie

(6)(8)
Johnny Rotten

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(0)(0)
Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(0)(0)
Anonymous

Wow I didn’t expect Tom to have a heavy Scottish accent. #sexy

(8)(4)
Anonymous

I’ve not watched the vlog or whatever they want to call it. Does it say why comments are closed on the ELS story or, indeed, how they got the story?

(1)(0)
Anonymous

So this was a video of people discussing old news rather than reporting on news.

It’s like a rip off of the buzzfeed feature.

Please go back to interviewing barristers and judges.

(5)(1)
Anonymous

I enjoyed that. Thank you. Please do make it a regular feature.

You probably don’t want to make it more than 15 minutes so wouldn’t want to include complete interviews with people featured in articles. But brief inserts would break up the piece and it would be interesting to hear from people like Eloise in person.

(3)(2)
Anonymous

Oh, and nice work with the Camden Hells and Red Bull product placement.

(2)(0)
Unexpected...

Hmm, the Le Santo article garnered the most comments I’ve seen on a LC article for a long while. Yet to watch this video; I hope it’s not some clumsy attempt to plaster over the massive cracks in the non-story/poor interview which was KK’s piece…

(1)(5)
Anonymous

Would you listen to yourself? Some of the Legal Cheek commenters are great, but others are so bitter and twisted. Enjoy the rest of your Friday night Unexpected! x

(2)(1)
Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(0)(0)
Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(0)(0)

Comments are closed.