England cricket legend takes to Twitter to ask how lawyers can defend terrorists — barrister responds and gets blocked

By on

Michael Vaughan poses a clichéd question that lawyers are really tired of hearing


An England cricket legend has blocked a prominent blogging barrister on Twitter after he tried to explain why a lawyer would defend a terrorist.

Just days after the terrorist attacks in Brussels, former England captain Michael Vaughan questioned how lawyers can defend those responsible for such atrocities. Addressing his 920,000 followers, the former batting-supremo — who retired in 2009 — tweeted:

Responding to Vaughan’s tweet, the Secret Barrister — who is an anonymous junior barrister specialising in criminal law — provided a link to a blog post that addresses Vaughan’s query.

Paragraphs nine and ten of the the helpful blog explain how barristers can defend an individual who is charged with a particularly grotesque crime, such as terrorism.

The unnamed barrister explains that in the interests of “fairness” someone accused of such a crime should receive “suitably qualified” representation, especially when he or she is up against a “state agency with an annual budget of £600 million”.

James Turner QC, a criminal barrister at 1 King’s Bench Walk, also responded to Vaughan’s tweet, questioning the cricketer’s thought process.

Despite being provided with the answer, Vaughan continued to question how lawyers can defend individuals accused of terrorism.

Having “politely” responded to Vaughan’s question, the Secret Barrister then discovered he had been blocked by Vaughan.

That’s just not cricket.


Lord Blingham

Law cricket puns? I’ll start.

Leggatt J before wicket.



That’s another boundary (dispute).



Absolutely stumped by his actions


KP (nuts)

I’m bowled over by Vaughan’s conduct.



Secret barrister hit Vaughan for six with his response.



Michael Vaughan – he’s a top cricketer surely?



Appears we have Run Out of puns based on the above.



If there’s grass on the wicket, let’s play cricket.



The ‘Secret Barrister’? More like the ‘Secret CRICKETER’!!!

Amirite? *High Five*

Yeah, I don’t really understand puns….



Nice to see Adam Johnson’s suggestion, 2 above.



You misunderstand, I was referring to the fertile mound that was presented by Vaughan’s grasping effort.



No sunshine, you just got out-bantahed.



Terribly loose ball from the Secret Barrister.

He may have bowled it with pace, all guns blazing.

But really he’d have been better sending in the medium pacer, to tease the batsman out a bit, before throwing in the big guns.


Corbyn. Sympathiser.

Mr. Vaughn appears to be attempting to make a silly point.



Secret barrister made Vaughan duck for cover.



Let me guess, the Secret Barrister practises from Manchester?



Vaughan’s from Manchester



I think it’s fair to say Vaughan has forfeited the innings with that response



Haven’t seen this many bad cricket puns since the Cairns trial



What I don’t get is how Piers Morgan can defend Kevin Pietersen. That’s a real ethical minefield. Or do I mean sticky wicket?


Bantersaurus Lex

Vaughan’s comments have really landed him in the deep mid-wicket.



Regarding Vaughan, it seems he has no balls!



Looks like Secret Barrister bowled Vaughan a googly.



Vaughan 0/1
Secret Barrister 1/0 (Winner D/L method)


Comments are closed.