The Secret Barrister’s legal analysis of Bananarama hit is a thing of beauty

By on

🎶 Come on baby, can’t you see, I stand accuuuused of love in the first degree 🎶

The Secret Barrister, an anonymous lawyer who blogs and tweets regularly about the plight of criminal justice in the United Kingdom, has turned his critical eye to a totally different subject matter: the musical stylings of 80s pop trio Bananarama.

Putting his usual offerings on the decimation of legal aid to one side, the mysterious legal personality tweeted a section of the lyrics to Bananarama’s 1987 hit ‘Love in the First Degree‘:

In a Twitter thread, which has since gone viral, The Secret Barrister explains the “legal inaccuracies and errors” that Bananarama fall foul of. First up, the role of the judge and jury:

Unless, of course, the girl band was referencing the judge’s power to rule on the availability of a particular defence:

Next up, Bananarama’s level of culpability and how this must be considered in relation to sentencing:

The anonymous blogger’s epic legal critique continues:

But there could still be hope for the musical trio. Continuing, the junior barrister — who recently became a published author — suggests Bananarama could appeal:

And, The Secret Barrister couldn’t resist having a pop at the under-resourced Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for bringing the case against Bananarama in the first place.

Rounding off his Twitter-based analysis, he notes:

So what next for The Secret Barrister? Well, it appears the advocate is keen to dissect the tricky legal issues contained in Meat Loaf’s track ‘I’d Do Anything for Love (But I Won’t Do That)’.

For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek's careers events:

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub


Judge Dredd

I’m not sure if the SB is male? The tweets were fun. Perhaps the briefs have ceased? Remember, it ain’t what you do, it’s the way that you do it.



Other topics of discussion:
Would Britney Spears’ invitation to “Hit me baby one more time” offer the defendant a violenti non fit injuri defence?


Scep Tick

Can’t work out whether “violenti” is a typo or a genius-level pun.



You dawg, I heard you like puns, so I put a pun in your latin so you can pun while you decline.



The defence of violenti non fit injuria does not appear in English Criminal Law. The closest available defence to it is that of consent. One cannot consent to any offences against the person including and above ABH.

Thus, in answer to your question, if the Defendant was charged with anything more than assault, Britney Spears’ consent and indeed encouragement would not suffice as a defence.

Do the admissions of “Oops I did it again; I played with your heart” by Britney, suggest the possibility of a defence of provocation/ loss of self control?



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



If we’re wasting time on legal cheek, we’re perfectly capable of wasting time on twitter ourselves.


Deed U No

How about – Bob Marley’s –
I shot the Shariff, but I didn’t shoot no Deputy (discuss)


Comments are closed.

Related Stories