Hertfordshire Uni law student caught smuggling cannabis into Brixton prison gets community service

By on

‘Any career in law will now be far more difficult’, judge warns

📸 David Anstiss / Wall of H.M. Prison Brixton / CC BY-SA 2.0

A University of Hertfordshire law student has been handed a community order after being caught trying to smuggle cannabis into a prison.

Annette Aigbogun, 19, brought a “relatively small amount” of the drug into HMP Brixton concealed in her hair. Once inside, she transferred the incriminating parcel into a packet of crisps. Suspicious security guards nabbed the hapless student in the visiting room as she tried to hand it over to a prisoner, Court News UK (£) reports.

Prosecutor Jonathan Ingram, of 5 St Andrew’s Hill chambers, said that the guards discovered “a four-inch lozenge-shaped object that turned out to be cannabis”. He continued:

“She met somebody outside Brixton prison on the day of the offence and was clearly given the package.”

Hatfield resident Aigbogun, a third year law and Spanish student at the University of Hertfordshire, reportedly pleaded guilty to the offence and was sentenced to 120 hours of community service.

The 2019 LPC Most List

According to a LinkedIn profile, Aigbogun had been working at Primark — not known as a particularly generous employer — to fund her studies.

Defence counsel Allan Goh told the court that Aigbogun had become homeless after falling behind on her rent and agreed to smuggle in a small amount of cannabis in exchange for £300 to clear her arrears. The 4 Breams Buildings barrister confirmed that Aigbogun is planning to continue her legal studies.

But sentencing judge Freya Newbury said that “any career in law will now be far more difficult”.

Over one third of undergraduate law students admit to taking drugs, according to a 2015 Legal Cheek survey — as do more than a quarter of practising lawyers.

Comments on this article are now closed.

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

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub



‘Any career in law will now be far more difficult’.

Yep, with Hertfordshire Uni on your CV



“Over one third of undergraduate law students admit to taking drugs, according to a 2015 Legal Cheek survey — as do over a quarter of practising lawyers.”

Yeah, but we don’t tend to bring them in to prisons, on account of that being a conspicuously stupid thing to do.


Primark Employee

As an employee of Primark myself whilst at uni, I’m quite offended by the statement LC are making as they have no evidence backing up their claim that Primark is not a “particularly generous emoloyer”. My wage rivals that many people my age earn and the conditions at the store and working hours are nothing to be complained of. Shame on LC!



Yeah, people in glass houses, right?






To quote that great philosopher, Dave Lister: “Let’s knock on the door and ask for Ronnie Real”

Law grad supply = pant-splittingly ‘king massive. Law grad demand = eye-wateringly low, tending to zero

You can be a whiz at Watson-Glazer and jump screening on all your apps but the pile skim by the Recruitment numpties will then be 1sts and 2.1s from Oxford and Cambridge, anything left perhaps a couple of 1sts from the RG Unis. Everything else will go in the bin..

As for the “come and join us if you’re from a STEM background, we’d love to have you !!” – what a load of tokenistic bollox. No they don’t !! Knowing all 3 of Newton’s Laws is enough to scare the living shit out of most partners – who wince when they touch a mouse and get palpitations if they have to open an Excel spreadsheet. They don’t want to be shown up…

Someone really needs to call this bs out. Selling a dream that will never be for some people – it’s beyond criminal really..



You ok hon?



I am massively fine 🙂 Thanks.

Just stating a few inconvenient truths



Are you?

Which Chambers or Firm told you it was really easy to get pupillage / a training contract and all you needed to do was spend a fortune passing the course and a glittering legal future would be handed to you on a plate.

Yes, law is oversubscribed by about 10 to 1. The same as the medical profession and many others. Passing the LPC is easy. Passing a law degree is easy. Hardly anyone fails either. Anyone doing the most basic google search would know that there are vastly more people passing the course than there is a demand in the market for baby lawyers before they even started their degree.

A firm that needs 1 trainee does not take ten, They are not obliged to. The other nine may not be any good. Or they all may be good, but there is not the market demand for that number of baby lawyers. Having a millenial tantrum about it does not change the fact that no proffession, trade or any sector of the economy is expanding indefinatley by 20% a year, which law would have to be for every student who passes the course to be given the job they feel entitled to.

In the real world no company in any field employs people it doesn’t need. Well done, you’ve masted GSCE physics by knowing three laws of motion. If you’d managed to master primary school maths you’d already have known that 5,000 people appying for 500 pupillages is not equal to everyone getting pupillage.



Also, Newton’s laws was an example of how easily spooked people from a non-technical background are not stating my own level of qualification (a Masters in case you were interested – oh you’re not ? whatevs..)- well done, you passed the numpty test
No millennial tantrum – just stating bald facts
Indefinately is definately(!) not spelled liked that 😀


Mate your ‘technical’ background is not the reason you can’t get a TC, no one cares what you studied prior to law lol


Exactly. I don’t believe you intended it (rather that you were trying to be a smartarse) but that beautifully illustrates the point I was making.
Thanks !


You implied that you can’t get a TC because partners are scared of your knowledge. You’re absolutely fucking delusional


No, that isn’t what I implied at all numbnuts. Maybe I am ‘fucking delusional’ but you’re certainly not very ‘fucking’ perceptive.


If a comment is more than three lines long I don’t have the patience the read it #snowflake


You had the patience to write that though #bellend


I am sorry you have been unable to obtain a training contract but what you are saying isn’t true. It is true at the commercial bar (oxbridge 2.1s rank behind RG 1sts though). For law firms, a good 2.1 (65%) from a decent university is sufficient. Degree subject is irrelevant. There are solicitors working in City firms from every undergraduate discipline under the sun, law, chemistry, music, theatre studies, whatever. Partners couldn’t care less.



Hear hear.

While going to a top university might indirectly help you with your applications and a few law firms might look unfavorably at you if your graduated from a seemingly worse university, the truth is that there are about 100+1 things that HR is looking at while evaluating your application.

Having worked in legal recruitment for several years, I have seen people from universities like Hertfordshire being chosen over Oxbridge alumni. The only difference is really in the volume of applications – I would receive 100s of applications from Oxbridge alone and maybe 2-3 from Herts and similar universities. That being said, very often candidates from lesser known universities put forward better applications and even if they got rejected at some stage it was not on the basis of their university.

Chippy from Tunbridge Wells

“I have seen people from universities like Hertfordshire being chosen over Oxbridge alumni” – this seems like it would be a very rare occurrence, other than in exceptional circumstances, surely?

I went to neither uni but, as a generalisation, it doesn’t seem particularly controversial to suggest that there is a difference in calibre between a Hertfordshire Uni graduate and an Oxford graduate. Not least, this is reflected in their minimum entry requirements – Hertfordshire Uni’s minimum entry requirements for their Law LLB are DDD. Oxford Uni’s Law (Jurisprudence) minimum entry requirements are AAA.

I am by no means saying an Oxford degree is the be all and end all of life, nor success in a legal career. But I find it highly unlikely that a firm or chambers would choose someone with a degree from Hertfordshire Uni over Oxford Uni, other than in very exceptional circumstances.

Perhaps the instance referred to WAS an exceptional circumstance, in which case I stand corrected


You’re missing the point completely lad, not everyone at Hertfordshire has shit A level grades, some turn down an Oxford uni offer after doing their summer camp as some are quite arrogant and pretentious, a fellow student told she didn’t like the pre uni students there.

So yeah she turned down Oxford for Brunel did more coursework that actually counted for the final marks unlike Oxford that only has ESSAYS WHICH DONT. And she got a first class.

Chippy from Tunbridge Wells

That seems to be exactly the point, no?

Your Brunel example is exactly the exceptional circumstance I’m talking about. 99 times out of 100, a student who has AAA at A level is going to choose Oxford over Brunel/Hertfordshire Uni.

Why? Because it’s fairly self-evident that you stand a much greater chance of getting a training contract at a top tier law firm or well regarded chambers with a degree from the former. The number of Brunel/Hertfordshire graduates at the commercial bar/top 20 UK law firms versus Oxford graduates would suggest this is fact, not opinion.


No. A 2.1 from Oxbridge will always trump a 1st from any other uni. The fact you have got into Oxbridge means by definition that you are brighter than anyone that went to another university and that you are better educated.


I can only speak anecdotally, but as a 2.1-level student at Oxford, I am generally better than my friends who study law at RGs who are getting firsts. I have a friend who finished top of her year in first year (and I think after second too?) and she is plainly worse than I am.

That said, I have no idea whether employers value an Oxbridge 2.1 over an RG First.


Yeah, you sound like a bit of a knob. Sorry like…


Of course you are better. You got into Oxbridge and they didn’t. You therefore are by definition brighter than them. And better educated.


True. The Oxbridge interview process sorts the wheat from the chaff. The dons are trained to discern the finest intellects; those who do not get a place are simply not bright enough.


‘The dons are trained…’ What ? They put them on some sort of course do they ? You tit 😂😂😂


Every Oxbridge grad I’ve ever met (and there have been many) is either posh af or firmly on the spectrum.
These dons are so well trained.


They are put on a course of sorts – you’d know that if you had been clever enough to have got into Oxbridge – which involves designing questions to discern the best minds.


@ 8:10pm anon:

I wrote the comment you are applying to and I would say that getting into Oxbridge doesn’t in and of itself mean you’re more intelligent than people who go to RGs.

It’s generally the case, but I know people smarter than I am who didn’t get it and I can only put it down to not being suitable for the tutorial-style of teaching.

I’ve spoken to a couple tutors about this. A lot of applicants are good enough for the course, but don’t suit the teaching style. By the time everyone reaches the end of their degree, the difference in ability is exacerbated because everyone at Oxbridge are held to a higher standard and receive better teaching than those at RGs.


@0445 anon – what were you doing writing that post at that time of the morning you freak ?
Were you clever enough to get in ? Because your logic makes no sense – surely I would know that (they had special training to design questions) if I had got an interview rather than ‘been clever enough to get in’ as you sneeringly put it.


Why comment on something you know nothing about? Not how it works at the commercial bar. They want the highest achievers. 2.1 = second class, end of. Go and look at pupil (or tenant) barristers’ profiles. You will notice a slew of academic prizes and mostly oxbridge firsts, followed by top RG firsts. 2.1s are rare.


‘A 2.1 from Oxbridge will always trump a 1st from any other uni.’

It really does not work like like this – while attending Oxbridge is valued by employers in legal industry and beyond and will definitely make them more interested in learning more about you, you will still have to show that you have personality and are not “just another Oxbridge graduate”.

I have seen it many times when Oxbridge alumni lost to people from worse universities such as Hertforshire University.

Nowadays hardly anyone will hire you purely on the basis of the university you attended. While of course Oxbridge and top RG universities tend to attract the brightest students it is not always the case and hopefully one day (I assume you are still a student) you will understand that graduates from lesser known universities can be equally, or indeed more, valuable to the employer than someone who has diploma from TOP 10.


^ the above is based on the chances of getting a training contract rather than getting into commercial bar, which, I agree, is a different part of shoes altogether and a bias towards Oxbridge and top RG performers is quite striking.


I see the aforementioned recruitment numpties have stirred. You can bleat all you want but I ain’t buying it – nor are many others.

Personality ? That’s a good one. 😀


It is true that law firms are less picky. This is because you do not have to be that bright to be a solicitor. You are either doing non-contentious work, in which case you never encounter law and just cobble together boilerplate deals, or contentious work, where you delegate anything remotely difficult to the Bar. Chambers do not, however, consider RG Firsts to rank above Oxbridge 2.1s. The Magic Circle and top Chancery Sets will take Oxbridge Firsts over anyone else; the next tier down will prefer Oxbridge 2.1s over RG Firsts.


The stats simply don’t bear this out – which top Chancery Sets are taking Oxbridge 2.1’s? Name names please.


Read the post: top Chancery Sets take Oxbridge Firsts.


Agreed, they take Oxbridge firsts and top RG firsts 🙂 in other words, the highest achievers

So who is giving pupillage to these Oxbridge 2.1s over RG firsts? Name names please.

You are completely ignorant about the commercial bar.


Top RG Firsts are not high achievers. You cannot by definition be a high achiever if you are non-Oxbridge. Plenty of second tier Commercial and Chancery Sets take Oxbridge 2.1s over RG Firsts. See places such as Selborne, Quadrant, 9 Stone Buildings, 5 Stone Buildings. I doubt I am ignorant of the Commercial Bar, given that I am a senior junior at a Magic Circle Set.


^No, you’re a deluded Oxbridge student who hasn’t scored a first class mark all year and wants to believe the world will fall at your feet regardless when you graduate with a 2.1.

So let’s take junior barristers at Quadrant as an example:

No. of junior barristers under 10 years call: 16.
No. with RG Firsts: 5.
No. with Oxbridge 2.1s: 0.

I could have used any of the chambers’ you named as an example.
At the commercial bar, FIRST class graduates from RG unis are preferred to SECOND class ones from anywhere – period.



You have ignored all other decent second tier commercial and Chancery Chambers. No wonder you didn’t get into Oxbridge. Too dim.




Let’s look at Selborne (another example you named) instead then.

Junior barristers called since 2011: 12
No. with RG Firsts: 4
No. with Non-RG Firsts: 1 (Kingston University)
No. with Oxbridge 2.1s: 0.

You have been utterly discredited and embarrassed you ignorant fresher. Sit down and shut up.


You can stick your sympathy where the sun don’t shine your patronising arse


It’s a shame that this final year Law student from University of Hertfordshire has sacrificed her future law career in exchange for a £300 handout.
One would have expected her to know better from Law Society that any elements of criminal records would surely jeopardise her career in United kingdom unless she’s not practising in this country.



Linklaters have reportedly since offered her a training contract.



Let’s be honest

This is institutional racism, pure and simple

The student was black

The inmate was black

The guard was probably also black

We need to liberate black people from this injustice

Decriminalise all drugs now

And tax consumption by middle class white people

And also tax their incomes and houses

A windfall tax on city greed




Oh fuck off.



They tried to make me go to rehab and I said ‘I am the Archduke of Moravia’.



“Goodbye first rate education, hello the University of Hertfordshire”



🎼Goodbye sun, hello moon🎶



Let’s not overlook the part where the girl had fallen homeless and was actually trying to clear her debt.

No, it’s not an excuse and there are legal things she could be doing to make money instead, but.. anyone here ever been homeless? She’s struggling to build a career for herself whereas I think a lot of people in the law have grown up with an endless supply of opportunities, (and food, shelter, education), just handed to them.

A bit of empathy would do us all good.


what everyone wanted to say

what prospects lmaoooooo



why would she seek help from a law lecturer and not from, say, the students’ union or the university’s counselling service?



some of them there care

not many but some

most of the good ones have quit tho and replaced by old people



Yes, but does she have a YouTube channel




How much has that degree cost so far?


Comments are closed.

Related Stories