Future Ashurst trainee solicitor has book published by Stormzy

By on

Taking Up Space explores what it means to be a black girl studying at university

Left to right: Ore Ogunbiyi, Stormzy and future Ashurst trainee solicitor Chelsea Kwakye

A future City trainee solicitor has had her debut book published under grime artist Stormzy’s publishing house.

Chelsea Kwakye (right) and Ore Ogunbiyi (left) co-authored Taking Up Space: The Black Girl’s Manifesto for Change, which explores everything from the barriers of entry into university, discrimination in the classroom, activism, mental health, relationships and diversifying university curricula. It was published by #Merky Books — an imprint set up by Stormzy and publishers Penguin Random House — last week.

Commenting on the hardback’s launch, Kwakye, who studied history at the University of Cambridge, tells Legal Cheek:

“A lot of time, research and critical discussion went into this book and we can only hope that this is the beginning of challenging institutions and individuals to have more engaging and critical discussions about what we mean when we talk about ‘diversity’, ‘inclusion’ and ‘equality’.”

The 22-year-old writer devoted her time during university to raising awareness around diversity and inclusion, namely as vice president of Cambridge’s African-Caribbean Society and as BME officer for her college union. She has spoken candidly about being the “only black girl” in her cohort and developing a “serious case of imposter syndrome” as a result. “I shrunk back a lot and this really affected my first two years at university because I was surrounded by people who didn’t look like me — students and staff alike,” Kwakye reveals in an interview with The University of Law.

The latest comments from across Legal Cheek

Since graduating the young writer has gone on to secure a City training contract with Ashurst following a summer vac scheme stint there and is currently undertaking the Graduate Diploma in Law (GDL) at The University of Law in Moorgate, with a view to embark on the Legal Practice Course (LPC) later this year.

British rapper Stormzy, 25, who headlined at Glastonbury Festival over the weekend, expressed his “awe” at the book’s release. “This is one of the most brave, brilliant, bold, important, well-needed, exceptional books in recent British literature history and I say that with my CHEST! It’s not your typical story of the trials and tribulations of being black in [an] all white institution — it BRILLIANTLY discusses and addresses the most intricate parts of being a minority… I am in awe,” the Vossi Bop chart-topper wrote on Instagram.

#Merky Books focuses on fostering talent among young writers. It is part of the musician’s growing #Merky empire, which also includes a record label and music festival.

Taking Up Space: The Black Girl’s Manifesto for Change is available to purchase now.

For a weekly round-up of news, plus jobs and latest event info

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Newsletter



Can someone write something similar about being BAME at the Bar?

Shocking that there are chambers in London with only 1or 2 non-White members.



I would be interested to know the BAME stats for those who start the Bar course and complete pupillage within 5 years. A lot of courses have international students that return home so perhaps it should be British BAME students to avoid including overseas students.



It always makes barristers squirm when you ask them about it.

They’ll gladly talk to you for hours about how ‘open-minded’ they are about migrants, Remain, how they stupidly shrunk the clothes in the wash, how they love Club World and how great it is to see Polish and Korean food in the supermarket aisles.

But ask them exactly how many BAME are in chambers, they start to recoil and go on the defensive before lashing out.

It’s like you’ve found out a horrible secret…



It is shocking. I’m not for affirmative action despite being an ethnic minority. I feel it is counterproductive to the main issue.

However I was still suprised to see how few BAME members there were in London sets. I believe 16% of the population is BAME and there is obviously a give and take with how proportionate places can be, but 1-2 BAME members in a set of nearly 100 people compared to regional sets is suspicious.

This is especially worrying given this is in London. I would be curious to see if this could be researched further as perhaps its a self sustaining issue where BAME applicants see this set, think they have no chance because of how off the numbers look and chose to not even apply.



I’m afraid, the answer will be, not alot. There are no HR teams. Recruitment is run by members and for members, with clients in mind.


This really should be spoken about and confronted a lot more.

The current BAME statistics don’t seem to account for the fact that an increasing number of children in private schools and boarding schools (where the majority of barristers hail from) at present do not have parents who were born in the UK.

There is a huge influx of Saudi, Russian, Chinese, Singaporean, Nigerian and Indian students given these countries’ changing economies and the importance to these parents of having their children educated in the UK.

I don’t know how these barristers can keep straight-faced about working in a nearly all-White chambers in London, then stepping out onto the street or picking up their child from school to see a completely different reality.

There is no other enclave in the city like it.


The Bar is about 14% BAME compared to 16% of the population, though BAME is made up disproportionately by “AME” and there is woeful under-representation of the black community. But the powers that be don’t really care, the box has been ticked. All they care about is the amount of women.



Between 2012 and 2014, 335 UK/EU students attained the grade ‘Outstanding’ on the BPTC. Of those, 293-296 (87.5 – 88.4%) were white.

Between 2012/13 and 2014/15, 1,333 – 1,348 students commenced a pupillage in a England and Wales. Of those, just 1,063 (78.9 – 79.7%) were white.

Therefore, when controlling for ability, white students are significantly underrepresented when it comes to pupillage enrolment.

If you’re only interested in “B” students, it might interest you to learn that Between 2011 and 2013, 376-386 black students completed the BPTC. Of those, just 2 – 8 (0.5 – 2.1%) attained a grade of ‘Outstanding’, whilst 88 (22.8 – 23.4%) failed the course altogether.

For comparison, over the same period 1,963 white students completed the BPTC. Of those, 296 (15.1%) attained a grade of ‘Outstanding’, whilst 108 (5.5%) failed the course altogether.

If one actually looks at the data, there isn’t the slightest hint of discrimination at the bar.



What are the statistics for BAME pupils at the chancery and commercial end of the Bar?

That’s when things get embarrassing.




I think this is largely a London problem too, if you look at chambers in Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham etc. then there is definitely greater representation across the board.


That’s the truth right there. Get it up you dickheads.



BAME here – I got my lowest marks on the BPTC on my Advocacy assessments marked by White assessors.

I completed 8 FRU cases before starting the course and also debated at university. With the course being so poorly managed, I saw no point in trying to argue against the marks.

As many get pupillage before the BPTC, the difference between a VC and an Outstanding is neither here nor there.

We really need much more research into whether unconscious bias has a role to play in how assessors mark practical assessments.

There are still chambers in London with very few BAME members and they must really hold people in contempt to think this wouldn’t go unnoticed.



So your intellectual point is that statistics tell the whole story. I don’t think your argument ban purely be strengthened by just using statists. There are also sociological issues to consider. In addition to certain courses being developed with a certain racial group in mind giving that group the advantage over others. A lot of discrimination is subtle and not recognisable especially to those who don’t challenge their unconscious bias. This is just a brief alternative view.


Bored of 'diversity' whinges

Differences in careers outcomes start at home: with parents, not with employers. The bar provides an interesting case study. Black and Minority Ethnic (BAME) barristers are extremely limited, but as a practising barrister warned, this is because, “Given the current pool of candidates available, a system which solely rewards merit must necessarily come at the expense of diversity. This may be a bitter pill for the politically correct brigade to swallow, but the facts speak for themselves; the data clearly show a significant gap in the average aptitude of white and black applicants, and therefore we should EXPECT a significant gap in attainment.”

Her full comment is below, and can also be found here:

“‘The lack of ‘diversity’ at the Bar can be explained by the lack of good-quality BME applicants coming through the system. This is more than evident from the BSB’s own figures:

Between 2011 and 2013, 1,963 white students completed the Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC). Of those, 296 (15.1%) attained a grade of ‘Outstanding’, whilst 108 (5.5%) failed the course altogether. Over the same period, 376-386* black students completed the BPTC. Of those, just 2 – 8 (0.5 – 2.1%) attained a grade of ‘Outstanding’, whilst 88 (22.8 – 23.4%) failed the course altogether. Put another way, white candidates are approximately 4x less likely to fail the BPTC than their black counterparts, and somewhere between 7 and 30x more likely to get an Outstanding. Given that the Bar Standards Board (BSB)’s own figures show that BPTC grade is a far better predictor of gaining pupillage than either degree grade or university attended, it’s little wonder that so few black students are getting pupillage.

People can argue that black people have fewer opportunities in early life and that this impacts their GCSE grades, A-level grades, University attended etc. People can likewise argue that pupillage committees are inherently biased and therefore subconsciously discriminate against black candidates. But, for all its faults, the BPTC is an extremely well-standardised course. Everyone, regardless of background, has access to the same teaching and access to the same course materials. Likewise, for the most part, everyone sits the same, blindly-marked exams. And yet, despite all of this, white candidates still significantly out-perform their black counterparts.

Clearly, therefore, any attempt to promote diversity for diversity’s sake – at least at the BPTC/Pupillage stage – is foolish and misguided. Given the current pool of candidates available, a system which solely rewards merit must necessarily come at the expense of diversity. This may be a bitter pill for the politically correct brigade to swallow, but the facts speak for themselves; the data clearly show a significant gap in the average aptitude of white and black applicants, and therefore we should EXPECT a significant gap in attainment. Now, I am not suggesting that the Bar should abandon its commendable attempts to tear down barriers and improve ACCESS to the Bar. It might be the case, for example, that for whatever reason gifted black students are simply less likely to apply to the BPTC than their white counterparts. Indeed, speaking as someone who myself comes from a ‘non-traditional background’, I have no doubt that some such barriers continue to exist; and no candidate should be led to believe that their creed, colour or gender makes them any better or worse suited to a career at the Bar. However, it’s important not to oversimplify the problem and blindly ascribe a lack of diversity in the profession to systemic prejudice. It’s likewise important to recognise that promoting ACCESS is not the same as promoting DIVERSITY. All too often people conflate the two. The first speaks to opportunity whereas the second speaks to results. Our only duty is to level the playing field, not the score.

Moreover, access aside, it is undoubtedly the case that there is a disproportionately large number of poor-quality black candidates applying to the BPTC. The figures clearly show that, whatever it is that explains the lack of good-quality black candidates, it is NOT a belief in the black community that the Bar is closed to people of colour. Therefore, we need to be very careful to ensure that we are sending the right message – namely, “the Bar is open to all people who have the ability, regardless of their colour”, NOT “we need more black candidates pursuing a career at the Bar”. In other words, what we need is a colour-blind system, NOT this ridiculous, facile, intellectually dishonest, politically-driven system we currently have, which is absolutely OBSESSED with people’s ethnicities and increasing ‘diversity’. In this regard, I am sorry to say that [Legal Cheek, the website on which this was originally published] is very much part of the problem. Every article questions why there are so few black barristers, rather than why there are so few good-quality black candidates. I have read many articles lamenting the underrepresentation of minority groups at the Bar. However, I have never read any acknowledgement whatsoever of the marked disparity in attainment between different ethnic groups at the application stage.

The BSB, Media and scorned students can whinge, whine, bleat and screech all they want, but sets of chambers will NOT start recruiting sub-par applicants simply because it promotes diversity in the profession. Unlike law firms, for example, chambers are far less invested in promoting a politically correct corporate message, and thus far more invested in recruiting candidates based on merit alone. Please abandon this relentless and myopic pursuit of ‘diversity’. And please, please, please, PLEASE, for the LOVE OF GOD, stop assuming that differences in attainment between whites/blacks, males/females, state-school/public school, northerners/southerners, gay/straight, left-handed/right-handed are always and necessarily attributable to systemic prejudice. It’s statistics 101: correlation does not imply causation, and just because any one group is underrepresented at the Bar, it does not necessarily mean that that group is discriminated against.

* When the number of students falling into a particular category is particularly low, the BSB merely states the number as being ‘< 5’, ‘< 10’ or ‘<15’. This is the case for black students attaining the grade of ‘Outstanding’ in the years 2011 and 2013, and the grade of ‘Not Yet Competent’ in 2011. Therefore, it is not possible to determine the exact number of black students who completed the BPTC over that time period, nor is it possible state exactly how many black students attained a grade of ‘Outstanding’. Nevertheless, there is sufficient information to calculate a reasonably narrow range of possible values.'"


Chancery barrister on pupillage committee

An excellent post.



Be brave and put your name and chambers down in agreement.

Why do you fear saying out loud that you think BPTC statistics prove black candidates don’t make as good advocates as White ones?


Chancery barrister on pupillage committee

Because I fear the mob mentality. I certainly don’t fear reasoned debate.

I don’t believe that any candidate should be treated any differently than any other based gender or ethnicity.


The BPTC is not marked ‘blindly’ as the assessors for the advocacy, negotiation and conference modules can clearly see what a candidate looks like.

The best chambers secure many of their candidates before they even start the BPTC. Your statistics show greater White attainment on the BPTC, but it is disingenuous to cite BPTC marks as no chambers use these to pick their candidates.

An ‘Outstanding’ does not erase a 2.2 undergraduate degree in the mind of the pupillage committee.

My understanding was that most barristers treat the BPTC as a necessary evil rather than decisive of potential as an advocate. Otherwise, they’d all rush to teach it.


Chancery barrister on pupillage committee

The majority of the top chancery sets that have been criticised here will be recruiting persons with firsts, double firsts and BCLs from Oxford.

A first from Oxford will secure you interviews but will not get you pupillage. I would be very surprised to find any BAME candidate with a double first and/or a BCL without pupillage (assuming a few years of trying).



You know as well as I do that commercial and chancery sets have taken pupils and tenants in the last 10 years with 2.1s. You are likely to have one yourself.

Why will you not stand up using your name and chambers to publicly state that you personally think BPTC statistics prove Black advocates cannot achieve the same as White advocates?

Chancery barrister on pupillage committee

The vast majority of persons in chancery sets with 2.i degrees will be lateral moves. They would have come from other sets, built a practice and then decided to move to increase career prospects. I can’t speak about other sets but we have not taken a pupil candidate with a 2.i for so long as I have been on the committee (5 years or so). The vast majority will be oxbridge firsts, double firsts etc.


Anon @9:29am, I am the original poster whom Anon @7:51am quoted. I have to say that I am both surprised and slightly flattered that somebody has remembered and reposted a comment which I made several years ago. Since Legal Cheek started deleting contentious comments, I tend not to come to this website very often anymore. Anyway, as it happens, I am here today and you raise two interesting points so I thought I’d step in and address them.

First, you make the point that some modules on the BPTC are not blindly marked. This is true (although to my knowledge they no longer teach negotiation on the Bar Course). However, the same pattern holds true even if one only looks to the centrally-marked exams. In other words, even when one only considers blindly marked modules, white students still significantly out-perform black students.

Secondly, you make the point that lots of chambers don’t consider BPTC grades when making pupillage offers. With respect, this is exactly the point. As I said in my initial comment, “the Bar Standards Board (BSB)’s own figures show that BPTC grade is a far better predictor of gaining pupillage than either degree grade or university attended”.

When pupillage committees seem to favour people who were educated at Oxbridge, for example, some people argue that this is because Oxbridge correlates with high aptitude. However, others argue that pupillage committees are simply giving an unfair degree of weight to the Oxbridge name. In turn, if one takes the view that the Oxbridge admissions process is discriminatory, this allows those people in the second camp to argue that the Bar is discriminatory against people of colour.

However, one cannot make that argument when citing BPTC figures because (i) the BPTC is (virtually) open to everyone, with scandalously low entry criteria and (ii) as you say, many pupillage committees give no weight to BPTC grade whatsoever. In other words, we have a variable with strong predictive value which simply cannot be explained in terms of systematic privilege.

If one actually looks at the data, the evidence is overwhelming.



If you are so confident in the data and sincerely believe there’s no racism or prejudice towards Black applicants, I don’t understand why you won’t put your real name and chambers to your conclusions on Black BPTC students within a public blog post or to Counsel magazine.

Go on. Get the word out and silence the whiners once and for all.

I’m sure the Twitter crowd will thank you for it.


Because my argument relies on evidence, not authority.

Bored of 'diversity' whinges

Bumblebee’s comments, both in 2017 and just above, stand in their own right. I would just answer one question. Both in response to Bumblebee, and to ‘Chancery barrister on pupillage committee’, someone has, in purported ignorance, asked, “I don’t understand why you won’t put your real name and chambers to your conclusions on Black BPTC students”.

The answer, as they almost certainly know, is that anyone transgressing from the politically-correct new orthodoxy (that black failure is down to discrimination not underperformance/anti-education culture) would have their lives destroyed by foaming-at-the-mouth social justice warriors.

The US, as in many areas, sets the tone for the UK. Many minorities perform superbly: Asians, in particular. In response, universities have introduced positive discrimination to favour under-performing blacks, and left-wing organisations have sought to downplay the role of culture in explaining black underperformance. Certain things are ‘not allowed to be said’: (a) a black culture of educational underperformance, and idolisation of violence; (b) poor discipline by black parents; and (c) irresponsible breeding by black men who won’t marry their partners, and black women who sleep around before marriage. Children without fathers do badly. (In the US, much of this was covered in the 1965 Moynihan report:

Last week’s Financial Times ‘Alphachat’ podcast covered the issues of left-wingers shutting down debate by harassing people out of the public sphere. This 20-minute podcast is well worth listening to, particularly the last five minutes, when these issues are focused on:


FT Alphachat: Angela Nagle on the online culture wars. Angela Nagle, author of Kill All Normies: Online Culture Wars from 4chan and Tumblr to Trump and the Alt-Right, talks to FT Alphaville’s Jemima Kelly about the online culture wars and the rise of the alt-right.


Benny Morris

Re “Bored of ‘diversity’ whinges” at 11:48, I’m not sure that that analysis really follows from the (mainly factual) points made by Bumblebee.

First of all, attempting to actually explain the discrepancy in ‘racial’ terms falls into the same fallacy discussed, of conflating correlation with causation. You are assuming the racial background of those candidates has a causative relevance. Secondly, the Moynihan report was discussing African-American families in the United States. What does that have to do with the people categorised as black BPTC students, who will be either immigrants from the Caribbean/Africa in the UK to study, or Brits of similar extraction? These are different people. I for one am unclear as to what your comments about ‘black culture’ and ‘blacks’ are based on, and who exactly they are supposed to relate to. Simply in presentational terms, it is worth exercising some caution before attributing profoundly negative behavioural traits to an entire group of people based on the colour of their skin.

Not surprised

@ Benny Morris, I couldn’t respond to your message but I agree with your points. The previous poster took comments from a US focused reports and applied them to the UK because it suits his racist agenda. Irresponsible breeding by black men? Really? In 2019 you are referring to such terms. What is the rate of marriage in the white community? In the UK can you compare Nigerian, Ghanaian, Jamaican, Guyanese, Trini, Somalian, Kenyan families? Do you have that breakdown, or do you want to lump all those groups together into black? The reason you are shut down is because you are irresponsible in your use of data.

Just trying to follow up on the stats

Link to the stats please…please note ‘my biased imagination’ is not a recognised research body


Link the stats

Link to the actual reports from 2011-2018/2019 is possible.

I am interested in reading all of it not the link to Legal Cheek’s article



I’m Asian and went to Oxbridge. I didn’t feel there was any hostility towards minorities until I dated a good-looking, very sporty White guy.

I got bitchy Facebook messages from other women and people saying “Why would he date someone who looks like a witch?” as we walked passed.

I still don’t believe mixed race relationships are fully accepted in the UK



I’m Asian, went to Cambridge and date a white girl I met there. Nobody has raised an eyebrow.

Sorry to hear about your experience, but people can be horrifically bitchy towards individuals of any race and gender, especially when it comes to relationships. My sister had similar comments passed about her when she dated a (fairly good-looking) Asian guy; the only difference was that it was by other Asian girls at the mostly-BME school in London we attended.



I’m sure you enjoyed Oxbridge, regardless of what was said when you walked PAST*…



Fuck you, can’t people make mistakes?



East Asian or South Asian?



If you’re referring to Jul 2 2019 10:32am, I’m South Asian (Indian)



Ore Ogunbiyi went to a school that costs £40,000 per year. She also did a masters course that cost $60,000 in the US.



Fair play to her.


BAME in the Square Mile

I was going to say the same thing to be honest. I feel like at Uni there is a perception that all black people have the same experience. But some of us had to struggle on our own to get there, whilst others got the fast track via an expensive school. Now they are writing a book together, the assumption will be that both the girls have the same background and the same experiences, which is far from true. On campus this perception continues, and there is the assumption that we all buy into the same things. There are a lot of very privileged Africans getting top jobs in the square mile (as well as Hong Kong/Arab/European even Eurasian youngsters these days) who have had a classic British public school education, but they want to project an image of being part of the under represented, when they are typical of the establishment. And I would personally sympathise with a working class white guy from the north who struggles to get in, and then is told he enjoys privilege.

The other thing I have to say, the background of Chelsea shows that kids from poor schools can do exceptionally well when given opportunities. Her GCSEs on her LinkedIn are lower than the average at Russell Group Universities, yet she aced her A-levels and sailed a first class at Cambridge in history. It shows that contextual recruitment can work, and that students of all colours who go to poor performing state schools and do well are very strong and should be given opportunities.


Unapologetic Elitist

Sorry, an Oxbridge degree is not an ‘opportunity’ or something. People like Chelsea basically see it as some sort of social mobility booster rocket enabling them to go from a deprived background to a shiny city job.

Now aside from the very questionable ethics of social mobility itself (which imo is just a way of moving from dismissing vast swathes of people based on wealth to dismissing vast swathes of people based on ‘intelligence’) this completely misunderstands what Oxbridge is or why it should admit people.

It does not exist to do favours to the poor of any colour in order to enhance their CV; it exists purely to be a site of academic excellence and to produce a) high-quality research in various subjects and b) a pipeline of future researchers who will be the best in the world. That is the sole factor that should motivate admissions, and therefore there should be no reason why a white man from Eton and a black girl from the East End should be treated differently.



Oxbridge is the biggest social mobility rocket any Brit can ever get.


BAME in the Square Mile

Sorry I don’t really understand the nonsense you wrote. She got a first, which means that she is better than most of her peers there. If she decided to go into research or academia then she would be far better placed than most to contribute to Cambridge’s rich history of top class scholarship. Her entry was not because she was favoured, it was because they looked at the context of her school attainment and identified that she is one smart cookie from the assessments she had to do to get in. Clearly they got it right. This is really the wrong example to spout your rubbish on.



Mate, ignore the dickheads. Every single word you wrote is true. You know it, I know it. And half the people giving it thumbs down know it.



Ore is still black so she is still underrepresented, regardless of her family’s wealth.



That’s just the fees. To live and study in New York you’re talking $100k at least.



She got a scholarship for her master’s.



The scholarship covered everything? Very unlikely. Her background is classic Lagos Princess, but she did well to go to Cambridge and not Warwick/Reading.



Class and money is an infinitely greater barrier to educational achievement than race or ethnicity. A white working class person from a single parent family will have a much tougher journey in life than a middle class person from the suburbs. The idea of a scholarship awarded to a certain race is ludicrous.



But you ignore the fact race and class are inexorably linked. One race proportionally predominates the under class due to systemic historical injustices that continue to this day. The British government has no real plan for the economic uplift of the Caribbean migrant communities that came here to rebuild following WW2. The racism and hostility they faced up to today with Windrush has played an incredible role in economically excluding them and their children. These non-white communities get less government attention (remember Grenfell?), their inhabitants are seen as expendable, and have less social capital than the white counter parts leading to less opportunities for their kids and alas the racial attainment gap.


Random passer-by

They do. It’s just people focus on schemes for black people more due to perceived perceptions of achievement etc. and it makes many people feel better about themselves. But there are many schemes available to working class white boys.



Rare operate the Discuss programme for low socioeconomic background students (regardless of race) and Linklaters have a scholarship focused on economic hardship. These comments are just inaccurate extremes



Those in power focus intently on race and gender, and pretend that race is largely co-extensive with class, SPECIFICALLY IN ORDER TO KEEP THE LOWER CLASSES DOWN and protect their own position.

These people do not actually care about gender and skin colour. So they bestow membership of the elite to ladies and bames with great fanfare – as long as they play the game, copy the right habits, adopt the correct attitudes, etc.

What you will not find is any ACTUAL PLEBS, black or white, getting ANYWHERE NEAR the top of anything.

SJW’s have been fooled into thinking they’re doing God’s work. They are not. They are fighting on behalf of the oppressors.



There are no barriers, except your own stupidity. This leftist idea is being way overblown.



Why has this become an issue all of a sudden? There are no such racial barriers in the City or in our educational system in this day an age. I seriously doubt that a hiring manager or an academic managing university student applications would see a name of African or Asian decent and straight away dismiss the application.

The only handicap that exists for people of a minority background are other people saying that this issue still exists, thus resulting in people in (naively) deciding to not bother applying.

This all falls back onto the daft left wing virtue signaling fad that is infesting the majority of the Western World at the moment. I suppose it goes hand in hand with the ‘colonial guilt’ that seems to be in fashion at the moment. SAD!

We are privileged enough to live in a society that boats a meritocratic and free economic market. If you want something and if you show true grit, it is yours for the taking.



I laughed so hard I projectile shat when I read this comment



The fact you don’t think something is a problem doesn’t mean it is a problem.



Remember lads, equality now means taking X group and putting it at the top of the pile.



Congrats on winning the straw man trophy. Your statement is 100% true considering 100% of City partnership is BME



I’m my chambers equality and diversity officer. I literally don’t give a single fuck about any of this bame diversity bollocks – because it’s all a load of silly bollocks. I’m just doing it to put on my silk application. Not even joking.



That is the case at charities. Legal tribunal charities don’t hire lawyers, they hire staff with poor academics or criminal records who would struggle to find a job anywhere else.

Ever wondered why the same surly staff are still there over so many years?



Ha. This is not even satire. I know this to be true as the same in my chambers too



Silly comment. What about all of the privileged home county fairies who get internships from family members like Uncle Buckstein, Partner at “(insert City firm here)”? It does happen and everyone knows it.

Private school types always talk about how everyone has an ‘equal opportunity to succeed’. Okay mate.



Wimmin can’t be lawyers, gawd.



Down and Out in Paris and London, I meant.

He lived as a miner for The Road to Wigan Pier.

Funnily enough, he left Eton to work in the Police in Burma as a regular PC, he did not go to Cambridge or the City.

His view of life changed when he escorted a prisoner to the gallows and the terror of the empire and inequality dawned on him as the doomed , bare footed prisoner athletically avoided all the puddles on the way, so that he didnt get wet feet. This was a thinking man who was alert and alive who was being processed by the system, George realised in a flash.

The human race, does anyone remember that classification before bame became the paradigm ?


Big Dolla

De Montford?



Good man ! I hope you and your forensic skills will not be my undoing when Saul Alinsky, Leon Trotsky and he who cannot be named, leap from their graves shouting “this is the society we wanted ! ….” as google rolls out its Chinese merit programme in Europe amidst skirmishes of civil war ” but who is this anonymous writer who has our number ? Can anyone identify him, for the mob to dismember ?”

A hand is raised at the chancery bar, it is the hand of Big Dolla. “He once broke cover as De Montford. If I am freed from my now non existant practice in chambers, I will seek him out in the courts, recognise his manner of speaking, befriend him and then betray him to the Party so that the bold arrow that he has drawn to the think tanks can be deleted from public consciousness forever…”

And then, unless the son of Frederick Christ Trump has finally understood the wisdom of the religion of the desert, such that he has made contingency plans to save its adherents, I shall be doomed. I shall lament my reflex towards honesty and friendship which thrice led me to drop my guard and say…Hello Big Dolla, yes it is me. Are you well , comrade ?


Big Dolla

What poetry.

I would never betray you De Montford. I’m you’re biggest fan.



Lol, stand by for more variations on the same theme !


Comments are closed.

Related Stories