Bank Holiday round-up
The top legal affairs news stories from the long weekend
Russian litigants left struggling to find lawyers for court actions [Financial Times]
Charlotte Proudman: The Depp-Heard verdict is a gag order for women [Washington Post]
Accountants could seize legal market under audit plans [The Times] (£)
Boris Johnson prepares law to override Northern Ireland Protocol [The Telegraph]
Brexit plot for EU laws bonfire torn apart with warning UK goods ‘unsellable in Europe’ [Express]
Metro Bank faces legal battle over coin-counting software [City A.M.]
Hands off our park: Shrewsbury takes its council to the supreme court [The Guardian]
Mums demand change to stillbirth law saying ‘we just want our babies recognised’ [Mirror]
Woman sparks debate by giving herself a tattoo of Johnny Depp’s lawyer Camille Vasquez [Independent]
Suspected shooter who killed retired Wisconsin judge in ‘targeted’ attack identified [The Guardian]
“If we are being honest, a lot of factors for securing a TC after your vac scheme is due to luck and things beyond your control. You can be the ‘best vac schemer’ and do everything right and you still might not get it…” [Legal Cheek comments]
Virtual student event THIS WEEK: Secrets to Success South West — with Osborne Clarke, RPC, TLT and ULaw [Apply Now]
3 Comments
Anonymous
The US process in the Depp-Heard case was much fairer than the English one, which was embarrassing. Is Proudman saying she believes Heard despite the verdict?
AnonPILawyer
Proudman doesn’t believe in facts… she told Nick Wallis (journalist) in a video interview).
One of those facts was that Amber Heard is a liar. She lied about donating her entire divorce settlement, she lied about tipping of TMZ about the TRO court attendance, she tried to pass off the same photograph (one altered) as the two separate photographs even though the metadata was the same…. the list goes on.
Johnny Depp may have abused her… if he did, then she was hoist by her own petard by severely exaggerating and/or lying. All Proudman needed to do is distinguish this from a victim with no photographs or medical records but was consistent and genuine in their evidence. She couldn’t do this because she hung her hat on Amber.
Proudman has tunnel vision when it comes to anything. The irony for me is that Proudman places so much weight on the HC decision of Nicol J, but is happy to disregard other HC decisions when they don’t suit her agenda.
As for US trial being fairer? Well I think the rules of evidence appear to be vastly different but one thing is for sure, Amber was only a witness and Depp failed to get disclosure from Heard under CPR 31.17. It was very much an unfair battle in E&W.
Anonymous
I think the main difference in the US was the availability of a jury.
Comments are closed.