Jump to content

Help to pay 83-year-old Kenneth Hugill's legal fees


Oxfordshooter
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

After that post I believe you may find yourself in a minority. From the tone of your post I can also ascertain that that will not bother you one jot.

 

There was a lad on another forum with exactly the same name and from exactly the same place and he has a remarkably same style to that lad who i think was banned.

Coincidence probably,lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest stevo

This thread is not about arguing the merits of the prosecution/defence again, we have had a thread for that, , its a request to help with the chaps legal expenses.

Pretty simple really, you give, or you don't.

Thank you !

 

The main reason I made comment was for no other reason then the man stood up for his rights in my opinion. The powers that be done there best to bring him down.but he battled on for what he believed I am convinced the man was terrified and did what ANY of us would have done in his situation. Ok if we didn't have a shotgun I wage good money you would have grabbed the nearest thing Be it baseball bat or what ever. But you would have not gone out there unarmed. You would have had some kind of protection. I personally would have just set the dogs on them and called the police. However we don't know what we would do until faced with that situation. Either way I belive the man should be given some slack for having the balls to defend himself and his wife. And then seeing it right the way the very end to prove his innocence !

 

Fair play I say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where on our SGC's does it say they are issued for self protection? Or for the prevention of fuel theft as Farmer Palmer claimed.....

He should have locked all his doors and called 999.

And no doubt waited 2 or more hours for the police to arrive!!! Plonker

I have made a small contribution - I hope all on here do likewise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is not about arguing the merits of the prosecution/defence again, we have had a thread for that, , its a request to help with the chaps legal expenses.

Pretty simple really, you give, or you don't.

 

As above - this thread is to raise awareness of the justgiving fund. Further derailing posts will be removed from here on in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The criteria for legal aid is very tight for "normal" people.

I do know some years ago an employee of mine applied and was refused mainly because he had a bank account and thereby access to a bank loan.

Its encouraging to see that the fund has reached 40% of the total required, I do hope that more contribute as a sign of solidarity with the old chap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

For Crown court Defence cost orders to extend to a firm that doesn’t have a contract with the Legal Aid Agency you must first have applied for legal aid and be found ineligible. Even if he had done that, the legal aid would only cover specific legal aid rates which are far below what a good legal firm and barrister would charge leaving a massive short fall which could be a £30 k shortfall.

 

The reason why he didn’t apply for legal aid in the first place is probably the exact same reason I wouldn’t for a case like this. If you are successful and get legal aid you are stuck with that firm who has a contract with the legal aid agency not necessarily the best firm for the job. To go with someone else you have to refuse legal aid which means you cannot claim afterwards.

 

You get what you pay for, legal aid gets you graduates, inexperienced advocates who can only charge a fraction for their time compared to firms and people who are not under a legal aid contract.

 

As I said earlier all right for shoplifting but I wouldn’t want to use them for this case if you want a chance to get off, you get what you pay for.

 

For crown court if he had a £37,500 disposable income then you apply safe in the knowledge you get automatically refused, then you can use whatever firm you want and get a contribution at the end.

 

Below that threshold you will get stuck with a firm or advocate who has a contract with the Legal Aid Agency which lowers the quality of legal representation due to financial restraint.

Edited by timps
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...