Common Law Vs. Civil Law

Common law spread Common law is law that is influenced by case law. This means that in court cases the outcome of one case will set a precedent for the next potential outcome of the next case. This gives judges a high amount of involvement in developing law. In common law only individuals who have successfully graduated with a law degree and passed the appropriate exam can give legal advice. This includes the drafting and creating of all kinds of legal documents.

In common law lawyers play a central role in court in regards to the examination of witnesses, presenting evidence before the judge and jury and delivering statements. Once the defending lawyer has given their closing statement the judge then weighs up the evidence and delivers a verdict. With common law the judge has room to create an outcome that they see most fits the crime committed.

Civil law was established in Europe during the Middle Ages and spread through the world via the Spanish and Portuguese. Civil law was created by codes and statutes that aim to provide a legal solution to all crimes. This means that judges have little room to give their own judgments like in common law. In civil law judges take the outcome of prior cases into little consideration when deciding the outcome of a case. In countries where civil law is practiced, lawyers do not have to be used for drafting legal documents. There are other middlemen who do not have to have a law degree that provide will and contract assistance to people.

In civil law judges take a lead role in the prosecution of accused people. The judges are more investigators and bring charges to accused people and examine witnesses themselves to establish facts during court cases. Lawyers in civil law represent their clients during civil cases. Yet unlike common law lawyers play a less central role in defending their clients in the courtroom.



How Barristers Defend In Court

Basically, everyone has the right to a just and proper defence, and it is the duty of the barrister to ensure this happens. People can be convicted based on questionable evidence, as explored in this article about Michael Wolkind QC: telegraph.co.uk/news/science/9115916/The-case-against-DNA.html

If it seems perfectly clear that there is no way for a client to walk away scot free, a barrister tries to go about things in a different manner. At this point, they review all of the relevant case law, the details of the particular situation and try their best to make sure their client gets the lowest amount of time possible. Perhaps the client broke the law while under the influence of drugs and they are clean and sober now, or they have stopped living a life of vagrancy and they're now more productive.

It is not very common for defendants to admit guilt to the people defending them, which makes it easier to assist someone without worrying about crossing any ethical lines. With that being said, if a barrister is sure that a client has done all of the acts they are being charged with, they have to go about their defence using a different strategy. Basically, they focus on the prosecution proving the case at hand. This means that they leave it up to the other side to show that the client is guilty of the crimes that they are being accused of.

The point is that barristers are not terrible people who want to help guilty parties go free. It is not their responsibility to judge how the law works or the moral fiber of the people they are hired to defend. What they do is simple: they use the skills and knowledge they have to make sure their clients get a fair outcome.



Selecting The Best Barrister For Appeals

Meeting with a barrister for appeals you will be able to learn:

- Whether or not you actually have grounds for the appeal

- Beneficial advice on any points of law, new grounds or evidence that may not have been available when the trial originally started

- Information on a second opinion if you were not satisfied with the advice and/or representation that your other barrister or solicitor provided

- Assistance if you feel as though you were not represented fairly at your trial and you ended up with a conviction in either Crown Court or Magistrate's Court.

The route to an appeal will always depend on whether or not the trail went through Crown Court or Magistrate's Court. If the conviction and sentence went through Magistrate's Court, you will have an automatic right for an appeal as long as it falls within the time limits. Appeals will usually be made to the Crown Court and you do have the right to have a qualified barrister for appealing your case.



Hiring Criminal Barristers: How To Make The Best Decisions For Your Case

The Difference Between Criminal Barristers And Solicitors

Criminal barristers are more than suitable for any type of legal situation you require help with, including advice and document preparations and presentations to the court. A barrister can negotiate on your behalf and make appearances for you; however, if you are in need of legal services through the public access system, meaning your financial situation is such that you can't afford attorney's fees, you may not be able to work with a barrister. Speak with a solicitor first; they will refer you to a barrister if that's the most appropriate course of action.

The law is too complicated to take chances with the decisions you make that can affect you for the rest of your life. Most especially with criminal matters, know who you need to speak with initially and who you need to hire to see you through to the end of the proceedings, which should work out in your favor, if you have the right representation on your side.