News2 mins ago
Solicitor = Selfish & Unfeeling ?
https:/
[Synopsis: Solicitor refuses to unlock Ian Brady's briefcases]
Why not release the papers - they might just have a clue to the lad's burial place. And the owner is dead, so who is he "protecting" ?
Self-important solicitor ought to be defrocked by his peers (or whatever they do) but no doubt they will close ranks as usual.
[Synopsis: Solicitor refuses to unlock Ian Brady's briefcases]
Why not release the papers - they might just have a clue to the lad's burial place. And the owner is dead, so who is he "protecting" ?
Self-important solicitor ought to be defrocked by his peers (or whatever they do) but no doubt they will close ranks as usual.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Canary42. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Naomi - // andy-hughes, courtesy costs nothing and, as far as I'm aware, isn't illegal. //
You are absolutely right, of course.
Which simply increases my view, that the solicitor is remaining silent either due to legal restraints, or at the request of his clients, and that is correct behaviour however much we, or indeed he, may not like it.
This man, by definition, is not stupid, so it must have occured to him that if it is in his power to answer some simple questions, and keep the approbation of high-minded strangers off him, then that would be the simple thing to do.
The fact that he has failed thus far to do so inplies to me that he is constrained by either the law, or his client, and I repeat, that is the correct action for him to take.
He must live with the harsh judgement of internet deciders who wouldn't know him if they fell over him, but still feel they have to condemn him for what they perceive to be his bad behaviour, however wide of the mark they may be.
You are absolutely right, of course.
Which simply increases my view, that the solicitor is remaining silent either due to legal restraints, or at the request of his clients, and that is correct behaviour however much we, or indeed he, may not like it.
This man, by definition, is not stupid, so it must have occured to him that if it is in his power to answer some simple questions, and keep the approbation of high-minded strangers off him, then that would be the simple thing to do.
The fact that he has failed thus far to do so inplies to me that he is constrained by either the law, or his client, and I repeat, that is the correct action for him to take.
He must live with the harsh judgement of internet deciders who wouldn't know him if they fell over him, but still feel they have to condemn him for what they perceive to be his bad behaviour, however wide of the mark they may be.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.