They may share the same initials but that’s where the similarities end, according to Addleshaw Goddard and Anthony Gold Solicitors

Logos are vitally important to law firms — from brand recognition to corporate identity, instantly recognisable symbols are powerful marketing tools. So two firms using a very similar image would be particularly awkward.

City giants Addleshaw Goddard and London Bridge-based firm Anthony Gold Solicitors appear to have done just that. Sharing the same initials, they have opted for similarly styled logos, using comparable fonts and positioning. The key question is — who had it first?

An Addleshaw spokesman told Legal Cheek that its logo has been in circulation internally since 2009, was trademarked in 2010 and has even been carved into stone at the firm’s City of London office.

However, it appears that the logo only went truly public after the firm’s website redesign was launched last week.

The similarity of the Addleshaw logo to that of Anthony Gold Solicitors was quickly spotted by a keen-eyed tweeter, who raised the point with Legal Cheek.

Anthony Gold — which also has offices in Streatham and the Elephant and Castle — says that its logo came into being in 2013 following an 18 month internal consultation, with the firm stating:

“Our brand was first released in December 2013 when we launched our new website. It was launched after an 18 month period of consultation and development with the whole firm.”

This suggests that Addleshaw’s logo pre-dates Anthony Gold’s, even if Anthony Gold’s reached the public domain first.

Both firms played down the similarities — with Gemma Blencowe, head of communications at Anthony Gold, telling Legal Cheek:

“It’s interesting that each design uses the ‘A’ and the ‘G’ from the company name in the symbol for each. They are similar in concept but work and are applied completely differently. I love the Anthony Gold one — naturally!”

A spokesperson for Addleshaw Goddard commented:

“We’ve had the logotype in limited use for several years and have now fully rolled-it out. The initials of both firms are the same but in our view the similarity ends there and readers can clearly decide for themselves.”

Decide away …

The post Which law firm trademarked its logo first? appeared first on Legal Cheek.

One wanted to be a Formula One driver, one wanted to be a doctor, another wanted to take over the world. They all ended up as lawyers

Law firms seem hell-bent on embarrassing their solicitors and staff in ill-advised bids to add a dollop of the human factor to their businesses.

The latest in the spotlight is Cardiff-based Capital Law, which has launched its own version of social media trend #ThrowbackThursday by cajoling several of its team to post childhood photographs of themselves on the firm’s website.

Wince-worthy, indeed; and one wonders just how helpful the firm’s clients find a picture of an employment law partner aged around six standing next to what appears to be one of Jackie Stewart’s cast-off racing cars.

But that’s exactly what poor Sarah Forster has been asked to do. Along with posting anodyne comments about how her ambition in 1974 was to become a Formula One driver, while now she has matured to the stage where her “likes” are “old Volvos” and “cars that don’t go over 40mph”.

If nothing else, Capital Law has provided a salutary illustration of how so many in life have seen their youthful bubbles burst and their ambitions recalibrated.

Rather predictably, at least one trainee has been roped into this marketing wheeze. Nick Lewis is pictured as a cheeky toddler with what appears to be a birthday cake in 1994. Then, he detested vegetables and bedtime. Some 20 years on, he’s rather keen on bedtime. Thankfully, no more is said on that subject.

Commercial partner Duncan Macintosh candidly admits that he hated being a law student, a comment that is illustrated by him bunking off to Lake Washington on the west coast of America in a bid to avoid exams.

To be fair, managing partner Chris Nott has led from the front in this charge over the top into law firm marketing no-man’s land.

Nott is pictured in 1962 standing before an image of a manor house, with his childhood ambition listed as a desire to be “lord of the manor”. Today, in a stroke of comic genius, Nott lists his ambition as wanting to be “lord of a bigger manor”.

The firm’s website blurb boasts:

“For our clients, the added value comes through our attitude.”

Worth remembering, then, that the attitude at the top is that they want a bigger house.

You can find the full collection here.

The post Cardiff solicitors seek to wow clients with ‘Throwback Thursday’ childhood recollections appeared first on Legal Cheek.

They are professionally meaningless, expensive and at times messy — but should the awards ceremonies be pensioned off?

When it comes to legal profession award ceremonies, Woody Allen’s remark in his classic 1977 film, Annie Hall, unavoidably leaps to mind.

“Awards!” he wails, as ex-girlfriend Annie screeches off in a sports car to catch her latest squeeze at the Grammys. “They do nothing but give out awards! I can’t believe it. Greatest fascist dictator — Adolf Hitler!”

One can only speculate at what the great bespectacled director would make of the legal profession and its addiction to handing out gongs to its own members.

This morning The Lawyer magazine — arguably the outfit initially responsible for the current glut of awards — trumpeted the results of its “European Awards”, having spent the last week appealing for more nominations for its headline “Lawyer Awards” gig. In addition to its blue riband event, the title also hosts a management awards.

Meanwhile, two days ago, the Legal Aid Practitioners Group and the Bar Council announced that nominations for the LALYs had opened. For the uninitiated, the LALYs are the “Legal Aid Lawyer of the Year Awards”. The name is slightly misleading, as not just one lucky lawyer will pick up a trinket — there are no fewer than a dozen categories, almost suggesting that there’s life in the legal aid sector after all.

The LALYs are only the most recent legal profession award ceremony to tout for nominations. These days, there are almost more award ceremonies for lawyers than there are napkin rings in the Slaughter and May partners’ dining room.

The Lawyer‘s rival Legal Week is by no means outdone, stumping up with three back slapping events: the “British Legal Awards”, the “Legal Innovation Awards”, and the “African Legal Awards”.

Also piling in with at least one ceremony each are Legal Business magazine, the Chambers & Partners directory, the International Financial Law Review, LexisNexis Butterworths with its “Halsbury Legal Awards”, and the “Modern Law Awards” — organised by software manufactures Eclipse.

Even the Law Society of England and Wales has lumbered onto the bandwagon with its “Excellence Awards”, the highlight of which last year was the organisers giving their own chief executive a lifetime achievement gong.

Indeed, that prize for Des Hudson suggests that legal profession award ceremonies are finally on the brink of coming full circle and eating themselves.

Does anyone take the awards seriously? Should lawyers revolt and say enough is enough — we don’t need your garish glass trophies — and what’s more, we want to stop being ripped off for dinner?

Yes … and no.

The structure of more or less all these ceremonies — and the earlier list is by no means exhaustive — is formulaic (with the possible exception of the LALYs).

The organisers construct as many categories as they can imagine that will tease the egos of as many wealthy global law firms as possible.

Having lured say 10 nominations for each category, they plonk all on a short list and hit them with invitations to a gala ceremony — that’s a table of 10 for up to £5,600 (if you don’t want to be near the lavatories — oh, and the fee is exclusive of VAT). Yes, that’s £560 per head for rubber chicken and as many bread rolls as you can throw at the senior partner.

The evening itself will normally be headlined by something approaching a B-list comedian (or in the case of the ever-so-serious Law Society, a BBC newsreader). That poor sod will fight a losing battle to be heard beyond the introduction, dole out the awards as sharpish as humanly possible, grin through gritted teeth for photographs with the winners, and dash for the door as soon as the lights go up, stopping only to collect a large cheque.

The real point of the awards has nothing to do with which City firm wins the category of “Best project finance deal completed while team was standing on heads in a country with a dodgy human rights record”. Even five minutes after the trophy has been passed to a slightly sozzled head of department no-one will remember.

What the awards do is provide an opportunity for law firms and in-house legal departments to let a few chosen souls — often including non-qualified staff — off the lead for an evening. They get howlingly pissed, dance like lunatics, try to snog someone they shouldn’t — and its all on the firm’s shilling.

Legal awards are clearly professionally meaningless, no matter how many City law firms fill glass cabinets with ever-more tasteless trophies — not least because just about every City law firm has got a cabinet full of the damn things.

But if a couple of big nights out each year buck up the spirits of those who otherwise toil for long hours in fairly uninspired and soul destroying occupations — then the awards ceremonies are providing a something of a social service.

And the firm’s are by no means unsophisticated or naïve participants; if they want to spend the best part of 600 knicker per person for an inferior dinner out — and in doing so, prop up the finances of legal publishers — then why shouldn’t they?

Follow @JudgeJohnHack

PREVIOUSLY ON THE JUDGE RULES:

The Judge Rules: Training contracts and pupillages should be scrapped [Legal Cheek]

The Judge rules: The magic circle is dead! Er … no it’s not [Legal Cheek]

The post The Judge rules: Legal profession awards — don’t they make you sick?!!! appeared first on Legal Cheek.

University applies for alternative business structure licence, which would boost its student-run pro bono advice centre

The third largest law school in the UK is bidding to become an alternative business structure (ABS) law firm, in a groundbreaking move to that would create the first “teaching law firm”.

Nottingham Law School — part of Nottingham Trent University — issued a statement earlier this morning saying it has applied to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) for the enhanced status.

ABSs — which were first granted three years ago under the Legal Services Act 2007 — allow non-lawyers to own and operate law firms.

According to the law school, the advice centre is set to handle more than 180 pro bono cases for the 2014-15 academic year. It covers various areas of the law, including employment, housing, and business and intellectual property law.

The centre deals not only with social welfare casework, but also runs the Miscarriage of Justice Project, assists local community projects, as well as public legal education schemes and overseas placements.

The law school statement said an ABS licence would “give the Centre flexibility in its future development”. It added that ABS status would put Nottingham Law School “in a unique position in the university sector, and enable its students to participate in the work of a teaching law firm”.

The law school’s associate dean, Jenny Holloway, commented on the move:

“The application for ABS status demonstrates the law school’s commitment to continued innovation which enhances our students learning experience, and shows Nottingham Trent University’s commitment in supporting access to justice in its civic and community role.”

And law school director Nick Johnson added that the enhanced status would allow “students at all levels of the law school … to gain experience of professional practice in the same way that medical students currently do at teaching hospitals.”

He added that, if successful, the bid to become an ABS would see work in a fully regulated law firm become a standard part of Nottingham students’ education.

The post Nottingham Law School in bid to become first ever ‘teaching law firm’ appeared first on Legal Cheek.

City University law student and local council candidate triggers defence of Chris Grayling in MP’s constituency newspaper

An anonymous newspaper letter in support of legal profession bête noir Chris Grayling has praised the justice secretary for cracking down on legal aid lawyers who “spiel out rhetoric and stretch a case as long as possible”.

The tirade came in the form of a letter to the editor at the Epsom Guardian in Surrey, the local paper in Grayling’s parliamentary constituency.

It was a riposte to an earlier published letter from wannabe barrister and local council candidate Alex Cisneros. The part-time Bar Professional Training Course student at London’s City University is bidding for seat on the Epsom and Ewell Borough Council, which will be contested on general election polling day, 7 May.

Last month, Cisneros wrote to the newspaper following criticism of Grayling in the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee.

“Mr Grayling is the first non-lawyer in 440 years to be in charge of our courts and legal system,” he wrote. “Since getting the job as Justice Minister [sic], he has cut legal aid to the bone, caused barristers across the country to strike for the first time ever and required dozens of essential law centres to close. To find out now that these cuts were pushed through without proper scrutiny, or even any evidence in some circumstances, is disgusting.”

But at least one local constituent is perfectly happy with Grayling’s performance. However, the fact that the letter is signed off with “name and address supplied” has led to a round of speculation that the correspondent must be one of the MP’s mates from the Dog and Duck in Epsom high street.

Indeed, the correspondent’s syntax suggests that the letter was penned after a rather long session in the public house.

“Mr Cisneros states that Mr Grayling is the first non-lawyer to be in charge of our courts,” writes anonymous. “At least he would not have been involved in the old boy network and would be able to see the whole law situation without being tainted by the system which has been in place forever.

“We are fortunate to have an honest and hardworking MP who has done so much for his constituents.”

PREVIOUSLY:

BPTC student stands for local council in Grayling’s constituency [Legal Cheek]

The post Wannabe barrister sparks newspaper letter row over Justice Secretary’s record appeared first on Legal Cheek.

Self-confessed Disney addict spices up a life of personal injury files with a spot of make-believe for children’s parties

A trainee solicitor at a Manchester personal injury law firm is leading a double life as a character from Disney blockbuster film “Frozen”.

Lucy Broughton — who is about to start her second year as a trainee at Graham Coffey & Co — spends weekends performing before hordes of screaming rug-rats as Elsa the ice princess.

The former Leeds University graduate — who did the Legal Practice Course at the now defunct York branch of the University of Law — told the Daily Mirror that she was “living the dream” in her moonlighting role, as she is a self-confessed Disney addict.

“A friend commented I look a bit like Elsa,” she explained to the newspaper, “and I wondered if there was something I could do with it. I realised I wanted to carry on being a lawyer. I had trained for years and spent a lot of money. But I also wanted to be Elsa.”

Broughton signed on with children’s party organisers Tinkerbella, where she was “given training to become a princess”. The agency gives law firms a run for their money in the billing department, charging £100 for half an hour of mock-Disney entertainment.

On the Tinkerbella website, Broughton — who in 2011 did a one-month summer placement at City firm Herbert Smith Freehills — says that while she is a “a trainee solicitor during the week, I adore being able to do something completely different at the weekends, putting on sparkly dresses and surprising little princesses and princes on their birthday!”

She relates that she is “a trained ballet dancer, aerial hoop artist and gymnast — a performer from being very small! (or show off as my mum would say)”. She also claims to be a three-time European cheerleading champion.

According to Broughton, “Disneyland is my favourite place on earth,” which must come as a something of a shock to Graham Coffey managing partner Stuart Snape, who had undoubtedly assumed that her favourite place would be tied to a desk at the law firm.

Broughton continues:

“Frozen is currently my favourite film! I am very proud of my unrivalled Disney general knowledge, which I sometimes get to showcase at pub quizzes.”

Her training supervisor will be interested in another line from Broughton’s Tinkerbella profile, in which she confesses:

“At university I would sneak out of my law lectures to star in all of my film maker friend’s projects!”

Partners at her law firm will also note that if Broughton isn’t careful she could easily shift from trainee to client status. Earlier this year, she posted a YouTube video of her routine on an aerial hoop.

Will Broughton’s extra-curricular activities stand her in good stead when it comes to qualification time and possible retention at the firm? She’ll be hoping the managing partner Snape has a soft spot for ice princesses.

PREVIOUSLY:

This claim by a self-published author alleging that Frozen stole her life story is very ambitious indeed [Legal Cheek]

The post Manchester trainee solicitor moonlights as ‘Frozen’ ice princess appeared first on Legal Cheek.

This time last year the former student at UK’s third highest-ranked law school was apparently marshalling at the Old Bailey — where he was sentenced today

A law student who dropped out of Queen Mary University of London has been jailed for life after bludgeoning a stranger to death while high on designer drugs.

Malachi Lindo, who apparently did a stint of marshalling at the Old Bailey last year, was today sentenced to a minimum of 14 years in prison for the murder of passer-by Philip Steels.

Lindo — high on, amongst other things, cannabis, cocaine, MDMA and Ethylone at the time — repeatedly struck Steels’ head with a brick in the early hours of Thursday 4 September last year.

The ex-wannabe lawyer, now 27, suffered from depression, failing to complete his law degree at Queen Mary before opting to work at a Tesco store and sell drugs to make ends meet.

However, it seems that Lindo continued to harbour ambitions of a legal career, with the Mail Online reporting that he had marshalled for a judge at the Old Bailey — the same court where he was sentenced today — as recently as last year.

This work experience would have taken place well after Lindo quit Queen Mary, with a spokesperson for the University of London college — ranked third for law by the Guardian — confirming to Legal Cheek that his last date of attendance was June 2008. A spokesperson commented:

“Our records indicate that Malachi Lindo was enrolled at Queen Mary University of London during the 2007/08 academic year. The student did not complete, and his last date of attendance was recorded in June 2008.”

During Lindo’s trial, the court heard how the former law student, from Enfield in north London, had left a friend’s home in the early hours of the morning in an agitated state due to a long-running feud with a neighbour.

Lindo then got into an altercation with Steels on Green Street in Newham, east London, which resulted in the 51 year-old charity worker being knocked to the ground and repeatedly hit over the head with a brick.

Leaving Steels in a pool of his own blood, the law dropout apparently sat on the opposite side of the street for 15 minutes before eventually fleeing the scene.

Police later arrested the then 26 year-old, who admitted taking a concoction of drugs. The court heard how the former law student spat at arresting officers before asking if he could go home, telling them, “I promise I won’t kill again”. Lindo’s lawyers claimed he was in a “drug-induced psychosis” at the time of the attack.

Sentencing, Judge Worsley highlighted the extent of the former law student’s fall from grace, describing Lindo as an intelligent man who was the first of his family to attend university. The judge also pointed out to the court that it was only this time last year that Lindo had undertaken a stint of marshalling at the Old Bailey. Lindo, who had admitted to the manslaughter of Steels, but was convicted of murder last Thursday, was then sentenced to life with a minimum of 14 years imprisonment.

The post From marshalling to murder: Queen Mary law dropout jailed for life appeared first on Legal Cheek.

Glenn Greenwald — the man behind the Edward Snowden story — gripped by tale of Harry Potter-style solicitor-advocate

The world’s top journalist has taken a break from shaking the establishment to its core with government surveillance revelations to revel in the sheer weirdness of the Lord Harley of Counsel of saga.

Glenn Greenwald tweeted today of his “love” for the story, which got a new instalment on Thursday when we revealed that the full transcript had emerged of solicitor-advocate Lord Harley’s infamous run-in with a Welsh Crown Court judge.

@AlexAldridgeUK @legalcheek I love it so much – that was a great article – hilariously written.

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) March 16, 2015

The journalist who broke the Edward Snowden story actually began life as a lawyer, beginning his career at top New York corporate firm Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz before later moving into journalism and blogging.

Like many US lawyers, Greenwald seems to find the English propensity for fancy dress baffling, tweeting his amusement at “grown men and their costumes” when he originally spotted the Harley story.

Greenwald’s reaction is a reminder that many Americans view the wig worn by the judge in the Lord Harley bust-up as even stranger than the solicitor-advocate’s ribbons. As US legal blog Above the Law put it in their report of last week’s Legal Cheek story:

“Pretty judgmental for a grown man wearing a wig. Seriously, everything about dress-up time in the UK is so stupid and listening to a man in a ridiculous getup chastise another man for his ridiculous getup is the height of absurdity.”

Previously:

Lord Harley of Counsel Vs Welsh Crown Court judge — full transcript emerges [Legal Cheek]

The post Now world’s most-famous journalist is hooked on Lord Harley of Counsel saga too appeared first on Legal Cheek.

Shaun Lawler tells Alex Aldridge about how he’s set to become one of the first four LPC graduates in the country to become a solicitor without doing a training contract

After we reported last week that the first four successful applicants had been approved to qualify as solicitors via the new paralegal shortcut, one of them posted a warning in the comments section of the story.

“Be under no illusion that this is a ‘shortcut’,” he cautioned.

Lincoln University law graduate Shaun Lawler (pictured above), 26, then contacted us and offered to share more information about what it’s like to go from law graduate to paralegal to solicitor without doing a training contract.

Alex Aldridge: How did you come to be the first law graduate to qualify as a solicitor without doing a training contract in a quarter of a century?

Shaun Lawler: I heard about the equivalent means application (aka the paralegal shortcut) last summer and realised I was in a good position to do it. At the time I was one year through the part-time Legal Practice Course (LPC) at the University of Law in Bloomsbury and had been working as a paralegal since September 2012 having finished my law degree in 2009. And I realised this could apply to me.

Aldridge: So all the paralegal work you’d done basically counted as a training contract?

Lawler: That’s the idea. The thing with equivalent means is that you’re ticking the same boxes as for a training contract. It’s exactly the same standard. Where it differs is that the onus is on the paralegal to keep all the records themselves. Fortunately, I’d kept all the relevant documentation since I started as a paralegal well before equivalent means came into being. Then, when I knew the route was possible, I obviously kept documenting everything.

Aldridge: It sounds fairly straightforward.

Lawler: It’s harder than you think. One of the biggest barriers is that you have to do effectively three seats — one contentious, the other non-contentious, and for the third it can be either. Many paralegals just don’t get this sort of variety. The key thing is having a supportive supervisor. I was lucky in this respect. So I spent time working in the firm’s civil/commercial litigation department and was given the opportunity to also work with commercial contracts and wills. It’s not enough just to do a few pieces of work. You actually have to spend a substantial period of time in each area — like a trainee would.

Aldridge: OK, so assuming you manage to do that, what happens next?

Lawler: You apply to the SRA to qualify via equivalent means. The application form [which can be found here] is over 50 pages long and extremely comprehensive in respect of each outcome that has to be met, so you have to provide a lot of documentation. I had to also get two references from existing solicitors to confirm that my work was to the same standard as a trainee solicitor and justify each outcome raised in my application. Also, it costs £600 to apply, which is a lot on paralegal wages. And then I had to wait six months to hear if I had been successful. Oh, and there are no appeal rights. So if you don’t get approved it’s back to square one.

Aldridge: *Sharp intake of breath*

Lawler: I told you it wasn’t a shortcut.

Aldridge: Has it been worth it?

Lawler: Absolutely, yes. The big difference is that now I’m not reliant on a firm dangling a training contract on a piece of string. It’s in my hands. I actually moved from my previous firm, where I completed the requirements for equivalent means, to join Malletts Solicitors last October. But the whole process has been a risk. The LPC is extremely expensive and I have had to take out a hefty loan to cover the fees. Fortunately the gamble has paid off.

Aldridge: Will you get a pay rise?

Lawler: Hopefully. But I haven’t finished the LPC yet. I will do over the summer [Lawler is on for a distinction]. At that point I’ll qualify and I’m looking forward to putting to use all the experience I have gained over the last few years.

Aldridge: What’s the plan beyond that?

Lawler: I’d like to specialise in commercial company law, with a focus on IT start-ups.

The Paralegal Shortcut: 29 LPC grads apply to qualify as solicitors without doing a training contract [Legal Cheek]

The post Legal Cheek meets the first person to do the paralegal shortcut appeared first on Legal Cheek.

Five years’ call junior to run for parliament representing newly “refounded” political party that was dissolved in 1868

When glanced at in a hurry, Alasdair Henderson’s website appears to suggest that he is throwing a party to celebrate his profession’s collective love of wigs.

This is incorrect, of course, with the 1 Crown Office Row barrister’s focus trained not on wigs but Whigs — the historic political movement which he and a bunch of other young wannabe politicians are in the process of resurrecting.

Dissolved in 1868 amid the rise of Labour, the Whig party was “refounded” last year by former army officer Waleed Ghan. Since then it has sparked appeal among a host of idealistic young professionals with a yearning for the glorious past, and secured five candidates to run for parliament in May’s general election.

Among them is Henderson, a five years’ call junior specialising in public law, employment and equality, human rights and clinical negligence, who is standing for the Whigs in London’s Bethnal Green and Bow constituency.

On his website, the young Oxford-educated rookie admits feeling “increasingly disillusioned” with the current political scene, before explaining why the Whig party — whose philosophy seems not dissimilar to the pre-Coalition Liberal Democrats — offers a credible alternative.

The barrister, 29, goes on to issue an appeal that sounds tailored to Bethnal Green’s thriving hipster community, describing the Whig philosophy as “vintage political principles that have stood the test of time, reworked for the 21st Century”.

Will such rhetoric get Henderson his deposit back elected?

“Let’s be realistic,” he told Legal Cheek yesterday afternoon, “I’d just love to get one person out to vote who otherwise would not have bothered because they felt disillusioned.”

Henderson added that his focus was on achieving the 2,500 votes necessary to secure the refund of the £500 deposit which he handed over in order to become a candidate.

As for what his colleagues in chambers — who include UK Human Rights Blog editor Adam Wagner and Boris Johnson’s wife Marina Wheeler — make of Henderson’s bid for power, the barrister said they were “slightly bemused that I’m running for a party they thought disappeared 150 years ago, but are now quite excited.”

Whig Party — Alasdair Henderson — Bethnal Green and Bow [Whigs.UK]

The post 1 Crown Office Row barrister in bid to become first Whig party MP for 150 years appeared first on Legal Cheek.

Global giant extends funding beyond GDL and LPC costs to LLM fees

Queen Mary University of London has done a deal with Norton Rose Fulbright that will see the firm cover the cost of two students’ fees for its energy law masters course.

The tie-up is one of the first examples of a law firm extending its student funding beyond sponsorship of the Graduate Diploma in Law (GDL) and Legal Practice Course (LPC) to other further education courses.

Under the arrangement, Norton Rose Fulbright — which is well-known for its international energy practice — will pay the chosen students’ course fees (which are £12,600 for a home/EU student or £18,000 for a non-home/EU student) and guarantee them a two-week vac scheme at the firm.

The scholarship commences at the beginning of the academic year this September, with applications — which are already live on Queen Mary’s website — closing on 30 April.

The news comes on the back of Queen Mary’s recent combination with Reed Smith to offer the first ever law sandwich degree, amid a mood of change in the legal education and training market that is being shaken up by changes such as the paralegal shortcut.

Queen Mary’s Norah Gallagher, who runs the university’s energy and natural resources law institute, described the partnership as “testament to the growing reputation of a new but popular programme with a practical focus.” She added:

“It underlines our commitment at CCLS [Queen Mary’s Centre for Commercial Law Studies] to building important links with energy partners in the legal profession, industry and commerce.”

Norton Rose Fulbright energy litigation partner Neil Miller said the deal was “both ideal and jointly beneficial”. He continued:

“We are delighted to be involved in a programme and initiative that provides students with invaluable skills which will enable them to build future careers in the energy law sector.”

The post The law firm-funded LLM: Norton Rose Fulbright to sponsor Queen Mary masters places appeared first on Legal Cheek.

Exclusive: Global law firm to award first and second years up to £18,000 in bid to broaden access to profession

The London office of transatlantic giant Hogan Lovells has unveiled a partnership with LSE and the universities of York and Durham to help fund law students through their undergraduate degrees.

The scheme, which comes three years after the government trebled the cost of undergraduate fees, will see two students from each institution awarded a maximum of £9,000 per year in their first and second years of study — giving them a total award of up to £18,000.

The cash comes from an overall funding pot of £150,000 earmarked by the firm for the programme to be used over the next three to five years.

Recipients of the bursary will be chosen by the three partner universities on the basis of need and merit. Criteria will include being the first member of a family to have gone to university and the standard of a student’s schooling relative to the grades they obtained.

Significantly, those given the cash will be under no obligation to go on to work for Hogan Lovells. Instead, the firm will offer optional mentoring and careers advice opportunities to the students.

This marks the programme out from the much larger scale funding packages for the Graduate Diploma in Law (GDL) and Legal Practice Course (LPC) offered by the big law firms. These deals see the costs of postgraduates’ study covered on the condition that they join the firm that is sponsoring them.

Speaking to Legal Cheek, Clare Harris, Hogan Lovells’ associate director of legal resourcing, emphasised the difference between such packages and what is a diversity-led initiative. She commented:

“The Hogan Lovells Bursary Scheme is about our commitment to social mobility issues and the wider theme of good citizenship. Whether the students go on to join us, or pursue careers elsewhere in the law is not the issue here. Rather, we want to support the ambitions of people who may be put off going to university because of the costs involved.”

Harris added that the firm saw the scheme as a way to contribute to universities’ outreach initiatives, which would leverage the Hogan Lovells brand in a mutually beneficial way.

“When, for example, Durham and York go out to students in the former industrial towns of the North East and Yorkshire, hopefully students will be motivated by the fact that a major firm like Hogan Lovells is taking an interest in them. At the same time, it is a way for us to get our brand out more widely,” she said.

Meanwhile, the universities involved have all expressed their enthusiasm for the initiative, with Durham Law School chief Professor Roger Masterman echoing the sentiments of his counterparts at LSE and York when he described the bursary as a “life-changing amount” that “will make a huge difference” to students. He added that it will allow the beneficiaries of the money to dedicate more time to their studies, reducing the amount of part-time work they have to do.

The scheme has just got underway at LSE and Durham, with the first bursaries set to be awarded to first year students at the institutions this term, and it will commence from September at York. Advertisements for the funding will be targeted at sixth-formers and awarded when the individuals start their first year at university.

Currently, the only comparable initiative in the legal profession is CMS Cameron McKenna’s ‘Bursary Scheme for Year 12 Students’, which offers four students £2,500-a-year during their undergraduate law degrees. It is awarded on the basis of an annual essay competition.

If the Hogan Lovells scheme is successful, Harris says that the firm will look at extending it to other universities across the country.

The post Hogan Lovells to sponsor undergrads in tie-up with LSE, York and Durham appeared first on Legal Cheek.

Newspaper watchdog rules that two Fleet Street tabloids and a regional publication did not breach its code of practice in reporting the elaborate claims of one of the country’s most renowned advocates

It may be only six months old and its genius highly controversial, but the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) has already attracted the attention of Lord Harley of Counsel.

Legal Cheek can reveal that the Rochdale-based solicitor-advocate — who has attained notoriety for an idiosyncratic approach to court dress and a resultant dust-up with a Crown Court judge last August — made three separate complaints regarding coverage of claims made on his elaborate LinkedIn profile. Lord Harley — aka Alan Blacker — took issue with articles in the Mail Online, Daily Mirror and Wales Online.

The complaints were made to IPSO — which is chaired by retired Court of Appeal judge Sir Alan Moses — between late October and early November last year, with the findings made public in late February.

In relation to the Mail Online and Daily Mirror, Blacker said the articles had inappropriately questioned his “bona fides”, particularly his membership of the Order of St John, of ambulance and Jerusalem eye hospital fame. He also alleged that the Mail Online was wrong when it reported he claimed to speak several languages fluently — and furthermore the use of his image was a breach of his intellectual property.

The Mail Online and Daily Mirror satisfied IPSO that they had reported the matter fairly and accurately, both submitting a statement from the Order of St John in Wales stating that Blacker was in no way associated with the organisation. The Mail Online also provided IPSO with screenshots of Blacker’s LinkedIn CV, on which he continues to claim to have “native or bilingual proficiency” in Urdu, Gujarati, Luo, Punjabi and Hindi.

In relation to Wales Online’s coverage, Blacker took issue with a reference to a Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) statement, which he claimed was never actually issued. The paper ran comments from the regulator saying that it was aware of concerns raised around Blacker’s purported credentials and that officials were investigating.

Blacker was also unhappy with a reference in the paper to him as a “Walter Mitty character”, maintaining it was unfair that the Wales Online had failed to disclose the source of the comment.

IPSO — which is the successor to the widely discredited Press Complaints Commission and was controversially launched in the wake of Sir Brian Leveson’s year-long inquiry into press ethics — was satisfied that Wales Online acted within the regulations.

In arriving at that decision, IPSO reviewed contemporaneous notes of the website’s conversation with the SRA, and considered assurances that the Walter Mitty comment was made by a source familiar with Blacker personally and that the remark was the unnamed source’s personal opinion.

In dismissing Blacker’s three complaints, the IPSO committee did not identify any significant inaccuracies that would require correction under the terms of its code.

PREVIOUSLY:

Lord Harley of Counsel Vs Welsh Crown Court judge — full transcript emerges [Legal Cheek]

9 reasons why ‘Lord Harley of Counsel’ has the best LinkedIn CV of any lawyer ever [Legal Cheek]

The post New breed press body throws out Lord Harley complaints appeared first on Legal Cheek.

There’s a little secret about the magic circle firm’s law firm of the year boast. Read on …

Something interesting about global giant Clifford Chance emerged from Legal Cheek’s exclusive unearthing yesterday of vintage law firm website home pages circa mid to late-1990s.

The walk down memory lane triggered a comparison between the old sites and their modern incarnations — which will be the theme of a forthcoming Judge Rules diatribe later today.

While on that cyber stroll, we discovered that today’s Clifford Chance home page trumpets:

“International law firm of the year.”

Fair enough — there’s bound to be a legal publisher out there prepared to award CC with that elevated title (see last week’s rant from the Judge on just that subject).

But hang on — what does that curious asterisk signify tucked up next to the word year?

Browsers can be forgiven for scratching their heads and giving up on that question. But the more eagle-eyed will have scrolled to the bottom of the page where they will have squinted and seen a small font navigation point reading “Legal statements” followed by an ever-so-minute asterisk as well.

Having clicked there, they are taken to a page that — in keeping with all legal statements — is designed to elicit the reaction: “Christ that’s dull — get me outta here.”

But the most tenacious will carry on to point 13 — “Statement on the home page”, which again bears the increasingly mysterious asterisk. The little devil keeps cropping up just like that red mac-wearing dwarf girl in Nicolas Roeg’s creepy thriller “Don’t Look Now”.

Gone on, click on it — we dare you.

Now you’re at the bottom of the page and a world of enlightenment. We discover that the boasting on the home page should read: International law firm of last year … and … er … the year before that.

To be fair, CC is the reigning holder of the IFLR gong — the 2015 awards are scheduled for next month. And indeed, the Canary Wharf giants are again on the short list, up against magic circle rivals Allen & Overy, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer and Linklaters, along with Yanks Latham & Watkins, Weil Gotshal & Manges and White & Case.

But as far as the Chambers Global award is concerned, CC’s home page must really piss off New York’s Skadden, which is the actual holder.

All of which begs the question: just what is the CC marketing team playing at? If you have to place an explanatory asterisk next to a bold boast, it’s probably best not to make the boast in the first place.

Perhaps Clifford Chance should take a leaf from the book of just about every other City law firm marketing department and slap a rolling panel of banal images on its website home page and leave awards boasting in the bar on the night of the event itself.

The post Clifford Chance’s website and the tale of the mysterious asterisk appeared first on Legal Cheek.

London uni wins corporate law version of University Challenge

Three students from Queen Mary University of London have beaten off competition from 112 teams across 42 different universities to win the first ever national commercial awareness competition.

Mitan Patel, Jonathan Hollingsworth and Amir Ben Shabat emerged victorious from a final held yesterday at Barclays’ Canary Wharf headquarters, beating off teams from the universities of Leeds, Edinburgh and York.

The contest is a bit like a corporate law version of University Challenge, with Chris White — the founder of the diversity and networking group, Aspiring Solicitors, which runs the competition — playing the role of a youthful Jeremy Paxman.

It began in November, with two rounds conducted over the phone by White, whittling contestant numbers down from 112 to 24. Then semi-finals were held earlier this year at four corporate law firms: Mayer Brown, Hogan Lovells, Simmons & Simmons and Clyde & Co. Out of that progressed four ace teams to yesterday’s final, which was judged by White and lawyers at the firms.

Yesterday’s questions (a selection of which are pictured below) were of the type used in law firm trainee assessment centres, with finalists also asked to discuss recent Financial Times articles and deliver a team presentation on a topical commercial issue.

Speaking to Legal Cheek yesterday, White, who used to be a corporate lawyer at Norton Rose Fulbright before setting up Aspiring Solicitors two years ago, said he hoped the experience would help the participants as they negotiate the ultra-competitive hunt for a training contract.

“To an extent the competition is modelled on the law firm application process, with the last two rounds great preparation for law firm assessment centres. All 460 students who participated should be able to build on what they have learned as they work towards becoming solicitors,” he said.

All the students who reached yesterday’s final won work experience in the legal team at Barclays, with the winners getting a full two-week summer vac scheme at Simmons & Simmons plus short placements at Mayer Brown, Hogan Lovells and Clyde & Co. As a bonus, the lucky trio also won new suits, which will doubtless come in handy during their work experience marathons.

Applications for next year’s Aspiring Solicitors’ UK Commercial Awareness Competition can be made here.

The post Queen Mary students are the most commercially aware wannabe lawyers in Britain appeared first on Legal Cheek.

Modern cyber marketing is flashier, but it lacks the individualistic charm of the earlier generation

Life was so much simpler in 1996.

The Spice Girls and Oasis were in the charts. As were those cheeky chappies Baddiel & Skinner and The Lightning Seeds with “Three Lions” — for that was the year football came home as England hosted the European Championship and Germany won the competition.

Even though the worldwide web had been around for some time, 1996 was the year that law firms twigged to the fact that they had better jump aboard the cyber bandwagon.

Surely the hordes of marketing and business development staff (remind me again of the difference) that have since grown like Japanese knot weed at law firms will have in the intervening nearly two decades made massive improvements to their employers’ sites.

No, not really.

Of course, modern law firm websites are infinitely flashier and slicker than their predecessors, incorporating all the tropes of modernity such as animated GIFs, embedded videos, hi-resolution imagery, mood-enhancing fading page transition gimmickry — and the odd tea-making facility.

But while modern sites at the top end of the City and US law firm markets incorporate enough bells and whistles to give an anti-capitalist march a run for its money, they are all much of a muchness. For the most part, they look and feel the same — and importantly, they more or less spout the same anodyne drivel.

“As one of the world’s leading law firms, we advise many of the biggest and most ambitious organisations across all major regions of the globe,” states Anglo-Australian firm Herbert Smith Freehills.

Likewise, Shearman & Sterling “has been advising many of the world’s leading corporations and financial institutions, governments and governmental organisations for more than 140 years”, say the New Yorkers in a stunning bid to set the firm apart in a crowded market.

Indeed, some firms try so hard to distinguish themselves that they fall into embarrassing traps. For example, that global giant we all take for granted today, Clifford Chance, was just nine years old in 1996, the product of a 1987 merger between Clifford Turner and Coward Chance.

Its 1996 home page has all the hallmarks of an earlier Blue Peter-style era of web design, and is dominated with a charming “Welcome” message.

Perhaps today’s marketing wallhas at CC should have stuck with the homespun simple approach of an earlier generation. Doing so might have saved them the grief of their current home page embarrassment as revealed in our earlier coverage today.

Interestingly, the supposed media-savvy crowd at London firm Olswang seemed to get it wrong then — and now. In 1999 the firm adopted a web design that has something of a naff Teletext feel about it. Today, it has one of the most dull and static home pages in law firm cyberspace.

Indeed, of the 10 sites highlighted by Legal Cheek, the only modern incarnation that catches the Judge’s eye is that of global maritime and aviation specialists Clyde & Co. Massive great hi-res images that fill the screen and are at least vaguely interesting on an artistic photographic level.

As for the text, most of it is clear-cut and simple — three main categories on the home page that are relatively useful. And while the firm also trots out the standard meaningless banalities — “Clyde & Co is a dynamic, rapidly expanding global law firm focused on providing a complete legal service to clients in our core sectors” — it keeps that level of nonsense to a relative minimum.

But to be fair, the modern Clyde & Co effort isn’t a patch on its 1998 version. In those days, it had a chic John Player Special look that almost meant that if the law firm had produced fags, the Judge would have been puffing their brand.

Previously

Revealed: How big law firms’ websites looked in the 90s [Legal Cheek]

The Judge rules: Legal profession awards — don’t they make you sick?!!! [Legal Cheek]

The post The Judge Rules: Law firm websites – bring back the good old simpler days appeared first on Legal Cheek.

Irish high court stops short of striking off Dublin solicitor because he was depressed — and paid the cash back

Lawyers — pay attention. If you receive a letter from Nigeria offering you all the riches in the world in exchange for a simple favour, put the note immediately in the shredder.

That might seem like a statement of the bleeding obvious, but members of the legal profession continue to be hoodwinked by the most clumsy and obvious of frauds – with a sad story emerging this week from Dublin to highlight the issue.

James Maher, who ran a small practice in the republic’s capital, fell into the standard “Nigerian letter” trap and found himself nearly a quarter of a million euros lighter as a result.

According to a report earlier this week in the Irish Times, the 53-year-old solicitor fell for a scam despite all the usual warning signs flashing in a multitude of colours. He bought a story involving a massive sum of €26 million, references to US President Barack Obama, the National petroleum Company of Nigeria — and a sob story around a cancer stricken wife of a former client.

In the end, Maher paid over €242,219 from his client account between April and September 2011.

Irish Law Society officials told a high court judge hearing the case that “naive” Maher had fallen for a “classic scam”. And that the lawyer’s gullibility had been unfortunately exacerbated by difficulties in his marriage and a long-standing bi-polar disorder.

Ultimately, the solicitor avoided being struck off as he was able to reimburse the lost cash after he inherited funds from a recently deceased uncle. But presumably he’ll have to toil away on residential conveyancing files until he’s 103 before reimbursing himself.

Maher’s plight is nothing new. Nearly two decades ago, the Law Gazette on this side of the Irish Sea warned English and Welsh solicitors that “so-called Nigerian letters are the best known examples of attempts at … fraud …’ It went on to say that “a number of solicitors have failed to see through the scams and have been sucked in”.

A decade later — in 2006 — the situation had improved little, with the newspaper publishing a long article bemoaning the continuing propensity of bumbling green-eyed solicitors to charge headlong into the fraudsters’ traps.

That article finished with an old standby that smaller high street law firms should probably frame on their walls:

“If something looks too good to be true, then it probably is.”

The post Lawyer fleeced for best part of €250,000 from client account in a scam as old as (Nigerian) hills appeared first on Legal Cheek.

Eclipse? What eclipse? That was the disappointed chorus from the heart of the legal profession planet; but Faroese lawyers were laughing

Britons across the country morphed into amateur astronomers this morning and went a bit bonkers over a once-in-a-generation chance to catch sight of a near-as-dammit full solar eclipse.

All Britons, that is, apart from legal London, where the sentiment was bemused sarcasm all round.

This photograph — posted on the Inner Temple Library’s Facebook page — illustrates that the Inns of Court looked pretty much like they always do on a late March morning: cloudy grey (although some of the flasher QC motors seem to have been cropped out of the image).

Well, the PR and communications team at the Holborn HQ of transatlantic giant Hogan Lovells gave it a pop. They tweeted this dramatic shot of themselves as gazing into the overcast sky from their 12th floor balcony.

What eclipse?? Not much for the HL PR team to see from the 12th floor balcony at Atlantic House this morning! pic.twitter.com/PPedssPud3

— Press Office (@HoganLovellsUK) March 20, 2015

While the celestial gods failed to smile on legal London, lawyers in the Faroe Islands capital of Tórshavn had a much more meaningful experience of the eclipse.

A spokeswoman for leading local firm Advokatfelagið við Strond — a nine-lawyer operation practising just about every area of law imaginable — confirmed to Legal Cheek that at 9.41 this morning “spectacular views of the eclipse” were visible from the steps in front of the firm’s offices.

“Many of our lawyers took the opportunity to go outside and photograph the event,” said the spokeswoman, who confirmed that the eclipse was jolly well impressive, indeed.

So put that in your telescopes and … er … smoke it, HogLovs.

Next time, that comms team should organise flights for partners and staff to the former Danish colony. Note for diaries: next time is scheduled for August 2026.

The post Celestial gods snub legal London – City lawyers miss out on eclipse fun appeared first on Legal Cheek.

On the eve of judging the Bar’s annual mock trial competition the President of the Queen’s Bench Division — and scourge of the tabloid press — speaks exclusively to Legal Cheek

Not many judges achieve anything resembling wide public notoriety — at least not for positive reasons — but there is at least a vague chance that the competitors at the final of this year’s premier mock trial event will have heard of the man determining the winner.

Sir Brian Leveson might not be exactly a household name, but for a year from November 2011 he was probably the highest profile judge in the land.

The £5.4 million Leveson Inquiry into press ethics gripped elements of the nation with its parade of ageing matinee idols, Fleet Street reptiles and ordinary members of the public that had been on the rough end of phone hacking.

Next weekend, Leveson will lead the judging panel of the Bar National Mock Trial competition, which is run by the Citizenship Foundation. The final this year — held in Edinburgh’s Court of Session — will be conducted using Scottish law principles.

The event is something of a Britain’s Got Talent for the law, with 2,000 state secondary schoolchildren having been whittled down to a select few for the grand finale.

Sir Brian is a big buyer of the concept. A Scouser, his own route to the legal profession started at Liverpool College, before reading law at Merton College, Oxford.

Now the recently appointed President of the Queen’s Bench Division, Sir Brian is no longer a Lord Justice of Appeal, but he still sits regularly on both the criminal and civil appeal benches. So the mock trial finalists can rest assured his judging eye is still sharp.

“The benefits of participating in the mock trial competition for school children who are not yet even studying the law is to my mind very clear,” Sir Brian told Legal Cheek in an exclusive interview in between genning up on the finer points of tartan law.

Indeed, his chat with The Cheek was the first he has given to any media outlet since reporting on the first part of his inquiry in November 2012.

“The development of analytical skill,” Sir Brian continues, “the ability to ask questions, to elicit or to challenge evidence, an ability to argue from facts to conclusions, are tremendously valuable for all to develop, regardless of whether a student ultimately goes into professional advocacy, or even the law.

“Those still at school can obtain great value from developing those skills, whether they are going to study the arts, history, science, anything that requires the asking of questions and analytical skills.”

Another advantage of the competition, according to Sir Brian, is that it gives schoolchildren raised on a diet of television courtroom dramas, a better feel for real judicial processes.

“I’m not criticising dramatic presentations of trials,” he emphasises. “There are some wonderful examples where great effort has been made at accuracy. But watching on television is very different from going to the Crown Court and seeing it in real life.

“The mock trial exercise is better in replicating real life. But even that is not perfect. These trials will be over in an hour or so and they are deliberately written to provide each side with arguments to deploy. But they have little of the complexity of what happens in court.”

Sir Brian plays with a straight bat regarding controversial legal issues of the day, so Ministry of Justice apparatchiks that have got this far will have nothing to fear from reading further. He steadfastly refuses to comment on the press inquiry or an issue of direct relevance to the legal profession — the proposed quality assurance scheme for advocates.

The judge sat on the judicial review challenge to the plan, ruling the legal profession regulators had cooked up the system lawfully — a decision that is currently being appealed.

But he is willing to advise law students on the core elements of good advocacy. The basic principle to remember, says Sir Brian, is hard work.

“You’ve got to know the brief, and work out what the other person’s brief says, and be prepared to deal with it. There’s no way of hiding if you haven’t done the work.”

It is crucial that advocates have a firm understanding of not just the issues they have to prove, but also the points on the other side that they must undermine.

“What is the weakness of the opposing case and the strength of yours?” he asks rhetorically. “And you have to be able to argue from the facts to the conclusion. But that doesn’t just mean hammering your good points. You’ve got to help the fact-finder deal with your bad points — you’ve got to provide the fact-finder with a reason to explain why the difficulties in your case don’t matter. You have to be able to dissuade the court from accepting what the other side is going to say.”

Sir Brian is also helpfully succinct on the subject of advocacy characteristics that irritate the bench. “Repetition of the blindingly obvious and a lack of preparation,” are two traits guaranteed to put advocates on the fast track to finishing second in his court.

For a someone as adamant as Sir Brian that the modern judiciary gets an unfair rap for being out of touch with modern society, he exhibits a woeful lack of knowledge of contemporary daytime television fads — even those with a core legal profession element.

Joining Sir Brian in Edinburgh for the mock trail finals this weekend will be the soar away star of ITV’s lunchtime slot, Robert Rinder. The 2 Hare Court criminal barrister has become something of a sensation as the UK’s version of America’s Judge Judy — but that’s news to the Queen’s Bench Division chief.

“I don’t get to watch much daytime television,” Sir Brian wryly informs Legal Cheek.

Undoubtedly, Judge Rinder will give him a full briefing on the train journey to the Scottish capital.

Previously

Lord Justice Leveson to brush up on Scots law as he heads north with Judge Rinder [Legal Cheek]

The post Leveson’s advice to wannabe advocates: stop bleating on about the blindingly obvious appeared first on Legal Cheek.

Quirks in California’s referendum system have allowed the promotion of a dangerously homophobic bill, as local politicians call for lawyer proponent to be struck off

Outraged calls are mounting for a California lawyer to be disbarred following his shocking bid to enact a law that would compel state authorities to execute homosexuals.

State Senator Ricardo Lara has called on bar authorities urgently to haul lawyer Matthew McLaughlin before officials to assess whether he has breached the “good moral character” clause required for California bar membership.

Lara and others are fighting against the lawyer’s bid to make it state law that practising homosexuals are executed by firing squad.

According to a report in the online version of San Francisco-based newspaper, The Bay Area Reporter, Lara — who is himself gay — has written recently to the state bar board president saying he is “deeply disturbed” that a California lawyer would “promote such pitiful, evil, and hateful statements in his proposed initiative”.

But then McLaughlin is from Orange County, an area abutting the southern border of Los Angeles and renowned as the home of Disneyland — and ultra-conservative political views. The airport is named after famous son John Wayne, but the county is perhaps best known as the home of former US President Richard Nixon.

Not much is known about Matthew Gregory McLaughlin, apart from the fact that he did a degree at George Mason University law school in Washington DC, was admitted to the state bar in 1998, and his registration number is 198329.

We also know that McLaughlin appears to have a potentially dangerous phobia about homosexuality. And that California’s own brand of popular democracy has enabled him to broadcast those prejudices around the globe.

California law allows any citizen to propose legislation through its “initiative” system. Fill in the forms, pay an admin fee of $200 (£135) and get your proposal — no matter how mad and vile — on the next ballot.

Well, that’s not exactly true — you also need to bag 350,000 signatures from fellow California registered voters. And that is where McLaughlin is likely to fall down.

However, as of 2012 there were 1.6 million voters in Orange County alone, so it is not beyond the realms of possibility and bonkersness that McLaughlin could see his imitative for the “Sodomite Suppression Act” — yes, that’s what it’s called — listed on the 2016 ballot.

For those who can bear to dig deeper into the mind of McLaughlin, Legal Cheek has posted the full text of his initiative. In summary, it refers to male homosexual acts as “buggery” and “sodomy”, describing them as “a monstrous evil” against “Almighty God”.

So far so Billy Graham. But then McLaughlin goes a couple of large leaps further. All homosexual “propaganda” would be banned under his draft legislation, with those convicted of disseminating it liable for a tiny fine of $1 million (£670,000).

And, crucially, in addition:

“… any person who willingly touches another person of the same gender for purposes of sexual gratification [will] be put to death by bullets to the head or by any other convenient method”.

Note the words “any … person of the same gender” — just in case California lesbians thought they had escaped McLaughlin’s beady eye.

The draft bill goes on to impose a duty on all the state’s resident’s to enforce the legislation — stipulating that attorney fees will be fully reimbursed when lawyers are instructed to assist.

Good to see that McLaughlin is looking after his own.

Read the proposed legislation in full below:

Sodomite Suppression Act

The post A lawyer is backing a terrifying law to enforce public execution of gay people appeared first on Legal Cheek.