BE AWARE P CLUB - THERE IS JEALOUSY OUT THERE

Dear Members of The P Club

Please note

If any of my lovely club members receive a message on their blogs, which appears to be from The P BUT, is:

Full of profanities
Mean-spirited
Nasty
Racist
Misogynist
Not witty
Many references to body parts

Then – it is not a real message from the P

There is Scottish man called Dave – he has a little moustache and blond hair. Those messages are from Dave.

He has a blog – which nobody visits, but him. P has popped over to his little Blog - left a few messages and Scotty Dave has pooped his pants.

He admires The P

And want to be The P

He has mirrored The P’s blog
Mirrored The P by mirroring The P’s profile.

He is obsessed with The P and wants to be The P

So be warned.

Remember:

Good/witty/inspiring messages = Mr P

Sad/profane/uninspiring messages = Scotty Dave

MY CASE (10) THE END

So I walk back to the car – carrying my blue bag and all of the papers. I was worn out despite the fact that all I had done was wait for the decision.

The Head Master pulls out of the car park – sees me, stops and winds down his window.

“He’s done it before you know. It’s bloody ridiculous to see him get off like that. Do you know his history?”

Well, actually I did. I knew what he had, in the past, been accused of, and what the disciplinary reports had said about our teacher. To summarise, let the record show that:

1. After provocation he had attacked a teenager in the school, and had caused some physical injury, although not serious. There had been an internal enquiry, and our teacher was disciplined. The boy did not wish to press charges;

2. He had spat at a child, again after provocation – there followed another internal enquiry – with a caution given to the teacher;

3. On a school trip there had been an altercation and a child (16 years old) had his nose broken – there was circumstantial evidence, which pointed towards our teacher – no one was saying anything and so the matter was dropped.

Our case was the forth incident.

I knew all of this before I went into Court – and had fought tooth and nail for these matters to be hidden from the jury. The Judge decided that they were highly detrimental and that the case should be brought on its facts alone.

So – P Club – the case was not as clean, straightforward as it appeared.

I said to the headmaster that I did know the teacher’s history and could understand why the case had aroused so much emotion.

With that – the headmaster swore and sped off.

I got to my car and drove home.

Another day at the Office.

As for our teacher – his last comments to me were that he was going to have a serious chat with the headmaster - to put him straight - to ensure that his career was put back on track.

Our case is now at an end P Club…..hope you found it entertaining, enlightening and enriching.

Justice in the raw.

MY CASE (9) THE VERDICT

The Jury go out.

P has a little chat with our teacher – he presses me for my opinion – I say “It’s all gone very well…but one never knows” – he then recounts some of the things I said in my closing – “Herculean strength” – “the message a guilty verdict would send to society”. He liked it all – some of his friends compliment P on the way the cross-examination was carried out – “very clever” – “you nailed it”.

I say nothing more.

Anyway – these are tense times – I hate the wait whilst the Jury is out.

P goes for a wander – a swift walk around the Court – then out into the park – keeps his eye open for the nutters – just in case they want another pop. I can’t go too far in case the verdict comes back.

So I give it half an hour.

As I walk back into Court the usher is waiting at the door – “Verdict is in”.

We take our seats; I look around at our teacher – he is ashen faced – gives me a nod – his family are all there – in the public gallery – tense – apprehensive.

In they walk – 12 good men and true.

The Foreman stands and we have the usual verbal formalities. I maintain an impassive expression throughout.

Verdict is announced: “Not Guilty”.

The Jury look at me and I retain the expression – win or lose – the same impassive expression. It’s my shield.

There is a bit of a commotion and I turn to see our teacher standing to his feet – gives me the thumbs up – beaming – I also see the headmaster storming out of the Court – with some others.

Outside I speak to the teacher – he is overwhelmed – his wife and friends are hugging and kissing him and then they all gather around – thanking me, shaking my hand – unsure whether to hug me too – they fidgit and decide not to. There is talk of champagne and celebrating. But not for me.

As I go to leave the teacher says to me; “The little bastard deserved it….the little shit.”

With that.

I go back to the Robing Room to get changed and to think things over.

THERE IS AN AFTERMATH

MY CASE (8) THE CLOSING SPEECH

Must take this carefully.

Truth is – a lot of barristers are stuffed shirts – have never mastered the art of being likeable as well as persuasive. Too much up their own arses to be real, normal and human. They prefer to sound like barristers – educated chaps; addressing a jury in a reserved and distant manner.

I don’t like that.

Better to win people over with a bit of wit – a touch of eloquence – some magic and charm. Of course the meat of the matter is the evidence but the delivery is the sugar that sweetens the pill.

Let the boring buggers be boring – Mr P is never that. Dullness don’t win votes on a jury.

Anyway.

In a criminal trial before a jury – I always start with a mantra:

“The defendant doesn’t have to prove anything – the prosecution brings this case and they must prove it beyond a reasonable doubt so that you are sure….sure….that the defendant is guilty of this crime. You must not rely on gut feeling, or a mere sense of guilt, but must look to the evidence. That evidence can be direct or circumstantial. You must rely on the evidence and the evidence must support the prosecution case so that you are sure of this man’s guilt. You cannot leave an important case like this to chance, there is too much at stake.”

I always kick off with that stuff – a jury might not necessarily know it. The judge will include this in his summing up – but it sounds better from me.

I then rabbited on about how difficult a teacher’s job has become – how society has seen deterioration in standards of behaviour – the lack of respect – the rise in knife crime – blah…blah…. It’s all true – all verbiage bollocks – but it would have a profound effect on a sensible jury.

Most ordinary folks would support a teacher, and I make it clear that I support all of the teachers who gave evidence in this court.

I then remind them of this kid’s behaviour – unprovoked – the foul words that were spoken (I say them again....and observe the jury grimacing). I say that this is the sort of thing teachers have to put up with everyday…they need and deserve our support.

And here’s the important bit: the summary of my main points – I signpost them right at the start – give them titles – headings – and take each in turn slowly. I say – I have THREE main issues – THREE – and they are simple points – here they are:

1. Being hurled to the floor;
2. Being grabbed around the neck;
3. The evidence of the boy.

I watch as the jury members write the three issues down – and underline them on their pads. Then they wait….patiently for me to start with issue number one. It’s there blinking at them on their writing paper – the paper demands words.

I am winning already. They are with me – I am simple – at their level – I am one of them.

Point One: Being hurled to the floor

I detonate my bombs throughout.

Who saw what happened?

One teacher only…..nobody else….and he was standing 200 yards away (of course he bloody wasn’t ! he was 20 yards away…..but was too hard headed to correct his error….and the prosecution were as dim as a 10 watt light-bulb to take issue with it).

And he says he saw – the lad (who was 10 1/2 stone and 5’ 5”) being hurled through the air backwards but miraculously sustained no injuries to the back of his head. It cannot be true, and I point at the defendant – “look at the defendant – he’s not a big man – not a latter day Arnold Swarzeneger (bit cheesy I know) – to have done this – he needed a piece of magic or Herculean strength. It just didn’t happen – how could it have? We must reject this evidence, as being entirely implausible.”

“Ultimately – it’s his word against the defendant’s – a 50/50 scenario – not enough to convict this man. What can tip the balance? The evidence of the boy himself”. See later…..


BING-AND-A-BOOM!


Point Two: Being grabbled around the neck

The evidence was that it’s easy with a struggling and lunatic kid to lose grip and to momentarily fall outside of “Team Teach”. There were no markings around the neck. The headmaster confirmed the fallibility of the Team Teach system.


Point Three: The evidence of the boy

And I read out his statement – slowly. The statement does not say that the teacher attacked him but it says it was an accident.....


ALL SIMPLE ….COMPELLING STUFF.

Finally

P appeals to their common-bloody-sense, and what a guilty verdict will mean for society:

A kid kicks off – trashes the room and attacks a teacher….and..THE TEACHERS GETS PUT INSIDE……NOT THE KID.

The kid swaggers off – boasting to his mates.

What a symbol of our society – what a message…...what a mess.

We must resist this at all costs.

END OF SPEECH.


The judge sums up the evidence fairly.

AND OUT GO THE JURY

Oh- the prosecution did a krap, erudite and dull closing speech....

MY CASE (7) THE TEACHER

Nearly there P Club....keep with it....the dénouement is imminent.

Let me tell you about my client: the schoolteacher.

He was a very normal, unassuming sort of geezer - not demanding, not slagging anyone off, just straightforward - a normal bloke - keen on sport - loved football, loved his wife - loved being a teacher.

I really liked the man. We got on like a house on fire – he even laughed at my jokes – and went along with everything I said. Some clients can be a total pain in the arse.

He did appear at times a tad listless, slightly disengaged from the process - his mind distracted. But he was keen to answer my questions and to assist me in any way.

Obviously - he was stressed out by the whole thing and had not enjoyed his suspension from work, knowing that his career and reputation were hanging in the balance. He managed to hide his stress very well, but he was nervous – by Gawd – I could tell that.

He was accompanied to court by supporters - and his wife came too. The whole gang of them were great - buzzing with anticipation and eager for our chap to win.

Barristers cannot train their clients on what to say in the witness box - coaching is forbidden in the UK. But I always say this to my clients:

"Tell the truth - simply tell it like it happened. Don't get annoyed by the other side's barrister - don't get angry and upset. You will be attacked, and called a liar, but you mustn’t let it get you down. At all costs do not get angry because that's what they want - a reaction - to prove that you are a voluble and violent man. Regard it all as a bit of a game, and never ever take personal offence as to what is said. The barrister has no personal dislikes he’s just doing his job."

The teacher got up there and was as good as gold - came across as sincere and hardworking - he told it just like it happened; no guilding the lilly and no colouring of detail.

He had indeed been let down by the school and judged before the facts were known - but he did not attack the headmaster in any way - on the contrary he uttered words of support throughout his evidence.

The Crown’s barrister was totally krap – as weak as dishwater – a wimp of the highest order. Some barristers should have been solicitors – they lack personality in the court – lack courage and the biting will to win.The Crown Barrister attacked him - called him a "violent aggressor", "a liar", and "a bad teacher and a danger to children". But our chap just took it mildly and said that he was sorry to hear those words.

I also called 2 other teachers in the school to give character references for him. They declared that he was a thoroughly sound teacher, who cared deeply about the kids, worked long hours and was passionate for his job.

The man did extremely well, and I know that he made a very good impression on the jury.

AND THAT FOLKS - WAS IT....THE EVIDENCE WAS DELIVERED.

So to my closing speech

MY CASE (6) THE HEADMASTER GIVES EVIDENCE

Sorry folks for the long delay between posts – but there have been some issues back in Uganda which The P has had to deal with. Totally back now….and on with the show.

The Headmaster was called as a witness. He seemed a very decent chap – but nervous in the witness box. The other side’s barrister leads him gently through some of the evidence, and out of the blue the headmaster starts talking about our chap's earlier assaults on kids. Weird - because he had been told by his barrister not to mention any of this; and I was assured that he would not.

Well up I stands – very quick – I do not want the jury to hear this. I demand that the Judge sends them out whilst we sort out a legal matter. Out they go. I argue that this is “Bad Character” evidence by the back door and should not be admitted. None of the allegations are proven and certainly our chap has never been charged for any crime....ever.

The Judge agrees with P – and the Headmaster is advised to stay off the subject. The sick thing is that I had already had this matter dealt with in the Court before the headmaster appeared.

So eventually I get to cross-examine the headmaster. He certainly was nervous and smiled weakly at me as I rose to my feet. I acknowledged him with a nod and a half smile. Like I said – a decent bloke – doing a difficult job – no way am I going to tear into this chap. So I give him respect and take things calmly and slowly. The Jury would expect no less.

It transpires that he did not witness the incident – was in his office at the time – just saw the aftermath. Found kid lying on the floor crying, sobbing and teacher wandering about wondering what to do...bemused and befuddled.

So I asks him what was the point of his evidence.

Apparently it was to explain to the Court the strictures and mechanics of “Team Teach” – the system for controlling wayward and unruly kids. So I says to him:

“So difficult to prevent your hand moving from the child’s back and arm isn’t it? – Especially when he’s struggling.”

“Yes”

“Not fool proof is it – “Team Teach”

“No”

“You weren’t surprised to see the boy sobbing on the floor – it’s quite usual to see upset kids at this school, isn’t it?”

“Quite usual”

“You didn’t see the teacher hit the boy?”

“No”

“Throw him to the floor?”

“No”

It transpired too that in the aftermath, although the child was looked after - picked up and ailments administered to, the poor old teacher was left to get on with it; he was asked to return to the class,on his own, to carry on with the lesson.

This was against the rules of the school: he needed another teacher present with him, as all of the children are disturbed and "behaviourally challenged".

On that day He was later suspended - without being afforded the opportunity of putting his version of events.

I put all of this to the Headmaster who meekly agreed that they had got it all wrong, dealt with it badly, and had let the teacher down through lack of support.

And that was it.

But as the headmaster was getting out of the witness box – he turned to the jury and said:

“I would never employ this man again….he has hit other children……he is not right…..”

He had to be forcefully removed and was still shouting and pointing at our teacher as he was ejected from the court.

What a scum- bag.

The Jury heard and saw the whole bleedin' thing.

MY CASE (5) THE NICE GIRL WITNESS

The second witness for the prosecution was a young support teacher who was in the class with our teacher when all this kicked off. In this sort of special school -each class must have two teachers present.

Her evidence was that our teacher did not handle the situation in accordance with the restraining method of “Team-Teach”, which gives instructions on how to deal with unruly kids.

Her evidence was that:

-He grabbed him (the boy) around the back of the neck (not allowed by “Team Teach”);
-Threw him out of the classroom in a very violent and dangerous manner;
-Continued to abuse the boy outside of the classroom.

She got into the witness box.

Trouble was – she was such a nice ordinary girl – one who commands the sympathy of decent folk i.e. the jury. Her manner was hesitant, a little timid, but nonetheless forthright.

No point laying into her – the jury would hate me and be embarrassed for her. Best I could do was to lay some incendiary devices and detonate them later in my closing speech.

So I ask her some questions:

Grabbing boy by the back of the neck

“Was the boy violent and aggressive?”

“Yes - he was dreadful.”

“Were you frightened?”

“Not frightened but concerned for the other boys in the class.”

“They need protecting and important to get him out of the classroom?”

“Yes, very important.”

“The safety of the others was a priority?”

“Yes” (DEVICE PLANTED)

“It all happened so quickly?”

“Yes”

“To operate perfectly within Team Teach, can be very difficult, with such an aggressive violent boy? We can’t expect teachers to get it 100% perfect.”

“No, it’s not easy” (DEVICE PLANTED)


Threw him out of the classroom in a very violent and dangerous manner

“Why didn’t you help Mr Jones (our teacher – not real name) in dealing with the boy?”

“I had to control the other boys.”

“Quite rightly, and you had a major task to contend with? Could have got out of hand very quickly?”

“Yes, very easily”.

“Had to focus on the other boys?”

“Yes”

“Watching them was important at that time?”

“Yes – I was worried what might happen.”

“More focused on them than what was happening between Mr Jones and the boy?”

“I had to be” (DEVICE PLANTED)

“You didn’t see the boy being picked up and hurled out of the room did you?”

“No but I saw him lying on the floor outside as if he had been pushed”

“As if he’d been pushed. So you didn’t see him being thrown or pushed out of the room?”

“No – but its obvious he had been pushed” (DEVICE PLANTED)

“Given the general mayhem and his aggression he could have fallen over by accident?”

“It’s possible.” (DEVICE PLANTED)



Continued to abuse the boy outside of the classroom

“You stayed in the classroom to protect the other boys?”

“Yes”

“Didn’t venture out?”

“No – I had to keep the boys in the classroom” (DEVICE PLANTED)

“And there was lots of yelling outside?”

“Yes”

“The boy and Mr Jones?”

“Yes – and others”

“So – lots of voices – all a bit confusing?”

“Yes” (DEVICE PLANTED)

“You didn’t see Mr Jones abuse the boy, verbally or physically because you were in the classroom focused on the other boys.”

“No I didn’t – but I was told about it.”

“Who told you?”

“The Headmaster.”

“I wont ask you what he said, but you personally didn’t see what went on outside?”

“No” (DEVICE PLANTED)

I thought she was a well-meaning teacher but had been subjected to a little persuasion. I was very content with how her evidence went and she was non-the wiser – I had not attacked her – called her a liar – or tried to wreck her story.

It required stealth.