If cats have 9 lives how may do LPC students get?

My highly perceptive senses are telling me that summer is on the way.

Is it the gentle warmth that permeates the bedroom and means the thick duvet must be put into mothballs?

Or is it the stiffling temperature that allows me to write this whilst wearing shorts and a t-shirt? (not an image which those of a mild disposition should dwell on)

Or is the heaps of dead insects that litter my flat like the victims of some multiple-bug car crash?

Mmm, it might be that last one. I seem to be taking daily work applications from spiders who have heard that there is some sort of 'all you can eat' offer going on at Chez Paul. It may sum my life up when I tell you that I have adopted one of the hairy little multi-legged brutes as a pet and call him 'Desmond'. Unfortunately Des runs whenever he catches sight of me (must be the shorts-he probably recognises my legs as being colonies of spiders clinging onto alabaster pillars)

Damn, this writing business ain't easy. How that JK Rowling does it, I don't know.

Of course, I could just name-drop here and point out that I went to University with ole JK back in the 80's and me and her are just like that (waggles fingers vaguely) and that she cheekily pinched a few of my short story ideas about a teenage wizard called Barry Cotter when she popped in after class one day for a mug of coffee.

..I make an excellent coffee!..

But that would be lying and we don't do lying in the law.

We always give a straight answer to a straight question

Of course, we are all hoping like mad that we don't get asked any straight questions...

Now, astute readers will be wondering where this is all leading (and to be honest so am I) but there is a reason. Bear with me. Amongst all the excitement of this week something rather good has happened.

I have a job interview coming up!

Well actually, I have two!

I am in College, Monday to Weds then I have interviews on Thursday and Friday-this means that I will have to re-arrange my working hours (again) so that in addition to prepping for my classses I can prep for the interviews.

It does however, put me in a bit of a moral dilemma, truthwise (squirms a bit on chair and catches leg hair in swivel mechanism-ouch). I may not have been quite 100% truthful when I applied for one of them. I may just have stretched the truth a tad-I may have mentioned (in passing like) that I had a lot of experience in a certain computer product. Which is nearly totally true-it's just the word 'lot' that may not be quite accurate. Unless of course 'lot' means 'some' or 'a very small amount'.

Hang one, I'll check with the dictionary.

Bugger...

Still, it's not that great a job anyway...

As I may have mentioned, the chance of getting a training contract now is pretty slim-so I'm trying to concentrate on getting in as a lesser position and hoping to work my way up. There is (allegedly) the opportunity to do that in this job (and it's in Guildford-so at least going to the interview won't cost much).

I've just had a rare spot of insight-they are probably lying about the promotion opportunities and that counters my lying about my knowledge!

Sorted!

Two wrongs do make a right after all!

Anyhow, Friday is an entry level position with the CPS in Hampshire-so not too far away there either. Part of the job is advertised as 'receptionist', so I shall have to practice chewing gum and filing my nails.

What do you mean stereotypical prejudice?

As I have remarked before the weeks are flying by-the electives are all now past the half way stage (though I heard this week of someone trying to change to different ones).

Just 4 weeks to go to the exams!

Alas, it does appear that we shall never have our 'proper' employment tutor. There is the faintest chance that she would be worse than temp-loyment but it is such a faint possibility that I shall have to discount it.
This week we started our first workshop on discrimination. We rushed straight into a case about sex discrimination with a female client being asked different questions at a promotional interview to the other (male) candidate.

So far we have looked at direct discrimination (as in the example above),
harassment (violating another person's dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for them)

What do you mean I copied that out of the textbook?

and victimisation (picking on an individual because they have brought proceedings in the past against the employer-or are doing so at present)

All good stuff and 'fairly' easy to spot. However, this coming week we'll be looking at 'indirect' discrimination and this may be a tad contentious.

An example from the textbook;
London Underground changed their workers shift patterns to more flexible hours. All of the male workers agreed to them. One of the female workers couldn't work the new hours. In the end it was decided that these new hours were discriminatory-not because of any fact that was relevant in the case but because statistically single mothers outnumbered single fathers by 10-1. (whuh?)

What I found fascinating was that there were 2000+ male workers and 21 female workers. So in fact because 1 out of 2050 workers had a problem, the tribunal (and upheld by the Court of Appeal) decided that the new shift patterns were discriminatory...

Hmm, I have a feeling that this may be Alice in Wonderland law where,

"when I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'
'The question is', said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty,' which is to be master-that's all.'

(Through the Looking Glass, c.vi)

As I say, a tad contentious...

Tuesday-what are we doing in criminal today? Ah, still dealing with our cannabis possessing benefit cheat and his gradual fall into prison. It's a tricky case this one,

On the one hand, he has a previous for growing cannabis (along with other offences), he was seen with potting compost on his hands and overalls and he has a weed habit.

But on the other, there are none of his fingerprints on any of the cannabis producing items (only a fan and an extension cable-which may have an innocent explanation being items with a possibly innocent use) and he was caught with cannabis from another source.
Which leads me to ask, if he has no money and grows the stuff why does he spend cash he doesn't have to buy it from a dealer?

All very intriguing stuff-I have the suspicion that the CofL like to keep it fairly even like this so that you can't get a biased or jaundiced view against your client. After all, if you think your client is guilty then you might be less inclined to do your best for them-well that's my theory.
The College can't present you with innocent clients though since;

• Statistically, about 93% are stone cold guilty, and
• You would miss out on the stuff about mitigation and appealing

So they have to keep it balanced and then hit you with fresh, overwhelming evidence where the whole defence case collapses like a house in an earthquake (apologies to any readers in Kent)

Recently, I have thinking about my first ever 'case'-it was for a union member back in my Smiths days who was accused of a dismissable offence.
I acted as her advocate and confidant and although she left the company she wasn't dismissed for 'gross misconduct' (with its subsequent problems) but left with 13 weeks pay and a good reference.
Every person that I spoke to in the store (about 60 people) believed that she was guilty of the offence. Only I had no personal view of the matter-even to this day, I don't think she did what she was accused of-she certainly acted foolishly but I don't think dishonestly.

The reason that I have been thinking about it recently-along with the prospect of being thrust into the world of law is that there is a young woman in Welfare who is the spitting image of her and even talks in exactly the same accent! (BTW, they are not related-I have asked!)

With the usual seamless link we now move to Wednesday and welfare. (damn am I so slick at this or what..?).

Well, actually I don't. In fact when I got home on Tuesday I had a surprise-a message on my answerphone. OK, the message did say that it had come on Sunday at about 6pm-but we'll move swiftly on from the fact that I have never got around to setting it properly (or even reading the manual).
The message was that I had been invited to lunch with the external examiners because temp-loyment (god bless her) had thought that I would be an excellent person for them to talk to (BTW I am getting a little concerned that she may have designs on me-I shall have to start shaving my legs)

Well, being an intellectual giant (**cough**) with educated opinions (**double cough**) on everything from indirect discrimination to number theory (**collapses in coughing fit**) I was the obvious choice to take a light repast with some others of equivalent intellects (or other people who have mindless chats to spiders that are running away from them).

Anyhow, the upshot was that I turned up for this lunch (as in fact did half of the workshop group-so much for exclusivity) and we were sat around a table with the external examiner who had a very faint whispery voice and a neck lump.
Now I am not one to mock the afflicted (that would be foolish considering my obvious deficiencies) but this was huge! The guy wore his shirt over it-I fully expected an 'alien' like moment as it burst free and ran under the table...

It was all quite pleasant and we made sure that we said nice things about Tigger and his teaching but I had been hoping to do a bit of networking, schmoozing and brown-nosing. Ho hum.

Interestingly the examiner has two specialities in which he is the outside invigilator. Welfare-especially looking after those with benefit claims and acquistions.
Acquisitions!!
That's kind of a strange combo. Acquisitions is about making money for people who have too much money already. (now I'm wondering if that neck-lump may have been a siamese-twin who handled the welfare side...)

The other thing of note was that of the 7 students around the table, all 4 of the acquisitions people had training contracts with big firms and all 3 of the welfarers are currently unemployed but then...

...our 'star' welfare student joined us. She actually has a job!!!

I made my excuses after about an hour and slipped away to finish my tasks for the workshop.

Which was a bit of a strange one. We had our prep task which was in two parts. We had been given a background reading relating to half a dozen people and were asked,'what benefits did they need?' and 'what benefits could they claim?'.

I don't think anyone did the first part-and we didn't cover the answer in the workshop.

The second part was the entire workshop-we did nothing else (we still overran, mind). We had to go through each of the claims making sure that we followed the checklist fully.

And we didn't finish all of the possible claims either...

Benefits are not going down anywhere as well as immigration did. I am determined to stay positive about them but my classmates are not impressed. The sheer amount of them is pretty daunting-and so far we've only touched non-means tested, non-contributory ones.

During the earlier part of the week I had tried to get my consolidation done because I knew that I would have to dedicate at least a day (or so) in getting back in the swing for advocacy.

Yep, it's that time-one week after picking up the papers I had to do my reassessment. The first thing I noted was how hard it was to get back into the right frame of mind. I last did advocacy in the 2nd week of December and outside of getting my feedback and having a horrid few minutes seeing myself on video, I had tried not to think about it.

The case was not an inspiring one.
A hotel had contracted someone to lay a carpet on their stairs. The hotel had chosen a red carpet with a bold diagonal pattern which the carpet layer had not laid centrally but had bisected the diagonal and ended up putting a triangular block on each side. The hotel were not happy and got a new carpet from a different seller and charged the cost to the originally carpet-layer (who just happened to be on holiday when the claim arrived and only returned home after judgment had been given against her)

And you have to present a case on the carpet layers behalf to get this judgment set aside.

To be fair, the case was not quite as bleak as I have made it. There are small straws to grab to try to make a case and give the judge the idea that if the case were to be tried the defence would have a chance of succeeding.
But again, the hardest part is memorising the litany and putting it all into sensible order. This was made more difficult because although I knew that I wouldn't have an opponent in the reassessment (the College obviously realise that two people who have both already failed the assessment would be a nightmare combination) that means that I have extra litany to remember.

In addition to introducing myself and the firm that I 'work' for I also have to introduce the absent firm and explain their non-attendance and show documents signed by them to that effect.

Anyhow, come Saturday morning I have my script and I am frantically trying to remember it. (the advantage of having no opponent means that you don't have to reply to what they say so it is easier to go by the script).
I should mention though that you are not allowed to have the script in front of you. The College allow some notes but only in bullet points and if you are seen to be reading from a script you are failed automatically.

My memory is pretty good regarding things like cases/dates and the names of statutes but this was not going well.
If I read the script it takes about 10 minutes (and I talk really fast) without it, I stumble along in about 20 minutes. In the assessment I will have about 10 minutes-so things are not looking good.

Then catastophe!
My taxi has arrived-10 minutes early and he's outside repeatedly sounding his horn.! So I grab the last few items, stuff my pockets-hoping I've not forgotten something important and swing my tie round my neck. (A fashion god, me)

The driver does apologise for arriving early-he misread his computer (that's your tip gone, my good man) and we set off.

I get to College and find that all the study rooms are closed and locked-so I have nowhere to go and pace whilst reciting to myself.
Catastrophe number 2!

Luckily I find a corridor and can chant to myself but it still sounds terrible, nothing is coming together...

And finally, the minutes roll by and I have to go to Student services and sign myself in. I am told that there has been a problem and one of the examiners hasn't arrived. So I will be delayed and have to sit in reception and wait.
By now, my demons are coming to torment me and my good friends doubt and despair are sitting on the couch with me.

'You can go up now', the words I do not want to hear are spoken and I climb the stairs to a familiar room. This was where I took my mock assessment (and failed-just).
This does not bode well, the door opens and the assessor is there. It is the same lady who took my mock assessment (that I failed, just) and she motions me in. There is a small Sahara going on inside my mouth-it feels like I've not tasted water for months-I just know that I am going to dry up like in my assessment.

'Are you ready?', the tutor asks. 'I'll never be ready', I reply with a smile.

She smiles back.

At that moment I know that I can pass this. I begin to talk, my litany is smooth. I don't dry up.

• I quote the facts of the case.
  
• I don't get emotionally involved with my client's case but simply point to things in the evidence and 'submit' a meaning for them.
  
• I do not ask rhetorical questions.
  
• I stress that the defendant has given first hand evidence and the other side have given hearsay.
  
• I talk of express and implied contract terms
• I speak well-not perfectly, there are a few pauses and 'ems' but I do finish up with, 'Madam, unless I can assist you further, those are my submissions'.

It has taken less than 10 minutes-I believe I have covered the whole case and of all my attempts that day, it was by far the best.

There should be a chance now for the tutor to ask any questions she may have-she doesn't ask any. With barely a second's hesitation she awards the case to my client.
She then asks about costs-normally my client should have to pay since after all she was the one in the wrong since she didn't answer the original claim. I explain that normally she would have to pay but since her reasons for missing the claim was a good one (holidays are acceptable) then the costs should be shared ('in the case').

The judge agrees and I have finished.

We smile at each other and I leave.

Have I passed? I would like to think so but I really don't know. My confidence is shattered regarding advocacy but all I can say is that if I haven't passed this time-I will never pass. I can be no better than I was that Saturday morning.

But what a difference that smile made...
*
*
*
*
p.s I really did go to university with JK Rowling-but I very much doubt we met though
I lived my 3 years on one side of campus and her the other,
I did a science subject and she did an arts one.

But it's good to imagine, right?
I can't forgive her about Barry Cotter though....