Wouldn't you think that any kind of barrister would have prepared what he was going to say in the boardroom?

After all, in court the judge would be relying on his submissions. Wouldn't get very far if he didnt speak up!

And he should know when to stop digging - when the hole is big enough for Sir A's pointing finger! Shouldn't a barrister be paying attention to the mood of his audience from the flow of what he's saying? Isn't the idea to influence the decision maker to your arguments?

At the beginning of the show didnt like the way he sneered at everyone - but then thought he was quite nice actually. But he really let himself down at the end!
Last edited by badfelafel : 28-03-2008 at 09:05

I think Nick has been in education all his life, and no matter how well you achieve in academia it never fully prepares you for "life in the real world". He's passed his bar exams, but has never been a barrister, never been in a real court and never learned those skills you mention. I think his sneering faded as he realised this himself.

I once knew a lawyer who was so dreadful at dealing with people it was recommended that he become a barrister. I rest my case!

Nic's defence in the boardroom was bad fullstop (barrister or no barrister). He's obviously not 'mixed' with fellow human beings. I know his university very well - it has a very good mix of people from all social backgrounds, so it is very surprising that he has turned out to be such a tosser.

Even in the strict confines of court, where the barrister has the upper hand, I can't help but think people will get the better of him.

I remember reading a medical negligence case where a woman who had lost one of her legs. The barrister for the defense argued that her compensation should be reduced because she would no longer need to buy so many clothes eg. one stocking instead of two. I think Nic will end up being this type of barrister!

I couldn't believe he said in his defence something along the lines of he didn't get along with some of the other men as he didn't like football as it wasn't sophisticated enough for him as he likes art.

Not a great impression to give in an interview if the person your going for a job with happens to have been chairman of a premiership football team and is a big football fan.

The one leg story is an amazing account of a barrister with an inhuman and inept approach.

His ineptitude manifest itself with clarity as he showed how he had failed even to do minimal research on the show host. If he had, then surely he would not have made the comments about art vs football that he did?

How NOT to sway a jury in your favour

I could see him getting some work for legal aid cases, particularly if the crown wanted a particular defendant found guilty quickly. Put de Lacey as his defence lawyer and it would be a no brainer!

Inept because one legged folk either have to buy two of everything (shoes) or pay to have one leg taken off (trousers) or to have the trousers or shoe specially made. There's also more wear and tear on whats worn on the one foot. Its a case for more compensation not less......