Irish Mirror Exclusive - Izevbekhai FGM story a lie

[Horace Horse]

All these delays add up until an asylum-seeker can use elapsed time and all that implies e.g. children in schools, as a grounds for leave to remain in this country. 4 years is long enough. Deport her.

Yes, and as I pointed out a day or two ago, we have columnists like F Looney in the Mail saying that because these people have been so long here they should be left stay. In other words, tie our asylum and legal system up for years, even by using fraudulent documents, and your reward is that we'll lose the will to get rid of you.

This woman should be removed forthwith. If she wants to make an immigration application from Nigeria, based on whatever grounds she can manufacture, let her do so.

[Horace Horse]

I got a raft of negreps from the usual suspects for that little outburst. .

You can't be surprised. A lot of Irish people hate racists like you. You're pretty disgusting. Accept that, and you're on the way to rehabilitation as a normal decent citizen.

[Catalpa]

It's been adjourned for two weeks to let Pamela's new legal team respond to the new affidavits. I know that's the new term but people might have the idea that it is months away. The new affidavits are actually the new evidence produced by the State. It's just a technical matter that you have to introduce evidence in the form of sworn affidavit. Therefore in two weeks Counsel for Pamela will either have to produce other, factual, sworn affidavits contesting the accuracy of the States new evidence to a convincing degree or the court will, more than likely, dismiss her action.

PS, State is represented by Hugh Mohan SC, former Chair of the Bar Council and a serious heavy hitter.

So who would represent her now and why are the head of the State's ream named but no of her legal eagles past or present.

As this is a case of huge Public concern it seems to me that the media are trying to keep the names of her sides lawyers a secret.

Does anyone one know how these people can be outed?

- and why in the case of her former representatives they obviously made no serious attempt over the last number of years to check out the bona fides of the documents she gave them?

[jmcc]

As this is a case of huge Public concern it seems to me that the media are trying to keep the names of her sides lawyers a secret.

Generally when a case is being reported only the names of the barristers are mentioned. The instructing solicitors rarely get mentioned.

Regards...jmcc

[corelli]

So who would represent her now and why are the head of the State's ream named but no of her legal eagles past or present.

As this is a case of huge Public concern it seems to me that the media are trying to keep the names of her sides lawyers a secret.

Does anyone one know how these people can be outed?

- and why in the case of her former representatives they obviously made no serious attempt over the last number of years to check out the bona fides of the documents she gave them?

Her SC, now withdrawn, was Mel Christle, a very serious advocate and a former serious boxer!! Careful what you say.

The advocates job is not to determine the credibility or not of their client but to represent their case to the best of their ability, other than when their bone fides are seriously in question, like in the present instance where Pamela has admitted that the documents were forged. In other words if your client tells you they are guilty you cannot plead innocent on their behalf but otherwise you just follow instructions.

[Vega1447]

Her SC, now withdrawn, was Mel Christle, a very serious advocate and a former serious boxer!! Careful what you say.

The advocates job is not to determine the credibility or not of their client but to represent their case to the best of their ability, other than when their bone fides are seriously in question, like in the present instance where Pamela has admitted that the documents were forged. In other words if your client tells you they are guilty you cannot plead innocent on their behalf but otherwise you just follow instructions.

How does an asylum-seeker go about getting a solicitor who can get someone like Christle to represent her?

A long time ago a family member had a cut and dried compo case against a *very* senior doctor - no pro-bono offers, just phoned around - ended up with a dud 'cos no easy way without legal contacts to make sure we got a good'un.

We still won the case - I could probably have won as a lay litigant...

But it makes me wonder how a foreigner can get free access to "very serious advocates" when natives cannot.

[Catalpa]

Her SC, now withdrawn, was Mel Christle, a very serious advocate and a former serious boxer!! Careful what you say.

The advocates job is not to determine the credibility or not of their client but to represent their case to the best of their ability, other than when their bone fides are seriously in question, like in the present instance where Pamela has admitted that the documents were forged. In other words if your client tells you they are guilty you cannot plead innocent on their behalf but otherwise you just follow instructions.

Thanks for the info - so the State paid for her case to be taken in the Courts then?

[corelli]

Thanks for the info - so the State paid for her case to be taken in the Courts then?

No, having done a little digging, I understand that the matter was done pro bono, that is, they did not seek payment unless they actually won the case and were awarded costs. Happens fairly often.

[corelli]

How does an asylum-seeker go about getting a solicitor who can get someone like Christle to represent her?

A long time ago a family member had a cut and dried compo case against a *very* senior doctor - no pro-bono offers, just phoned around - ended up with a dud 'cos no easy way without legal contacts to make sure we got a good'un.

We still won the case - I could probably have won as a lay litigant...

But it makes me wonder how a foreigner can get free access to "very serious advocates" when natives cannot.

Because, generally, no matter what the tribunal fallout might suggest, the bar is populated by generally decent people who are actually willing to help people, not always at huge expense.

As someone else said, the Tribunals were the worst public relations disaster for the legal profession, ever! The negative comment on the bar is usually from people who never had to seek any barristers assistance, when they were up s**t creek!

In answer to your specific question, I would imagine the reason that you could not get other than a "dud" is because your solicitor does not know an awful lot, to be honest.

[kerrynorth]

I see there was an advert just on now for the Would You Believe programme on PI Sunday 10.20pm.