Originally Posted by FutureTaoiseach

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.

Originally Posted by D.Harry

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

Originally Posted by corelli

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.

Originally Posted by Catalpa

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.

Originally Posted by Catalpa

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?

Originally Posted by corelli

Her SC, now withdrawn, was Mel Christle, a very serious advocate and a former serious boxer!!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

Originally Posted by corelli

Her SC, now withdrawn, was Mel Christle, a very serious advocate and a former serious boxer!!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

Originally Posted by Catalpa

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

Originally Posted by Vega1447

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.