Judge accuses defence solicitors of incompetence
A solicitor defending one of four fraudsters accused of taking part in a £3.5 million credit card cloning operation had “neither the experience nor the competence to adequately represent his client” in court, the trial judge said after the defendant was convicted last week.
The solicitor’s “knowledge of the law, procedure and advocacy skills fall below that which is needed in this case”, Judge Gledhill QC said at Southwark Crown Court on April 15.
All four defendants were represented by solicitors with advocacy rights rather than by barristers. Three of the solicitors were criticised by the judge for breaking basic rules of law and procedure.
In remarks made after the trial, which can be read in full here, the judge suggested that at least one of the solicitors’ firms concerned had wanted to keep the legal aid fees for itself rather than share them with a barrister.
The fraudsters, all Chinese nationals, were each given four and a half years’ imprisonment.
Khi-San Voong, 46, Qiu Yeu, 46, Qiang Xue, 34, and Dauy Chung, 40, all of Walworth, south London, had operated during a “window of opportunity” after Barclaycard announced its takeover of Morgan Stanley’s credit card business last year.
The court heard that while the security system was not operating effectively, the gang defrauded 2,000 accounts across 27 countries, stealing £3.5million between 28 September and 8 October.
Judge Gledhill did not name the three solicitors. Instead, he addressed his remarks to “Miss Roxborough”, saying she was the only lawyer he had “no cause to criticise”.
It appears he was referring to Kathleen Roxburgh of Bullivant and Partners.
The prosecutor was Ben Fitzgerald. He too should have been given more support from the CPS, the judge said.
Judge Gledhill’s remarks will be welcomed by the criminal Bar, which has long been concerned that the quality of legal representation in court is deteriorating because of pressures on the legal aid scheme.
Posted at April 20, 2009 11:37 PM