Oscar - SA's OJ case

[desA]

Two systems of law:

1. Innocent until proven guilty.
1.1 One person can tie up immense resources who have to 'prove' the case against the baddie.
1.2 Clogs the legal system.
1.3 Baddie can carry on as 'normal' until the court finally stops him - if ever.

2. Guilty until proven innocent.
2.1 Baddie has to do the running around to prove his innocence.
2.2 Far less stress on the legal system.
2.3 Baddie's hands are tied & further damage limited.

[desA]

Dave A stated:
The greatest obstacle to justice for all would seem to be legal fees

Fees & wasted time.

[sterne.law@gmail.com]

I think the media is not potraying fees responsibly and they refer only to top earners.I believe that supply and demand economics control pricing.Attorneys fees range from R400 per hour to R3000 an hour.*
Counsel, may consult at R1500 upwards, appearance from R1000(unopposed) and R4-R10 000 (opposed)Given the price range, it means there is a broad spectrum, skills probably comensurate..thats life. We cant all drive luxury cars, big houses etc. Things cant and wont be equal, thats capitalism.
You choose your legal assistance and skill based on what you can afford.Re the R50 000 per day for senior counsel. Yes R50000 equates to say R6000 per hour, but what is not mentioned or taken into account is that prior to the day he may have spent 6-8 hours researching and preparing. Now we looking at R3000 per hour, not a bad rate for a SC. As a litigant I could use junior counsel (say 5 years experience) and perhaps my bill would be R10000 per day, or effectively R700 per hour (8 hours at court and 6 for prep).

If government wasted less money on litigating unneccessarily, or punished officials who allowed matters go to court, we would have pleny spare cash for litigants. Never mind what we pay for officials, especially the presidency, both personally and officially, to litigate.Yes, access to justice is important. Unfortunately litigating is expensive. Even at R500 per hour, puts it beyond the majority. This is becuase people underestimate the number of hours that go into a matter. Even if you get in and out in 15 hours, you still need R25 000 at the ready, and thats a real straight forward matter to be done in 15 hours.

Access to justice requires not capping of fees but more FREE services by the profession.*There are a number of legal products for R100 or so a month, allowing people to get protection. That creates a level of access. If you cant pay the R100 then you are stuck irrespective at what rate fees are capped.

Law firms and advocates deliver a mountain of free services. I worked for ProBono.Org, a NGO that gets lawyers and advocates to act probono. Bowman Gilfillan delivers R20 million a year in free legal services. Norton Rose, Cliffe Dekker,werksmens, Weber Wentzel and others all deliver. The advocactes at all bars do probono hours. I cant put a figure but conservativley it easily tops R500 million.

Probono work is compulsory, the problem or challenge is managing it. It cant just be goto any law firm and they will help you.*At this stage only the law soceity and ProBono.Org do this. Of course one can approach the court for pauper proceedings. This is what government needs to concentrate on, how to manage the process. Given the 20 000 attornyes in practice, unlocking the 24 hrs each, equates to almost 500 000 hours..thats access to justice. This excludes counsel.

Attorneys can certainly put the free hours in. If you are booked 8 hours a day, then you can give up 5 hours a month, you are making plenty. If you only getting 3 hours a day, then you have time to do some free work, given that time is money.

[wynn]

If you have a legal problem there should be a legislated minimum that an attorney charges to listen to your side of the story, thereafter, if he feels you have a case, he must take it on contingency, if he doesn't win he doesn't get paid, that will free up a lot of space taken up by lawyers simply charging to represent wealthy clients to outlast not so wealthy ones.
Also if an attorney sees the defendant doesn't stand a hope in hell of winning he will rather recommend a settlement.

[Marq]

You choose your legal assistance and skill based on what you can afford

This seems to be crux of the matter. I can only afford somebody charging R100/h and find myself going up against legal council whose skill base and name allows them to charge R3-6k/h. What are my odds of winning?

The legal products that cost R100 a month are not an answer for any problem beyond a paperwork shuffle. I have tested them and found the council rather wanting and it is doubtful that some of them are even qualified. A dangerous situation to be in when you are trying to win a case thats not so obvious.

I dont know that supply and demand is that obvious either. I have yet to see an attorney drop their price or suggest a cheaper alternative when I have needed assistance and baulked at the fees charged.

I think there should be a maximum fee per hour per council level so that one can determine a possible ceiling on each scenario.

I find it ludicrous and opportunistic that one has to sell ones main asset like a house just to pay somebody who doesn't/cant guarantee a favourable outcome. Assume you are innocent and have been wrongly charged with a huge crime. You may end up out of jail, but your life is ruined, you have no where to stay and no resources to start again that easily. The council who only had their maybe reputation to lose, sits up their ivory tower drinking champagne and celebrating their win without a thought of their now ex-client who is about to rob a grocery store so that he can eat something.

Perhaps another methodology could be to make the council be equally charged with their clients charge and if the case is lost, let them do the same time. Perhaps then the fees could be justified.

[Marq]

I put it to you that:-
Kenny Oldwadge seems to have been to the same Hogwarts school of legal subterfuge as the Le Roux guy, but I think he is losing the defence some points. Twisting the story left and right without success this morning. Nel even objected at one point, which must be a first. Maybe/perhaps/apparently/without prejudice, Oldwadge is the probono portion of the trial.

[desA]

Kenny Oldwadge seems like a really obnoxious character. A bit of a prat, I thought & a rude one at that.

[Hermes14]

QUOTE=desA;107985]Two systems of law:

1. Innocent until proven guilty.
1.1 One person can tie up immense resources who have to 'prove' the case against the baddie.
1.2 Clogs the legal system.
1.3 Baddie can carry on as 'normal' until the court finally stops him - if ever.

2. Guilty until proven innocent.
2.1 Baddie has to do the running around to prove his innocence.
2.2 Far less stress on the legal system.
2.3 Baddie's hands are tied & further damage limited.[/QUOTE]

You must remember that we are dealing with human beings.
I would classify a Judge or magistrates task more of an art than a science.
There is no text book that can teach you how to tell if a person is innocent or guilty.
At the end of the day a Judge has got to rely on her/his knowledge & experience to determine if a person is innocent or guilty.
DesA how would yo feel if you were sentenced to life for a crime you did not commit & 15 years down the line they catch the real criminal.
Sterne as soon as you employ a lawyer to fight a case for you he does a thorough background check on you.
Most of them do try to milk every possible cent they can out of you especially in the lower courts.
One point I must agree on is that there is a lot preparation that goes in to a case before it goes to court but every time the case gets postponed he smiles because he charges a he charges you for a full day in court.
A few years back I made a civil case against a security company that shot my dogs.
Luckily I had the knowledge to do the investigation myself but I needed special wittnesses to testify.
My lawyer was charging me R8000-00 a day in court & my Advocate was charging me R20 000-00 a day in court,
For every email my lawyer received cost me R85-00
There was a fee for every phone, email & fax call he made & a fee for everyone he received & this is all before you even go to court.
This is where I learn't when you phone your lawyer plan what you are going to say to him & keep the conversation as short as possible.

I put it to you that:-
Kenny Oldwadge seems to have been to the same Hogwarts school of legal subterfuge as the Le Roux guy, but I think he is losing the defence some points. Twisting the story left and right without success this morning. Nel even objected at one point, which must be a first. Maybe/perhaps/apparently/without prejudice, Oldwadge is the probono portion of the trial.

He is getting paid to defend his client no matter if he is guilty or not.
That is why he is using every possible trick in the book he possibly can.
His objective is to create as much doubt as possible in the withnesses statement as possible.

After listening to all the wittnesses evidence , (neighbours not special wittnesses)I have come to the conclusion that they are unsure of the sequence of events involving the first four loud bangs & the screaming. This could be crucial in determining if it is premeditated murder of an assumption of self defense.

Hearing this new evidence that CAPT Moller is bring out regarding the cell phones is very interesting, There is the possibility that this could be pre meditated murder.

[xcorporation]

Hermes,

Might want to wiki on the requirements for a sa judge.

i have worked in several dozen magistrate courts and i can tell you, they see things thats not even said by both parties. yet valid.
The purpose of LLB degree outweigh your statements about "There is no text book that can teach you how to tell if a person is innocent or guilty".

Regards