MP's want legal aid to fight court case

drc

How is this possible? I thought you were only entitled to legal aid if you were on a very very low salary or not working?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1262273/MPs-want-legal-aid-expenses-fight-Court-case-cost-public-3m.html

MPs want legal aid for expenses fight: Fury as court case expected to cost public £3m

Three Labour MPs charged with claiming £60,000 in fraudulent expenses are to apply for legal aid to fund a lengthy court battle to get the case thrown out. The politicians accused of fiddling their expenses are expected to claim state assistance for top barristers to fight the case, which could go all the way to the Supreme Court.
In a grave embarrassment for Gordon Brown, they will use arcane laws to claim they are immune from prosecution in court hearings on the eve of a possible general election.

Anger: Protesters dressed as Guy Fawkes and a pig outside Southwark Crown Court yesterday

Elliot Morley, David Chaytor and Jim Devine will argue they are above the law in hearings which begin on May 4 - two days before the expected polling day.
The sight of three Labour MPs seeking to dodge their day in the dock could cost Labour thousands of votes.
Legal experts estimate the bill for legal aid could push the cost of the prosecution to £3million.
The country's top legal minds are being lined up to prosecute the three MPs and Conservative peer Lord Hanningfield, who are accused of dishonestly pocketing thousands of pounds.

But the MPs have hired two top silks, with another two QCs likely to be brought in on legal aid to fight the prosecution in a High Court hearing.
Under the 321-year-old Bill of Rights, the MPs claim the Commons rulebook on expenses is covered by Parliamentary privilege.
They say this means only the House of Commons can judge them and they cannot be tried in a court.

Accused: (left to right) Jim Devine, David Chaytor and Elliot Morley

Yesterday a senior judge fixed a High Court hearing to consider the argument on Parliamentary privilege which will see the MPs in court on the day of the general election.
The issue will be determined by Mr Justice Saunders in a three- day hearing between May 4-6. Whatever the outcome of his ruling, legal experts predict the point of law will be taken to the Court of Appeal and then the Supreme Court at enormous cost to the public purse.

They say the MPs' QCs will have to spend at least 150 hours in preparation for the case, charging £250 an hour, and up to £1,000 a day for court work.
If the prosecution is allowed to go ahead, there will be separate trials for each defendant at Southwark Crown Court.



The prohibitive cost of fighting their case in the courts of the land ahead of a possible criminal trial will mean the MPs have to claim legal aid, though they could be asked to pay back part of the money if they are tried and found guilty.


Yet another MP comes under expenses watchdog's radar


Police yesterday passed a file of evidence to prosecutors against another parliamentarian suspected of abusing expenses.
The file is the eighth to be sent to the Crown Prosecution Service, four of which have resulted in charges. Two cases were dropped and a file of evidence on a seventh politician is still under consideration.
Police and prosecutors have refused to name those facing charges, but it has been claimed that Leyton and Wanstead MP Harry Cohen is under scrutiny after claiming around £70,000 for a second home while renting out his main one.



Yesterday Matthew Elliott, of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: 'These are people who became wealthy on the taxpayers' ticket, with hefty salaries and extremely generous expenses.
'Regardless of whether they have their hands in the till or not, no one on an MP's salary should be getting legal aid.
'It's shameful that taxpayers face picking up a bill in the millions at the end of this whole scandalous affair.'
The police investigation into alleged expenses abuses has already cost the taxpayer more than £500,000.
Thirteen officers have been working on the case since the scandal broke last May.
But the final bill is likely be significantly higher as detectives are still investigating a number of politicians.
Yesterday a file of evidence on an eighth parliamentarian was sent to prosecutors.
All four defendants deny the offences under the Theft Act 1968.
If convicted, they could face up to seven years in jail.

markharding557

I really can not see how they should qualify for legal aid and they are making themselves look even worse than ever

Andy_L

Legal aid isn't means tested for cases head in the Crown or higher courts, otherwise only the very poor and very rich would be able to have legal defence

ses6jwg

The funny thing is that it is difficult to tell Elliot Morley and the "pig" in the top picture apart...

wymondham

Does this not show the true extent of how detatched MP's really are from public opinion?

nearlynew

Legal aid?
You really couldn't make it up could you?

They should be given a fair trial, then hanged straight afterwards.


Lying f*cking thieves.

kennyboy66_2

1) The legal aid budget (£2bn) in the UK is the highest per Capita in the world.

2) 10 QC's earned more the 1/2 million each from legal aid last year. They run the director of the BBC close as the top paid government workers.

3) A further 75 barristers received more than £300k

4) above points would not include other earnings for non-legal aid work.

5) There is no shortage of supply of people wanting to be a solicitor or barrister.

6) Terrorism and complex fraud account for 1% of higher court cases but 50% of the legal aid budget.

7) If you work, you almost certianly would not qualify for legal aid, unless you killed someone, planned to blow up a train or carry out an epic fraud.

For some reason, the Law Society don't want any reduction to the legal aid budget. Can you guess why ?

boomerangs

Forget the trial, they're guilty. Just chain them up in the Tower of London and let the ravens feed off them.

Kohoutek

kennyboy66 wrote: »

1
For some reason, the Law Society don't want any reduction to the legal aid budget. Can you guess why ?

For some reason, you're trying to change the subject from corrupt Labour MPs. Can you guess why?

leveller2911

boomerangs wrote: »

Forget the trial, they're guilty. Just chain them up in the Tower of London and let the ravens feed off them.

I'm not sure that the Ravens would find them edible .

Very clever birds Ravens, think they would have better taste ...:D

kennyboy66_2

Kohoutek wrote: »

For some reason, you're trying to change the subject from corrupt Labour MPs. Can you guess why?

Nope.

For the record, it is scandalous that these Labour MP's are getting legal aid.

Does that make you feel better ?