Latest news with #FacultyofAdvocates
Glasgow Times
13 hours ago
- Glasgow Times
Pupils from Glasgow school take part in mock trial
A total of 26 pupils from Woodfarm High School, in Glasgow, and St Andrew's Academy, in Paisley, participated in the immersive session at the University of the West of Scotland (UWS). The session, held in the newly opened moot courtroom within the Paisley campus, was designed to give the youngsters a taste of what it's like to study law at university and practice it in real-world settings. Read more: 'Do not be a hero': Armed robber raids Glasgow pharmacy for methadone and Valium Professor Kasim Sheikh, dean of the School of Business and Creative Industries, commended the pupils' enthusiasm and potential. He said: "It was inspiring to see such insight, courage, and promise from these pupils as they stepped into the courtroom. "Events like this are about more than just learning how the legal system works; they're about helping young people see themselves in professional roles and giving them the confidence to take that next step." During the event, pupils were given roles as prosecutors, defence lawyers, witnesses, and jurors, and brought their arguments to life in UWS's purpose-built courtroom facility. The trial was overseen by a judicial bench of two: Isabella Ennis KC of the Faculty of Advocates, and Jeremy O'Neill, procurator fiscal depute, who jointly presided in the role of sheriffs during the proceedings. Both legal professionals gave a career and legal pathways talk after the verdict, designed to offer pupils insight into routes into the profession and life in the courtroom. The event also introduced pupils to UWS's new LLB (Hons) Scots Law degree. Developed in consultation with the Law Society of Scotland, this programme offers a professionally accredited pathway to becoming a solicitor. It is designed to provide students with both the academic foundations and hands-on courtroom experience required for a successful career in the legal profession. (Image: Supplied) Read more: Major new housing development in Glasgow district put on the market Isabella Ennis KC said: "I was genuinely impressed by the level of preparation and passion these young people brought to the courtroom. "From their structured legal arguments to their confident delivery, they demonstrated real potential. "With this new moot courtroom and the new LLB in Scots Law, UWS has created a space that makes the study and practice of law accessible, inspiring, and inclusive." Professor Sheikh added: "Through our new LLB in Scots Law launching in September and our investment in learning, UWS is opening doors and nurturing the legal professionals of tomorrow." UWS has hosted annual mock court events since 2022, adapting and drawing inspiration from MiniTrial materials, with the generous support of the Faculty of Advocates.
The Courier
12-06-2025
- Politics
- The Courier
Sheku Bayoh inquiry told chair's independence is 'torpedoed' by family meetings
Meetings between Sheku Bayoh's family and the chair of an inquiry into his death have 'torpedoed the independence of the chair', a hearing was told. The Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, Roddy Dunlop KC said 'secret' meetings held several times since Lord Bracadale was appointed to head the £50 million probe in 2020 were 'spectacularly ill-advised'. He is representing the Scottish Police Federation – one of a number of groups calling for Lord Bracadale to step down – and two of the officers involved in Mr Bayoh's death. A public inquiry running since 2021 is investigating the circumstances of Mr Bayoh's death in Kirkcaldy in May 2015 and whether race was a factor. Mr Dunlop said Mr Bayoh's family had made 'inappropriate' remarks during these meetings, with Lord Bracadale claiming to have ended the meeting as a result. He said this was contradicted by the minutes of the meeting, which showed further conversation taking place. He said: 'These meetings were, almost in their entirety, completely inappropriate. 'They were doubtless well meaning, they were doubtless arranged out of the best of intentions but – and with the greatest of respect – they were spectacularly ill-advised and they have torpedoed the independence of the chair.' Mr Bayoh died in custody after a group of police officers involved in his arrest in Kirkcaldy responded to multiple reports of him in the streets with a knife. Mr Dunlop also said Mr Bayoh's family were as positioning him as 'Scotland's George Floyd'. 'The arresting officers, on the other hand, argue this was a man bent on violence, heavily intoxicated and armed with a knife – creating a clear and present danger. 'The attempt to equiparate this inquiry with, for example, the Covid inquiries or the Omagh bombing inquiry is entirely specious.' He added the fact Lord Bracadale had written to Mr Bayoh's family stating he was 'humbled and honoured' to hear from them was 'alarming'. He said it showed clear bias and that the officers were not afforded any opportunity to similarly meet with the chair. Claire Mitchell KC, representing the family, said they had the 'utmost confidence' in Lord Bracadale. She said: 'There is a preliminary matter I'd like to address and that is the idea that the meetings that the chair and others had with the family were secret – they were nothing of the sort. 'The chair mentioned in open hearing that he had met with the family, matters were stated publicly, indeed, it was even recorded in the national press. 'But perhaps rather than being surprised that the family met with the chair a question might be asked, why did other core participants not expect it? 'Because meetings with families is common place in public inquiries.' She listed a number of such, including the Stephen Lawrence inquiry, the Grenfell Tower inquiry and the Omagh bombing Inquiry. She added the legislation that governs public inquiries states not all core participants have the same rights. 'The family of Sheku Bayoh have an Article 2 right, which this inquiry as a public body itself in terms of Section 6 of the Human Rights Act must not breach. 'That duty is not held to any other core participant and it places this family in a unique position. 'It follows from that that any and all suggestions that the core participant should be treated equally is wrong. It falls into the same error as those who say they don't see colour and therefore they treat all people the same, can't have issues of race. 'The inquiry has duties to the family of Sheku Bayoh that it does not have in respect of others and the chair has made that clear repeatedly from the outset of this inquiry.' Father-of-two Mr Bayoh, died after he was detained and lost consciousness on Hayfield Road by police officers at around 7am on May 3, 2015. The public inquiry into his death, the actions of police, and whether race was a factor began in Edinburgh in May 2022. The hearing heard from members of the public who reported seeing Mr Bayoh on the streets of Kirkcaldy with a knife, including a nurse who would go on to treat him in A&E. He wasn't carrying the knife when officers arrived at the scene but a violent confrontation followed, with up to six officers restraining the 31-year-old on the ground. Former police officer Nicole Short told the inquiry she was attacked by Mr Bayoh and believed his death was 'unavoidable'. But nearby residents refuted the claim he had 'stomped' on PC Short, with a doctor noting she was not in pain. The officers were allowed to stay together in the cafeteria of Kirkcaldy police station while family members claim they were given conflicting accounts of events.
Scotsman
09-06-2025
- Scotsman
How I became one of Scotland's youngest female Advocates
Iona Young outlines the unusual path she has taken in her Scottish law career Sign up to our Scotsman Money newsletter, covering all you need to know to help manage your money. Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... At 26, I am one of the youngest female advocates in Scotland. I also specialise in both criminal and family law; an unusual combination, and one that many aspiring female advocates may not consider. Getting to this point has been a long and sometimes daunting journey and my journey from law student to advocate has not been a typical one. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The 'traditional' route to a career at the Bar involves completing a traineeship and then working as a solicitor for some years before becoming a devil at the Faculty of Advocates. I chose not to take this path. Instead of working as a solicitor for a period, I worked towards becoming an advocate at the earliest opportunity. Iona Young's journey from law student to advocate has not been a typical one I joined the Faculty of Advocates after completing my studies at the University of Strathclyde, followed by a traineeship at a solicitors' office. By foregoing the usual years-long period working as a solicitor, I knew I was opting for a shorter but more difficult journey. Having gone straight from completing my traineeship to the Faculty of Advocates I found preparing for its entrance exams without having any substantial gaps in my studying routine helpful. The Faculty's devilling course also involves periods spent in the classroom developing your advocacy skills. I didn't feel disadvantaged by not having spent some time practising as a solicitor, as this advocacy training is carefully designed to build upon your skills in a supportive learning environment. Initially, when I left university, I wanted to practice exclusively in criminal law. However, the solicitor's office where I completed my traineeship also practiced family law and I realised it was a discipline I enjoyed. I went on to spend a large portion of my time during my nine-month devilling training at the Faculty of Advocates shadowing an experienced family law advocate. This was a turning point in my career, which has led me, to this day, to practice both. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I was also fortunate enough to be awarded a Lord Hope Scholarship by the Faculty of Advocates to support me as I undertook my devilling training. The scholarship gives greater weighting to those in financial need or from groups currently under-represented. This was vital to me; devilling is a big financial commitment and I would not have been in a position to devil without it. I would encourage anyone considering a career at the Bar to consider applying for one of the sponsorships administered by the Faculty. Having completed my training, I was called to the Bar last year. I now enjoy the benefits of a varied and interesting career in law as an independent practitioner, specialising in both criminal and family law. I feel lucky that I have been able to experience both. It feels a very far cry from the classroom in Stranraer Academy where I was first inspired to pursue this career path while studying post-World War II international criminal law. As a member of the Faculty I am also involved in outreach projects in support of other young people who are considering a career as an advocate. This is my takeaway: no matter your background or the route you may take to get there, there is a home at the Faculty of Advocates for everyone.
STV News
28-05-2025
- Politics
- STV News
Part-time sheriff dismissed over 'vulgar' comments attacking inquiry chair
A part-time sheriff who accused the chair of the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry of being a 'monster', 'deranged' and 'evil' has been removed from office. John Halley, an author and member of the Faculty of Advocates, was appointed as junior counsel to the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry (SCAI) in October 2015 but was dismissed in April 2019, and posted a series of social media posts regarding chair of the inquiry, Lady Smith. In 2020, he was investigated for 'misbehaviour' regarding Twitter posts and public statements between May 2019 and December 2019. A probe around 'unfitness for office by reason of misbehaviour', led by Judge Lord Bracadale, found that 'it is inappropriate for a judicial office holder to conduct a campaign against another member of the judiciary in such a confrontational and public way… Such conduct is improper and not consistent with the dignity of judicial office'. Mr Halley brought a case against Lady Smith in an employment tribunal in July 2019, alleging disability discrimination, but withdrew his claim in December, and the proceedings were dismissed that month. In a series of statements in May 2019 he alleged that from September 1 2016 he had to suffer disability discrimination, harassment and victimisation by Lady Smith and accused her of being 'a danger to cancer sufferers at work'; and less than a month later, he branded her a 'serious danger to cancer sufferers'. In December 2019, he repeated the allegations to a broadcaster. However, a ruling issued on Wednesday found Mr Halley had the option to follow a formal grievance process, and was expected to behave with 'dignity' in his role. Procedures around fitness for office were postponed until February 2023, following a judicial review. However in several months in 2023, Mr Halley again posted on Twitter criticising Lady Smith, including calling her 'deranged', a 'monster' and a 'bully', and sharing an excerpt of his book, A Judicial Monstering – Child Sexual Abuse Cover Up and Corruption in Scotland. Mr Halley claimed by raising a case at the employment tribunal he had the right to be protected from allegations of 'misbehaviour' and claimed the communications did not constitute this. However, he was dismissed from his role on the basis that his posts amounted to 'personal attacks' and became 'progressively worse over time'. A report said: 'The fundamental problem for the judicial office holder is that it is not possible to identify anything which might reasonably and properly be categorised as a protected disclosure of information as opposed to mere vulgar abuse and vituperation, repeatedly made in the most unprofessional of terms. 'There is therefore in the present case no risk of confusing any protected disclosure with the terms in which it is advanced.' It added that 'communications were not framed in the way one might expect from a professional judge, conscious of the dignity of the office, exercising appropriate restraint, and aware of the need to preserve public confidence; rather the tone was offensive, vulgar and confrontational. 'The communications certainly amounted to a public attack on the character and integrity of a fellow judge.' It continued: 'The communications referred to the chair of the inquiry as evil, corrupt, a monster, who had manufactured false criminal charges against him to get him arrested, and who was a bully who had treated him viciously, an abuser, a danger to cancer sufferers, evil and deranged, questioning whether she was a normal, compassionate, rational human being, and saying that she was a person who was guilty of the abuse of public funds. 'The tenor of the communications, and the language used, becomes progressively worse over time and it is not unreasonable to categorise it as a campaign of personal abuse addressed to the inquiry chair.' It said the messages 'are seriously lacking in dignity…. not simply rash or intemperate comments showing a one-off lack of judgment. They evidence a sustained lack of judgment over an extended period of time.' The report said Mr Halley had 'brought the office of sheriff into disrepute'. It added: 'We are satisfied that (Mr Halley) is unfit to hold office by reason of misbehaviour.' A statement from the Scottish Government said: 'Given the gravity of the tribunal's findings, the First Minister accepted there are compelling reasons to remove part-time Sheriff Halley and has taken that decision.' The SCAI has been contacted for comment. Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Press and Journal
26-05-2025
- Press and Journal
Organised crime lawyer jailed after £87,000 drug bust at Peterculter home
A former criminal lawyer who was caught dealing nearly £87,000 worth of ketamine from her Peterculter country house has been jailed for 18 months. Advocate Amanda Lothian, 65, was convicted of being concerned in the supply of the controlled class B drug from Lower Kennerty Mill in Peterculter during the Covid-19 pandemic. A jury of six women and nine men took less than an hour to find Lothian guilty by a unanimous verdict following her trial in April. During her sentencing hearing today, Lothian represented herself and told Sheriff William Summers that she accepts that she was involved in drug supply – but denied the drugs were hers. Aberdeen Sheriff Court was previously told police raided Lothian's former home on August 28 2020 following a period of surveillance. A search of the house and a black Volvo registered to Lothian – a former member of the Faculty of Advocates who specialised in serious organised crime – uncovered two vacuum-packed bags of ketamine, worth £71,620. A further quantity of the drug was seized from a man named James Hanlon, who claimed he collected drugs from Lothian at the property off Burnside Road. He was arrested by police and found in possession of more than £15,000 worth of ketamine. Cash totalling nearly £4,000 was also found in various locations around the £600,000 former mill house. Jurors heard evidence during the four-day trial that police raided the Peterculter property on the afternoon of August 28 2020 where they found nearly a kilo of ketamine in Lothian's car. A sniffer dog named Buster then detected more ketamine within a wooden TV unit in the living room. During the defence evidence, Lothian, who represented herself, claimed that she had no knowledge of any drugs being inside her property and claimed she had been a victim of cuckooing at the hands of Hanlon. She stated that she had 'absolutely no idea what was going on inside that house'. Quizzed by Ms Thompson about why her DNA was found on the bag containing the drugs, Lothian stated that she had moved them, believing that they were a muscle-building supplement. Ms Thompson put it to her that Lothian must have 'incredibly poor luck' for her DNA to be on illegal drugs she claims she knew nothing about. The fiscal depute then asked Lothian whether she had started selling drugs to make a little extra cash to pay the rent on the huge Peterculter property. 'No,' she replied, adding: 'I find the suggestion laughable. It's absurd. I'm not the distributor.' Addressing the court today, the former advocate said that she accepted the verdict of the jury. 'I'm not maintaining my innocence in that I could or should've known what was going on – but that's not incompatible in maintaining that the drugs didn't belong to me,' Lothian said. 'I'm accepting that I had some part in the chain of supply, but I'm not accepting that the drugs are mine.' Lothian went on to tell the court that she had a serious degenerative lung condition and was taking part in an experimental drug trial at St Bart's Hospital in London, which involves regular injections. She described it as 'critical' to her future good health. However, sentencing Lothian, Sheriff William Summers told her that she had been found unanimously guilty by a jury of being concerned in the supply of drugs. He said that he took into account her health, her age and the fact that she was convicted of supply on a single day. 'With all that notwithstanding, this is a very serious charge,' he continued. 'The harm to those who abuse drugs is well documented and it's clear that a significant number of drugs were involved,' Sheriff Summers said, adding that he 'must respect the finding of the jury' in this case. 'In my opinion, the only appropriate disposal in your case is the imposition of a custodial sentence,' he said. Sheriff Summers sentenced Lothian to 18 months in prison.
