With no university education I practised at the bar for 33 years and never encountered the sort of snobbery the secret barrister enjoys writing about. I think the man has a chip on his shoulder and makes stuff up. Either that or he writes what he thinks his readers expect to hear.
Did you not appreciate Lord Hoffmann’s judgment in Mannai? And what was wrong with Lord Denning’s judgment in Todd v British Midland Airways? It would be helpful if you gave examples of what you claim are inadequate judgments. If you include Hoffmann’s decision in Lawson v Serco, I’d agree with you.
Drahcir Nevarc
1 year ago
I have become viscerally anti-progressive over the last 15-20 years.
Tom Watson
1 year ago
‘Will Lloyd’s description of Centrist Dads comes to mind: “they still carry on like they are hated by an establishment full of port-soaked aristocrats and Thatcherites who want Nelson Mandela to stay in prison”.’
Exactly this. There is a certain type of centre-lefty who can talk about ‘The Establishment’ without a hint of self-awareness. It’s all so tiresome.
One of the things that Hans Rosling was able to demonstrate in Factfulness was how even people working in universities and charities were many decades out of date in their perception of the actual facts of world poverty, life expectancy in third world countries etc. It takes many decades for people to adjust their stereotypes even when they are intimately involved.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair
R Wright
1 year ago
If I ever need a criminal barrister I’ll be sure to avoid the London sets. The Secret Barrister demonstrates that they clearly have too much time on their hands. Instead of brushing up on new case law or cleaning their tiny Temple room, they’re tweeting about how much they hate their whiteness, or why English law is a tool of colonialism.
hayden eastwood
1 year ago
Thank you for a beautifully written and thought-provoking article.
I have read the Secret Barrister and I didn’t find it beyond-the-pale woke at the time, though it seems that since he wrote that first book he has swung further into self absorption and conformity.
There is likely a selection bias in the publishing industry which means a conservative Secret Barrister will never be published.
People, in other words, who have gone through the reverse transition (and I have spoken to some of them), would likely not conform enough to the current orthodoxy to get a publishing deal.
Perhaps it is like I sometimes jokingly say to my friends: “When I get rich I plan to become leftwing”. It may be a case of that – finding success professionally means that he is drawn to finding success with the establishment.
“There is likely a selection bias in the publishing industry” I have taken a solemn oath only to read novels by white men until the publishing industry starts publishing novels by white men.
There was the splendid “Animal QC” a few years ago.
Michael J
1 year ago
SB has that well-honed disdainful and sneering attitude of the progressive twitter class. They know what is best for you as they are your betters and they are more decent than you because they hold all the right opinions. I find them nauseating.
Don’t eat them if they make you sick 🙂 Srsly they (+ the judiciary/police as a whole) are a danger to ordinary working people and if they don’t straighten out on their own history has a habit of forcing their hand.
Michael Follett
1 year ago
I have not read his books, but I have followed him on Twitter for several years. Similarly, I do not know much about what it is like to be a barrister, but I recognise when someone is performing to an audience. He comes across as intelligent and well-educated, however I find him cynical and insincere. In my opinion, like most Liberals and now Progressives, he sees the benefit, in his case financial, to broadcasting his own virtue and condemning others for their shortcomings.
Colin Elliott
1 year ago
After I left school, I never wore my old school tie, because it wasn’t favourable sartorially, and never perceived any other advantage.
In the intervening years, the situation then arose whereby I came to think it would be extremely disadvantageous. That was at least 50 years ago.
The numerous progressive broadcasters and writers have built a mental image based on stereotypes so widely and repeatedly described that it is instantly recognizable to those not in a position to truly know, and capable of arousing prejudice and envy. By doing so, they acquire cheaply the virtues of integrity, courage and compassion, and along the way, also employment, royalties and reputation.
tom j
1 year ago
It’s probably worth pointing out that nobody becomes a criminal barrister for the money, so it will probably attract the progressive types. The guys making the big bucks are doing the commercial cases.
True women can be selfish puffed up drawling public school morons BUT in my exp men are far more likely to adopt that persona. I think its a coping strategy for insecurity and low intelligence, both academic and emotional. I’d bet 10:1 on that its a man.
mike otter
1 year ago
Thankfully i have limited experience in the courts: had one brilliant Barrister who really did the whole Atticus Finch in his defence and saved me a heap of trouble. The three other times were one each of witness, plaintiff and defendent. Won 2 lost 1, but in each case the Barristers were arrogant, foolish dramatists who i wouldn’t employ to sweep the floor. Part of their schtick seems to be ham RP accents and Bertie Wooster mannerisms. On a more serious note one managed to convince a judge that an inner car panel can be damaged from the outside whilst the outer skin remains perfect. Whether its just the arrogance of privelage or lack of education there needs to be a way of controlling these characters, even a primitive legal system would be a start because it seems there are more “secret barrister” types than genuine operators. There are two solutions to a failure of civil law – martial law or anarchy. These puffed up popinjays would fair as badly in the one as the other.
As a juror I recall the trial argument that a black gun may not have been seen lying on top of a radiator if the radiator was painted black, with no claim that the radiator was painted black.
Some anti- police jurors of limited intelligence actually accepted this argument! They were quickly disabused by my asking how many black radiators have they seen in their life, with the sarcasm carefully hidden.
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
“Of a weak-willed youngster uncritically devouring the ideological gruel of their industry”. Well. He certainly proved that’s true, given that he refers to himself in the plural.
Paul Watson
1 year ago
‘Centrist Dad’ is such a lazy idea. Would be a better article without it
David McDowell
1 year ago
He’s not a barrister when blogging he’s an activist.
john o'donoghue
1 year ago
The hilarious irony of an article bemoaning conformity spawning a comment thread full of conformity. Is this a parody?
Yours, of course, shines with originality and wit.
David Hammond
1 year ago
A young man from a provincial middle class background gets to Oxbridge from his comprehensive. Studies law, becomes a barrister. In his forties he explores a judge’s role. During this procedure he is asked an optional question: “Did you attend an oxbridge college?” He chooses not to answer this question knowing that it will be used against him. His hard work and success do not recommend him.
The system penalises those who might be “privileged”. Not sure what the “secret barrister: is on about.
Last edited 1 year ago by David Hammond
Tim Smith
1 year ago
I thought his identity had already been made public a few years back by Guido Fawkes?
Jeremy Bray
1 year ago
Zzzz
Adrian Maxwell
1 year ago
I came to the criminal bar after a career elsewhere. I got half way through The Secret Barrister before sentencing it to a community penalty by donating it, in aliis ruderibus libris, to a charity shop. A little satire there, Latin is no longer used. It is easy and lazy to write about the Bar as if it were a 1950s Boulting Brothers comedy, where everyone dresses for dinner or Carry on Up the Steps where Sid James is a wily clerk and Barbara Windsor runs the court list office. The Bar, in particular the criminal Bar, is a hard working, essential industry suffering from a top down inability or reluctance, to adopt modern working methods. Defence barristers should be able to effectively withdraw their labour, the work of the law should not involve 2 confused and competing professions (solictors and barristers) scrambling for the same work and the ridiculous garb required of the barristers (who actually appear in court) should be axed. But these core ideas of challenging the old ways are not dealt with well in the author’s works. A central problem is that the British public enjoy the theatre and drama of productions like Rumpole or recently on Netflix, Anatomy of a Scandal. A survey some years ago asked court users if wigs and gowns should be dropped. An indicative 98% of witnesses, defendants, jurors, professionals, admin staff, reporters and the public gallery wanted these relics kept! This sort of thing explains the sales of The Secret Barrister’s books and why we have a Rumpole figure as a Prime Minister. .
A good, informative post – but other than being an overweight, middle-aged, henpecked Oxford grad, Horace Rumpole bears no resemblance to Borisconi that I can see. Rumpole has ability, integrity, a passion for justice, a deep love of English literature and shows little career ambition.
Good point, thank you. I have done Horace a disservice and John Mortimer would be spinning in his grave at the association! I like Borisconi.
anthony seymour
1 year ago
Firstly, I find that his and Clive Coleman’s (the BBC’s legal correspondent) opinions on law seem to coincide a lot . (Is that a coincidence’?) His/ Her opinions on law are very populist. Such as guilt by accusation and whether ‘not guilty’ means innocent (In Law) I would welcome an open discussion on these points and I am available to take part in these discussion whenever they take place.
I think a good start would be to study how much the system that created “barristers” etc can be traced back to any theories of jurisprudence from Lex Talionis through Sharia to Hayek/Crowley and their “do what thou wilt”. It seems they don’t even have the logical base of the last one. Until “guilt” can only be established via inquisition of facts you can forget revenge, reparition and rehabilition through the courts. What is on trial is not facts but a person’s social standing, skin colour and personal habits. This works a bit as a deterrent by causing law abiding people to fear the courts & police, but doesn’t put committed criminals off at all.
Anton van der Merwe
1 year ago
As someone who is obsessed with evidence it is very difficult to be enthusiastic about either side of the political spectrum. Both sides studiously ignore evidence when it does not support their views. One difference is that the right are aware of the fact that they are doing this. I am not sure whether this makes it better or worse.
Delia Barkley-Delieu
1 year ago
Well, that rather scathing article has made me want to read the book.
I’m all for the puncturing of pomposity and for things to be said ‘like what they are’. I do like straight talkers with at least one food grounded in reality. I have little truck with Centrist Dads and their ilk. We all know we will be blighted with a damning ‘ist’ label should we dare ‘speak our truth’. (OMG…I hate that term…self-flagellation after cocoa.)
The Secret Barrister serves a purpose. I’ve no idea what goes on in the Inns of Court and the only bar I’ve ever been drawn to will serve me with a stiff G&T or a decent beer. However, “Bravo” I say for highlighting there are still many who delight in wearing the old school tie and enjoy the many privileges it will bring them decades after they’ve left school. I’ve yet to hear a barrister speak as if he was born and bred in the east end of London so let’s have some realism here. Well done to those who make it without the aid of nepotism or financial privilege. There’ll be some, but not many.
I raise my glass to the Secret Barrister. If he does have a ‘chip on his shoulder’, so what? Don’t most of us? I could open a fish and chip shop and never have to buy a potato. In a world dominated by left-wing media we desperately need an outlet and some perspective. I wish him well.
Dustshoe Richinrut
1 year ago
They … who must be obeyed. At all times.
Nicky Samengo-Turner
11 months ago
Just take a look at the names published at those called to the bar… 20 % or less are British.. watch this space.
With no university education I practised at the bar for 33 years and never encountered the sort of snobbery the secret barrister enjoys writing about. I think the man has a chip on his shoulder and makes stuff up. Either that or he writes what he thinks his readers expect to hear.
It’s a pity he didn’t concentrate on the inadequacy of some of the post-war Judges. Wheatley, Denning, Hoffman, Saville and others, spring to mind!
Denning was close to the most overrated judge of the 20th century.
Only exceeded by Hoffman, it must be said.
Would you care to give some examples? Denning had one of the most brilliant intellects of his generation.
Did you not appreciate Lord Hoffmann’s judgment in Mannai? And what was wrong with Lord Denning’s judgment in Todd v British Midland Airways? It would be helpful if you gave examples of what you claim are inadequate judgments. If you include Hoffmann’s decision in Lawson v Serco, I’d agree with you.
I have become viscerally anti-progressive over the last 15-20 years.
‘Will Lloyd’s description of Centrist Dads comes to mind: “they still carry on like they are hated by an establishment full of port-soaked aristocrats and Thatcherites who want Nelson Mandela to stay in prison”.’
Exactly this. There is a certain type of centre-lefty who can talk about ‘The Establishment’ without a hint of self-awareness. It’s all so tiresome.
One of the things that Hans Rosling was able to demonstrate in Factfulness was how even people working in universities and charities were many decades out of date in their perception of the actual facts of world poverty, life expectancy in third world countries etc. It takes many decades for people to adjust their stereotypes even when they are intimately involved.
If I ever need a criminal barrister I’ll be sure to avoid the London sets. The Secret Barrister demonstrates that they clearly have too much time on their hands. Instead of brushing up on new case law or cleaning their tiny Temple room, they’re tweeting about how much they hate their whiteness, or why English law is a tool of colonialism.
Thank you for a beautifully written and thought-provoking article.
I have read the Secret Barrister and I didn’t find it beyond-the-pale woke at the time, though it seems that since he wrote that first book he has swung further into self absorption and conformity.
There is likely a selection bias in the publishing industry which means a conservative Secret Barrister will never be published.
People, in other words, who have gone through the reverse transition (and I have spoken to some of them), would likely not conform enough to the current orthodoxy to get a publishing deal.
Perhaps it is like I sometimes jokingly say to my friends: “When I get rich I plan to become leftwing”. It may be a case of that – finding success professionally means that he is drawn to finding success with the establishment.
“There is likely a selection bias in the publishing industry”
I have taken a solemn oath only to read novels by white men until the publishing industry starts publishing novels by white men.
Fortunately, there are a great many which were published in the past – plays and poetry, too.
Heh. Me too.
“When I get rich I plan to become leftwing”.
Nice one, Hayden!
There was the splendid “Animal QC” a few years ago.
SB has that well-honed disdainful and sneering attitude of the progressive twitter class. They know what is best for you as they are your betters and they are more decent than you because they hold all the right opinions. I find them nauseating.
Don’t eat them if they make you sick 🙂 Srsly they (+ the judiciary/police as a whole) are a danger to ordinary working people and if they don’t straighten out on their own history has a habit of forcing their hand.
I have not read his books, but I have followed him on Twitter for several years. Similarly, I do not know much about what it is like to be a barrister, but I recognise when someone is performing to an audience. He comes across as intelligent and well-educated, however I find him cynical and insincere. In my opinion, like most Liberals and now Progressives, he sees the benefit, in his case financial, to broadcasting his own virtue and condemning others for their shortcomings.
After I left school, I never wore my old school tie, because it wasn’t favourable sartorially, and never perceived any other advantage.
In the intervening years, the situation then arose whereby I came to think it would be extremely disadvantageous. That was at least 50 years ago.
The numerous progressive broadcasters and writers have built a mental image based on stereotypes so widely and repeatedly described that it is instantly recognizable to those not in a position to truly know, and capable of arousing prejudice and envy. By doing so, they acquire cheaply the virtues of integrity, courage and compassion, and along the way, also employment, royalties and reputation.
It’s probably worth pointing out that nobody becomes a criminal barrister for the money, so it will probably attract the progressive types. The guys making the big bucks are doing the commercial cases.
I suspect they do okay anyway
I thought it was a woman, not a man.
Interesting that you and all commenters assume the Secret Barrister is a man.
True women can be selfish puffed up drawling public school morons BUT in my exp men are far more likely to adopt that persona. I think its a coping strategy for insecurity and low intelligence, both academic and emotional. I’d bet 10:1 on that its a man.
Thankfully i have limited experience in the courts: had one brilliant Barrister who really did the whole Atticus Finch in his defence and saved me a heap of trouble. The three other times were one each of witness, plaintiff and defendent. Won 2 lost 1, but in each case the Barristers were arrogant, foolish dramatists who i wouldn’t employ to sweep the floor. Part of their schtick seems to be ham RP accents and Bertie Wooster mannerisms. On a more serious note one managed to convince a judge that an inner car panel can be damaged from the outside whilst the outer skin remains perfect. Whether its just the arrogance of privelage or lack of education there needs to be a way of controlling these characters, even a primitive legal system would be a start because it seems there are more “secret barrister” types than genuine operators. There are two solutions to a failure of civil law – martial law or anarchy. These puffed up popinjays would fair as badly in the one as the other.
As a juror I recall the trial argument that a black gun may not have been seen lying on top of a radiator if the radiator was painted black, with no claim that the radiator was painted black.
Some anti- police jurors of limited intelligence actually accepted this argument! They were quickly disabused by my asking how many black radiators have they seen in their life, with the sarcasm carefully hidden.
“Of a weak-willed youngster uncritically devouring the ideological gruel of their industry”. Well. He certainly proved that’s true, given that he refers to himself in the plural.
‘Centrist Dad’ is such a lazy idea. Would be a better article without it
He’s not a barrister when blogging he’s an activist.
The hilarious irony of an article bemoaning conformity spawning a comment thread full of conformity. Is this a parody?
Yours, of course, shines with originality and wit.
A young man from a provincial middle class background gets to Oxbridge from his comprehensive. Studies law, becomes a barrister. In his forties he explores a judge’s role. During this procedure he is asked an optional question: “Did you attend an oxbridge college?” He chooses not to answer this question knowing that it will be used against him. His hard work and success do not recommend him.
The system penalises those who might be “privileged”. Not sure what the “secret barrister: is on about.
I thought his identity had already been made public a few years back by Guido Fawkes?
Zzzz
I came to the criminal bar after a career elsewhere. I got half way through The Secret Barrister before sentencing it to a community penalty by donating it, in aliis ruderibus libris, to a charity shop. A little satire there, Latin is no longer used. It is easy and lazy to write about the Bar as if it were a 1950s Boulting Brothers comedy, where everyone dresses for dinner or Carry on Up the Steps where Sid James is a wily clerk and Barbara Windsor runs the court list office. The Bar, in particular the criminal Bar, is a hard working, essential industry suffering from a top down inability or reluctance, to adopt modern working methods. Defence barristers should be able to effectively withdraw their labour, the work of the law should not involve 2 confused and competing professions (solictors and barristers) scrambling for the same work and the ridiculous garb required of the barristers (who actually appear in court) should be axed. But these core ideas of challenging the old ways are not dealt with well in the author’s works. A central problem is that the British public enjoy the theatre and drama of productions like Rumpole or recently on Netflix, Anatomy of a Scandal. A survey some years ago asked court users if wigs and gowns should be dropped. An indicative 98% of witnesses, defendants, jurors, professionals, admin staff, reporters and the public gallery wanted these relics kept! This sort of thing explains the sales of The Secret Barrister’s books and why we have a Rumpole figure as a Prime Minister. .
A good, informative post – but other than being an overweight, middle-aged, henpecked Oxford grad, Horace Rumpole bears no resemblance to Borisconi that I can see. Rumpole has ability, integrity, a passion for justice, a deep love of English literature and shows little career ambition.
Good point, thank you. I have done Horace a disservice and John Mortimer would be spinning in his grave at the association! I like Borisconi.
Firstly, I find that his and Clive Coleman’s (the BBC’s legal correspondent) opinions on law seem to coincide a lot . (Is that a coincidence’?) His/ Her opinions on law are very populist. Such as guilt by accusation and whether ‘not guilty’ means innocent (In Law) I would welcome an open discussion on these points and I am available to take part in these discussion whenever they take place.
I think a good start would be to study how much the system that created “barristers” etc can be traced back to any theories of jurisprudence from Lex Talionis through Sharia to Hayek/Crowley and their “do what thou wilt”. It seems they don’t even have the logical base of the last one. Until “guilt” can only be established via inquisition of facts you can forget revenge, reparition and rehabilition through the courts. What is on trial is not facts but a person’s social standing, skin colour and personal habits. This works a bit as a deterrent by causing law abiding people to fear the courts & police, but doesn’t put committed criminals off at all.
As someone who is obsessed with evidence it is very difficult to be enthusiastic about either side of the political spectrum. Both sides studiously ignore evidence when it does not support their views. One difference is that the right are aware of the fact that they are doing this. I am not sure whether this makes it better or worse.
Well, that rather scathing article has made me want to read the book.
I’m all for the puncturing of pomposity and for things to be said ‘like what they are’. I do like straight talkers with at least one food grounded in reality. I have little truck with Centrist Dads and their ilk. We all know we will be blighted with a damning ‘ist’ label should we dare ‘speak our truth’. (OMG…I hate that term…self-flagellation after cocoa.)
The Secret Barrister serves a purpose. I’ve no idea what goes on in the Inns of Court and the only bar I’ve ever been drawn to will serve me with a stiff G&T or a decent beer. However, “Bravo” I say for highlighting there are still many who delight in wearing the old school tie and enjoy the many privileges it will bring them decades after they’ve left school. I’ve yet to hear a barrister speak as if he was born and bred in the east end of London so let’s have some realism here. Well done to those who make it without the aid of nepotism or financial privilege. There’ll be some, but not many.
I raise my glass to the Secret Barrister. If he does have a ‘chip on his shoulder’, so what? Don’t most of us? I could open a fish and chip shop and never have to buy a potato. In a world dominated by left-wing media we desperately need an outlet and some perspective. I wish him well.
They … who must be obeyed. At all times.
Just take a look at the names published at those called to the bar… 20 % or less are British.. watch this space.