Re: Doing a McCann - Drunk mum spared jail for leaving boy at home as she was 'not as bad as the McCanns'

by aiyoyo 17.01.14 13:00

PeterMac wrote:
bobby18 wrote:
I am aware of the old adage 'there is no such thing as bad publicity' but I wss going to ask that if it materialises the the McCann's are involved, wouldn't Carter Ruck be aware of people's perception of them (which already exists to many today)?

Peter Mac, I think your above post above answered my question succinctly.

They do not care, so long as the bank account is full.
Have a look at the scandal of Trafigura, where they not only "defended" the indefensible, but sought to prevent publication of what an elected MP had said in the House.
There were slapped down by Parliament for that, but I suspect the invoice still went out.
The questions all lawyers ask is not "Is this a just cause" but "Can this person pay, or are they legally aided ?"
Very few do pro-bono work, as we discovered when Kate's statement that C-R were doing this suddenly turned into a third of a million pound bill, when it came to buying TB.

Shark lawyers and high profile and/or controversial clients with reputation to salvage go hand-in-hand like pair of gloves.
A hefty sum in exchange for salvaged reputation quid pro quo - that has proven to be done deal.
One side buying conscience with money, the other side selling conscience to earn money.
Each side as ugly as the other side.

by **PeterMac** 17.01.14 15:17

russiandoll wrote:haven't a clue where to post this......please move to wherever more appropriate . THE SAFEST KID ON THE PLANET [ thanks twitter]

Pack of dogs waiting for lunch-time ?