Books

Law students spend the most on books; we need the most up to date textbooks even though only a few extra cases or comments may have been added.  However, reference an old book and you risk losing marks as your point may have been updated in a later edition.  Another huge risk is the law may dramatically change for example, European Union (EU) law, when the Lisbon Treaty was ratified all EU law became instantly outdated.  Everything changed in terms of EU law although older books were good for historical information.

So that is book tip number 1 – make sure you have up to date books and hope to any deity out there that there is no dramatic change in law during the academic year.

Next and this is one I really wish I had known, it’s the end of your first year and you have a mountain of books and notes piled around your room.  Thankfully you have passed all modules and are ready for second year and yet again you have a bookcase load of books to buy.  “This is gonna cost half my student loan” is one of the first thoughts especially as no other subjects seem to need so many books BUT yay the campus bookshop will buy my old books back making new purchases cheaper.  DO NOT DO THIS it is not a simple as I have done Public Law I will never need it again because you will, throughout the degree the other law subjects blend.  This is known as the ‘golden thread of law’ and it is so very true Public Law for example can be used in many subjects after all knowing basic principles of administrative law, separation of powers, the rule of law are present in most subjects.  How can you study Human Rights without knowing the basis of these rights?  I do not mean the Human Rights Act 1998 alone but it starts with Entick v Carrington, which at its core says no man, is above the law and influenced even the United States Constitutional Amendments.  I could list at least 100 more examples but basically the modules are individual the cases and principles are not.

So that is book tip number 2 – keep all of your books at least until the end of your degree.  By this time you will have come to love them and want to keep them anyway.

When reading law books or cases there will be many new terms, Latin and Norman French may well be present and sometimes there are just “law” words and “law” grammar and it doesn’t make sense but it just ‘is’ accept it quickly there is no reason.  Simply put its law and at times it appears that due to the prestige of the subject once you are a renowned  Judge or academic you can prima facie make language up.  Therefore, it is essential that you have at least 1 good law dictionary, as it will be well used.  I had a book and an app and used them often.

So that is book tip number 3 – a good quality law dictionary is essential for all law students.

Next read, read and read some more.  You can never read enough while doing a law degree and no matter how much you have read – read more.  This is not just books, but you should be reading full judgments, journal articles and newspapers. This is at the very least law students should always be aware of politics and this can involve listening to the radio, watching Prime Ministers Questions and Question Time – to name but a few.

So that is book tip number 4 – read widely and around the subject as this will only gain you extra marks.

So these are 4 things I wish I had been told at the start of my degree. Keep reading your up to date books and read as many legal journals as possible, ensuring you have a Dictionary at hand while doing it.

The USA is no longer the ‘Land of the Free’

The United States of America emphasizes the cultural importance of its flag National Anthem the ‘Star-Spangled Banner’ it is one of the amazing features of this nation and its people.  Unlike many Western nations there is a real sense of community spirit and shared values and it is a wonderful achievement in today’s society that a nation still holds importance in its Constitution, Flag and Anthem.

The origins of the anthem is in itself inspirational, September 1814, fresh from defeating the British invaders soldiers at Fort McHenry raised a giant American flag to celebrate the victory.  The lawyer and poet Francis Scott Key was so inspired by the sight of his nations flag he wrote a poem that would later become the beloved anthem.  The poem and anthem were so powerful and moving that it began the tradition of celebrating the flag and its meaning to American citizens.

The full lyrics can be found here but it goes without saying the most memorable section is that which proclaims the USA to be “the land of the free and the home of the brave”.  As a non-American I do not feel the sense of national pride but to me the importance of this statement and the flag is to remember.  That is to remember American history for it is a land rich with history and some of the most amazing achievements.  From the Declaration of Independence which proclaims the American values of ‘Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness’ and importantly that ‘all men are created equally’.  Additionally, it is a celebration of the Constitution, one of the oldest surviving constitutions in history, the American people recognize and emphasize the notion of ‘founding Fathers’ and consideration is often placed on the intentions of the writers of the Constitution.  If citizens Constitutional rights are impeached then of course the United States Supreme Court will intervene and correct such a breach, as the Constitution is the highest law of the land.  Of course the 1812 was after these events, arguably it was the bravery of the founding Fathers that actually led to the war.  America declared war on Britain for a variety of reasons, including the British restrictions on the trade between France and America, along with the humiliation of impressment of American seamen into the British Navy.  America declared war that was fought on many fronts and the all-important Battle of Baltimore to which Key coined his famous poem was hailed as the second war of independence.

This is an extremely brief look at a small facet of American history; the point is these values are still strong today.  The constitution is taught in Schools, The Pledge of Allegiance is recited at the opening of Congress, at the beginning of Government and private meetings and at the beginning of the day in many Schools.   This demonstrates the importance of the flag and the constitution in modern times.

It would be safe to think that today’s American citizens would experience the greatest Constitutional protection available, and enjoy a fantastic array of civil and human rights.  Furthermore one would assume that arbitrary justice systems and procedures would be a thing of the past.  This assumption would be sorely wrong; take the death penalty for example the USA is the only Western nation that actively maintains a death penalty program.  As of the 13th June there are 33 death penalty states, which includes the federal and military death penalty.   Without debating the death penalty itself and on the assumption that this is a suitable punishment then surely it this is a punishment only dispensed when there is clear evidence of guilt.  Additionally, capital crimes would be prosecuted efficiently honestly and defendants given adequate legal counsel.

Wrong on all counts the American justice system is arbitrary at best in relation to the death penalty.  I am actively following several cases where there is evidence of misconduct at trial and actual innocence.  However, one case I have followed has recently had some success, that is the case of Erskine Johnson who has recently been released after 27 years incarceration, 19 of which were served on death row.  Johnson has always maintained his innocence in 2004 he successfully overturned his capital sentence when the State Supreme Court ruled that the prosecution withheld key evidence and Johnson was re-sentenced to life in prison.  This key evidence was proof that Johnson could not possibly have shot the victim even if he was an accessory to murder, 19 years on death row is surely a more than adequate punishment?  The Court did not agree and Johnson was remanded in a high security prison until December 2011 when he was awarded a new trial.   This was awarded due to the discovery that there was a close relationship amongst several key witnesses who may have motive to protect another suspect.  Despite evidence of his innocence the District Attorney offered a deal, if Johnson entered an alford plea he could be released immediately due to time already served, saving his family the ordeal of another trial.  Johnson accepted and is now a free man hoping to help others in similar situations.

This is not a singular occurrence and it seems like US District Attorneys do not like to admit they may be wrong.  The state of Texas executes more prisoners than all States combined.  The judiciary in Southern States is conservative and protective over their rights to execute its guilty.  It does not take much to be guilty in these States, and considering more than 60% of capital convictions are subsequently reversed it seems that guilty verdicts are not reliable.  How can these figures be even close to accurate?  The reasons are simple capital defenders are underpaid and overworked and can rarely give the best counsel also after the initial trial there is no longer a Constitutional entitlement to a defence.  This means that the initial trial is where the defendant needs the best counsel; many of the subsequent appeals are conducted by volunteers from invaluable organisations such as the Innocence Project who work to exonerate the innocent.  This can be too late, as actual evidence of innocence does not automatically gain a new trial.  But what about when initial counsel is incompetent?  A staggeringly high percentage of capital defenders are disbarred due to drug convictions, providing inadequate counsel and general miss-conduct.  Facing a death sentence is counsel high on cocaine and falling asleep adequate?  Well as long as counsel is not asleep during the ‘important parts’ its ok after all “the constitution doesn’t say that the lawyer has to be awake.”  It is not so much the land of the free as with little evidence a citizen may well find himself languishing on death row.  Land of the brave? I hardly think the forefathers would hide behind the Constitution in such a way no I rather think the brave forefathers, who declared war partly as the British humiliated them, would stand and fight out a Court ‘battle’ to prove that they had the right man and would not be scared of a little thing called due process and the rule of law.

I oppose the death penalty for many reasons that will be discussed later.  However if any nation but especially one of the leaders of the democratic world is to maintain an active death penalty program it must stop applying this punishment in an arbitrary manor.   In order to prove to the world that this punishment is fitting and not a cruel punishment then it has to stop current practices.  Why are prosecutors so afraid of disclosing evidence?  It is only in capital cases that there is such a catalogue of failures, are prosecutors so afraid to lose the death penalty that they will allow the innocent to be executed?   Why is there such desperation to execute at all costs? Granted some crimes truly are heartbreaking and horrific and prima facie executing the guilty seems fitting, this would rid society of such evil and prevent repeat offences.  It is clear why when faced with atrocities prosecutors would want the perpetrator executed but the point is have they got the right man?  They should not be afraid of a trial with adequate defence, rather they should embraces it as only when there is such a trial can you truly be sure that the right man was sent to the proverbial chair.   Until then I can only wonder at the elected officials that at times appear blood thirsty and ponder are these the right people to decide the fate of others.  Especially when they wish to kill people to prove to society that killing is wrong, yet it is only the State that can make this decision?

If this truly is a representation of the experience in the ‘Land of the Free’……. I think I would rather pay!