Are barristers today too boring?

Modern barristers are dull, wails Marcel Berlins, The Guardian's legal columnist, after reading a biography of Clarence Darrow, the legendary American trial lawyer. What happened, he wonders, to the sense of theatre?

Barristers these days address a jury as if they were accountants explaining a balance sheet. Oratory has disappeared from the English courtroom.

. . . Gradually, the vocal and behavioural tricks have been abandoned, as have the excesses of language. Common sense, matter-of-fact and monotone have taken their place. Much more effective, no doubt. And so boring.

Is he right? Have advocates become too sensible?

Comments

[Gary Slapper]

Marcel Berlins laments that these days barristers are boring. But if boring means unflamboyant at work then barristers should be boring in the same way that surgeons should be boring and aircraft maintenance engineers should be boring.

Marcel says that “oratory has disappeared from the English courtroom”. I don’t think that is true although what counts as good oratory might have changed since the celebrated Edwardian barristers used to pull adoring crowds into the public galleries.

Cicero noted that the effective advocate is always mindful of the fact that people decide far more problems “by hate, or love, or lust, or rage, or sorrow, or joy, or hope, or fear, or illusion, or some other inward emotion” than by reality or legal standards or laws. But the 21st century courtroom is much more a palladium of rationality. People can see through an advocate who wants to sell a dodgy argument using rhetoric as clearly as they can see through a double-glazing rep who wants to do the same thing.

Jurors, judges, and magistrates have got the X Factor or political hustings to watch if they want to be entertained by colourful personalities or florid rhetoric. It is desirable that we moving away from the trial as an event in which 12 citizens judge which side has the better advocate.

[BabyBarista]

Of course lawyers are boring when they're working two to three thousand hours a year and running scared. Scared of mounting bills, of litigation and of people making complaints. TheCreep is now King, even over the colourful characters such as UpTights and OldSmoothie. The man for whom the words of Dostoevsky are frighteningly apt: “Show [him] a map of the stars, which he knows nothing about, and he will give you back the map next day with corrections on it.”

[Michael of Birmingham]

I agree. I first visited a criminal trial in 1961 and the 2 barristers were severely repremanded by the Recorder for lack of preparation. This fault has been on going.
I remember attending court for a civil trial with my senior principal. The ontarage lead in a single file, Leader, his junior, my principal, me and our expert witnesses.
In another visit, I could not understand why so many people got excited about the immident arrival of the robed Graham Swanwick QC with his ontarage following him, to lead in a heavy criminal case.
In the early 1960's the Assizes lasted 2 weeks only in Leicester, Lincoln, derby and Nottingham, in each term. By today's standards it is unlikely that 1 case would be concluded in those 2 week sessions.
Over the years I have set behind many QC's and juniors. I had a limited choice for a couple of decades. Some of the adversaries ought to have been at home doing something useful. When it came to taxation of costs, I often saw the inexperienced counsel's clerk charging up to double we paid our client's counsel. I was able to persuade the taxing officers to reduce bills of costs by substantial amounts, my record deduction was 92%, leaving the solicitors to repay their client over £5,000 and my client's bill of costs was taxed out at over £1,000.
The fault lies with those responsible for listing cases before Judges. None of them have tghe remotest idea of the type of work any judge did in practice. I was once asked by the Registrar to the Court of Appeal how long the hearing was likely to last? I said tell me the judges by name and I will do my best to help you. He said I cannot do that. He reluctantly conceded he had no information about any Judges practise. I replied if you do as you did with an earlier case on litigation, you selected Judges from planning, Chancery and a retired Judge, and it will last 2-3 days but with Judges who have a civil background 1-2 days.
Further decay occurred when the Lord Chancellor advertised for applications for judician appointments.
I would not have briefed the majority of the present day circuit judges as 90% of those in the midlands are not up to my standards for conducting civil litigation.

[Simon]

Michael of Birmingham

You are not up to my standards of literacy. The word entourage has never been so butchered.