UKC

Who is James O’Keeffe?

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 Martin W 01 Feb 2017
He's the liar - oops, sorry - lawyer who represented Shanique Sheena Pearson in her trial for using threatening or abusive behaviour and driving without reasonable consideration during a widely-publicised confrontation with Jeremy Vine on 26 August last year.

From https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/feb/01/driver-abuse-jeremy-vine-conv...

Pearson was nine months into a suspended sentence for theft, assault causing actual bodily harm, and resisting arrest at the time of the altercation with Vine.

O’Keeffe said Pearson was a single mother and the incident was “out of character in the sense it was unplanned, it was impulsive and it was something which she in her interview with the police is very willing to accept and did accept she was wrong”.


So she was on a suspended sentence for ABH, and yet shouting abuse at and threatening a cyclist was "out of character". Riiiight...

(Perhaps what he really meant that it was out of character for her to accept that what she had done was wrong?)
2
Rigid Raider 01 Feb 2017
In reply to Martin W:

I once asked a solicitor pal how he dealt with defending a scroat who was obviously guilty. He replied that on occasions he has refused to defend people but that on the whole he regarded his role as that of ensuring the defendant got a fair trial and got off as lightly as possible.

Same chap also used occasionally to defend people pro bono if they had no cash.
1
 Tyler 01 Feb 2017
In reply to Martin W:

I think if the defence bring up something about the defendant's character which can be refuted by previous the prosecution can then bring up those previous convictions. However, the prosecution wouldn't be allowed to refer to it otherwise.
 Trevers 01 Feb 2017
In reply to Martin W:

It seems pretty appalling to bring race into it and to accuse Mr Vine of stereotyping.
1
 Chris the Tall 01 Feb 2017
In reply to Martin W:

The right to a defence is a pretty fundamental tenet of our legal system - the lawyer is doing his job

Yes it does seem implausible that it was out of character, but the lawyer has spent time with her, and I doubt you have. As has been said, it does allow for the prosecution to bring up her previous.
And I don't doubt that she has been subject to racial abuse as a result of the publicity this case has received, which is the other claim he is reported to have made. Whether it's fair to criticise Vine for not editing the footage before making it public is a moot point. And of course if he hadn't a celeb and had gone straight to the police would they have done anything ? But that's not the lawyer's problem

To be honest I'd rather see this woman banned from driving for 5 years than go to prison, but it is useful that this case has made the headlines, and an example being set
1
OP Martin W 02 Feb 2017
In reply to Chris the Tall:

> And I don't doubt that she has been subject to racial abuse as a result of the publicity this case has received, which is the other claim he is reported to have made.

That doesn't make her any less responsible for what she did on the day in question, does it? I can see that it would be valid as a plea for leniency in sentencing, which I suspect is why her lawyer saw fit to mention it.

> To be honest I'd rather see this woman banned from driving for 5 years than go to prison

She hasn't yet received her sentence for the offences of 26/08/2016: failing to license a vehicle, driving without reasonable consideration for other road users, and threatening behaviour. I would be surprised if she got prison for that lot - I'd agree that a ban, and a fine/community service for the last one would be more appropriate. However, she is under a suspended sentence for her earlier ABH offence and AIUI this further conviction - especially the threatening behaviour element - could trigger the sentence for that. (It isn't straightforward to find out what that sentence was online, even though it should be a matter of public record. Someone seems to have done a good job of persuading Google to remove references to her from their search results. I'm sure that's what the CJEU intended...)
 Chris the Tall 02 Feb 2017
In reply to Martin W:

> That doesn't make her any less responsible for what she did on the day in question, does it? I can see that it would be valid as a plea for leniency in sentencing, which I suspect is why her lawyer saw fit to mention it.

Correct - which is why it is legitimate for the lawyer to raise it

It's one thing for a defense barrister to try to downplay the aggression of a motorist towards a cyclist - as I say that's their job. More worrying is when a judge decides that ramming someone with a 4x4 isn't an "attempt to inflict serious harm" http://road.cc/content/news/216696-4x4-driver-rammed-cyclist-he-suspected-s...

 felt 02 Feb 2017
In reply to Martin W:

Thought this was about this excellent person, being the bike forum:
http://www.jonathanokeeffe.com/strava/map.php

But it's not.

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...