Setting an Example
One should never take pleasure in another's misfortunes, difficult though that stricture may be to comply with at times. However one aspect of legal affairs should always be that those who preach should set an example.
Recently Meredydd Hughes, the former chairman of roads policing at the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) and Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, admitted driving over the speed limit. His speed allegedly was 90 miles-per-hour on a 60 miles-per-hour road. He received a 42 day disqualification. Of course this was a criminal offence for which a penalty was imposed. It was not a question of him acting voluntarily in response to being caught out not exactly practising what he preached. However having received that penalty, that should probably be regarded as sufficient.
Not everyone strictly follows the need to lead by example. Some years ago there was particularly dramatic example. A senior prosecutor was effectively in charge of prosecutions for a particular area. He decided that certain standards had to be kept. In consequence, just before Christmas, all of the prosecutors under his control received a letter pointing out the dangers and perils of drink-driving. They were told that the idea that any prosecutor should be convicted of driving with excess alcohol was abhorrent. Not you might think an extreme or unreasonable position. He added that should any be convicted of such an offence, he would expect their resignation on his desk the following day.
However Christmas did not quite work out as anticipated for the senior prosecutor. He was breathalysed and it was positive. There was much derision from his subordinates, given that he did not regard this as a ground for resignation. Of course he never actually said that he would resign in those circumstances, merely that he expected his subordinates to do so. Needless to say such a technical defence would not have met with much favour in the court room or anywhere else.
For lawyers not working in the CPS or like organisation, it is the view of the profession and the employer or firm or chambers which counts. However, whilst not expecting lawyers to lead blameless lives (an expectation which is 100% likely to be fulfilled), the legal profession is moving into different times with the Legal Services Act and outside investors. This could be an exciting and innovative time. However there is bound to be public disquiet and concern as to the involvement of outside third parties and the nature of the influence they will wield.
This is only likely to operate and be regarded as in the public interest if in the main lawyers are regarded, like Caesar's wife, as above suspicion. Lawyers can benefit greatly from some of the advantages that access to business capital can bring. However it will be a disaster if this leads to the public getting the impression that lawyers are just businessmen rather than professionals with standards which they rigorously uphold.
Most lawyers do not preach and have not set themselves up as there to set an example. However, like it or not, more than ever in the new marketplace that is what lawyers are expected to do and what they will have to do.