Readers will recall Ruthie, Geeklawyer’s ejected co-blogger who shuffled off tearfully to run a little read blog called Ruthieslaw. Ruthie is taking part in a 6 week trial at a crown court where she will be carrying the bags of a proper lawyer, a barrister not a solicitor-inadequate, into court.
Not terribly demanding one might think but it is causing her some stress. She made a confession to Geeklawyer, on condition of strictest confidence which he will obviously ignore, that she woke up this Sunday morning after a night of disturbing dreams of court, in the belief it was a Monday and that she was thus late. So she then ran down stairs clad only in her court shirt and san knickers. Oh dear oh dear. The Defendants don’t stand the faintest prospect of conviction with her acting for the prosecution.
So remember lady lawyers: wearing your knickers in court is a must, unless you plan to distract the jury Sharon Stone style.
Apparently she is also having sexual fantasies about her leader who she says is a glamorous and attractive chap: one imagines the hotel she is sharing with him will have squeaking bedsprings. But Geeklawyer was told to make sure MysteryQC didn’t hear this — done.
Geeklawyer will be attending the crown court to have a giggle at her.
Dear Mr Greeklawyer,
I am afraid you are quite wrong. Mistress Ruthie is not in an hotel but an apartment.
This rather egregious error leads me to suppose that there is something of the tabloid press in your story. That is to say that it is made up. But perhaps you simply were not listening?
As to competence it has always been my experience that talent as an advocate is not confined to the Bar. I believe Mistress Ruthie prosecutes this matter having been nominated by the Attorney to do so. Speaking as a member of the Panel of some 15 years’ standing, it has again, been my experience that it is genuinely competitive. Perhaps things are different in the sphere of intellectual property? Do tell.
Incidentally I rather like it when my female junior wears no knickers. One finds out either accidentally, in which case it is a delightful surprise, or on purpose in which case life becomes immediately much more interesting…
Ah, MysteryQC. I’m so glad to see that your armour is polished. The windmills of England, and her leader, are in great peril but with you in attendance Ruthie’s honour is not.
Dear Mr Greeklawyer,
I should hope so, or Tucker would be severely disciplined.
how can I continue being a ruthie support in the face of such overwhelming evidence (aka GL’s fevered imaginings)?
the lack of knickers — is that due to forgetfulness or a subconscious attempt at “easy access”? I know not. I believe some would choose to believe the latter. I will, based upon my many months of knowing ruthie via the net, choose to believe the former.
btw, when’s the next podcast?
Oh, it is just forgetfulness I’m sure. Ruthie can whip her knickers off so fast that ‘going commando’ wouldn’t save significant time
Podcast soon …
Dear GL
I thank you: I too am a sociopathic computer geek who is on the verge of making the lemming-like leap towards the Bar form the relative safety of a profession that is not on the verge of going tits up. It is reassuring to know that I shall be in good company.
Oh good god: the world does not need two Geeklawyers. By the way Andy, do I know you?
Ah, true love speaks
Dear Ruthie: I think not. I’m pre-CPE even, and therefore can still boast some kind of life (apart from generalised open-source nerdery, obviously). Am thinking of changing my tag to Lamb To The Slaughter…
Sadly my hairline dictates that eschewing the wig is simply not an option.
“Sadly my hairline dictates that eschewing the wig is simply not an option“
weeellll, that doesn’t stop Ruthie.
If you are a bit old I’d urge to be realistic about your prospects (difficult I know). Simon Myerson’s blog is a great source of discussion and information about pupillage & careers at the Bar.
Being old isn’t a Bar bar but you’ll need to be at least as good as me — a huge challenge.
I fear you are right GL, and yes Myerson’s blog has been really helpful.
I’m pretty past it at 37 but not utterly decrepit, have a decent degree, and bags of industrial experience so there is plenty of scope for delusion. I chose my lemming metaphor carefully.
Who knows: maybe I’ll end up doing the Barrister’s Quickstep (BVC, transfer to practice, gain both Higher Insults, beg Chambers to take me on without having to shell out for the pupillage fees, tight gits). I believe on current figures I have a 92% chance of failure, but hey: I’ll have a wig. The alternative is to choose spineless yet realistic, which has a 100% chance of failure.
Like your attitude Andy. “Spineless but realistic” sounds like a good title for a blog post. So many people spend their lives wishing they had done something else, but simply wishing it has a 100% chance of failure.
As for your hairline and your age you’ve haven’t seen Geeklawyer. Bwa ha ha…
I only mentioned that I might know you as I do know a geek called Andy, who is interested in the law.
By the way: Solicitor Advocates get to wear wigs in February. Sorry to shatter your dressing up dreams.
And in case you are fat Andy don’t let that worry you either. Ruthie is a 12 stone blob and it hasn’t harmed her career: she’s the sensation of Dagenham magistrates court — if you have a speeding ticket she’ll talk them into dropping your fine by £10 — no problem.