Page 254 - Pages from 8. 2017 New 26-05-21 No Table- 2nd Half

Appellant’s health had deteriorated, when the Appellant’s
mother told The Appellant she believed she had found a
solicitor to take the Appeal on this did bring his mood up a
little but he felt so much had gone wrong it would only just
go wrong again, he agreed that he would attend Court and
meet the barrister that the new solicitors was sending, the
problem was this could change at any time, The Appellant
does not leave his home which he treats as his prison. On the
17/01/2016
17 January 2016
we attended Court, the barrister was there for The Appellant,
so was the Appellant mother and the Appellant uncle we
went into a side room and the barrister spoke to The
Appellant in regards to what the plans was and what he was
going to ask the Judge for which was an adjournment, that
they needed an adjournment so that they could act in the best
interest of their client, so that they could go over the
complete case bundles, take instructions, make sure legal aid
was in place correctly, and instruct a barrister who would be
dealing with the Appeal for The Appellant, The Appellant
agreed that an adjournment could be asked for, again it was
stated to the barrister that we did not feel the Judge would
grant an adjournment, the barrister stated that the Judge
should understand that an adjournment would be needed for
the new solicitors to act in a professional manner for their
client and be able to get everything ready and have time to
understand fully what the case was about, that an Appeal
should be fair for all sides. We were called into Court and
the barrister spoke to the Judge, explained the situation and
that he was asking for an adjournment, he spoke to the Judge
in regards to the legal aid, and having the appeal ready for
their client and having time to be able to deal with it in a
professional manner for their client. The Judge stated that he
believed legal aid was still in place and it could just be
transferred, the barrister stated if legal aid had been revoked
then it would take at least two weeks for it to be put back in
place, the Judge adjourned the hearing so that the barrister
could contact the legal aid department to check the status of
the legal aid, the barrister made calls to the legal aid
department, but the legal aid department could not confirm
whether legal aid had been revoked. Calls was also made to
Michael Carroll and Co who stated that when they were
removed from record that the legal aid that was in place had
been revoked. The case was called back into Court and the
barrister explained that the legal aid department could not
say whether or not the legal aid had been revoked, but when
a call was placed to the old solicitors Michael Carroll and co
they had said that the legal aid that was in place had been
revoked. The Judge handed the barrister certificate of legal
aid, the barrister stated that the certificate was not proof that