The rants of a baby law student. Occasional politics &and personal stuff. All my own thoughts, I am capable of that much...
Monday 26 December 2011
Tuesday 13 December 2011
The importance of books. Because they are important...
Ever since the age of four, my mum took me to our local library, and introduced me the wonderful world of books. I have developed a passion for books ever since, which may therefore come as no surprise that I now study law (which requires excessive reading) but that I always have two books minimum with me to read, where ever I may be.
I was therefore a bit gutted to discover via the Stylist magazine that nearly four million children in Britain do not own ANY books. None whatsoever. I brought the article home from uni to read further, and turn on the TV, to watch a programme on BBC1, about how physical hard copy books are becoming extinct by these online, E-books, which young people may not read anyway because they concern themselves more so with social networks.
I personally find it appalling that young people are growing up in a world of booklessness (I just invented a word, I know). The adventure to travel to an actual bookstore, or make the mature decision to join a library, is part of the voyage of growing up. I am sure I am not the only one who can say that all the books I read and still read, make me who I am today.
Yet this is also true for those who waste their time solely on social networks and the like. (I say solely because I acknowledge the importance of social networks, as I have plenty, but only when used moderately.) People who spend more time on social networks, fretting over how many ‘followers’ they have, or how many ‘like’ their facebook statuses, are more likely to have low self esteem, caring more about what others think about them, than those who spend time away from the world time and again to spend time in another world, in another book, in another adventure.
I think it is time for people, young and old (although I dare say the old have inherited the great habit of reading) to take it upon themselves to read. To open their eyes to worlds beyond their own. To deepen and improve their vocabulary, as the reason many young people have adopted ‘slang’ as their first language (if that’s what such a vile dialect can be called) is due to these social networks and online activity as opposed to spending more time with books and knowledgeable pastimes.
Books not only broaden your vocabulary, open your eyes, deepen your mind and intellect, but also generate positive attitudes in human behaviour. The mere process of setting out to read something (usually in a tranquil environment) and carry it out till the end, promotes patience, and I have personally found myself grow in patience, in comparison to my sister who was not brought up with books as much as I was. So, having said all this (with little facts or figures, maybe if this was an article I could’ve provided facts, but I have no time to research, and my brother wants to use the computer) I hereby declare my urging you to read read read! Oh you do so already? Fantastic! :-)
I was therefore a bit gutted to discover via the Stylist magazine that nearly four million children in Britain do not own ANY books. None whatsoever. I brought the article home from uni to read further, and turn on the TV, to watch a programme on BBC1, about how physical hard copy books are becoming extinct by these online, E-books, which young people may not read anyway because they concern themselves more so with social networks.
I personally find it appalling that young people are growing up in a world of booklessness (I just invented a word, I know). The adventure to travel to an actual bookstore, or make the mature decision to join a library, is part of the voyage of growing up. I am sure I am not the only one who can say that all the books I read and still read, make me who I am today.
Yet this is also true for those who waste their time solely on social networks and the like. (I say solely because I acknowledge the importance of social networks, as I have plenty, but only when used moderately.) People who spend more time on social networks, fretting over how many ‘followers’ they have, or how many ‘like’ their facebook statuses, are more likely to have low self esteem, caring more about what others think about them, than those who spend time away from the world time and again to spend time in another world, in another book, in another adventure.
I think it is time for people, young and old (although I dare say the old have inherited the great habit of reading) to take it upon themselves to read. To open their eyes to worlds beyond their own. To deepen and improve their vocabulary, as the reason many young people have adopted ‘slang’ as their first language (if that’s what such a vile dialect can be called) is due to these social networks and online activity as opposed to spending more time with books and knowledgeable pastimes.
Books not only broaden your vocabulary, open your eyes, deepen your mind and intellect, but also generate positive attitudes in human behaviour. The mere process of setting out to read something (usually in a tranquil environment) and carry it out till the end, promotes patience, and I have personally found myself grow in patience, in comparison to my sister who was not brought up with books as much as I was. So, having said all this (with little facts or figures, maybe if this was an article I could’ve provided facts, but I have no time to research, and my brother wants to use the computer) I hereby declare my urging you to read read read! Oh you do so already? Fantastic! :-)
Friday 2 December 2011
Three months into law. Three years More..
Okay, three months into uni, and NOW I am feeling like a true law student. Not in a good way, in a 'OMG This work is soo hard, HELP ME LORD' kind of way. I keep up to date with all work that must be given in (sometimes I am even ahead) but that doesn't change the fact that I am still feeling the pressure.
Reading in advance still isn't enough either. How do I know this? Because every time I go to lectures and seminars, my lecturers give me ways and things I ought to be doing, that I had no idea I was meant to do. Yes, there is always something to improve on whatever field or circumstance you find yourself in, but when I'm told to improve or 'up my game' it is to such a high extent that I marvel whether I shall ever finish trying to reach there. For example, books. I am a natural reader, but law is about excessive reading, up to the point where you are reading 5-8 books minimum a week, and each chapter of each book could be a book in itself - No joke.
*breathes* It'll get better though. In a way, I embrace pressure, as it shows that I will always be on my toes and giving 110% into all. Also, seeing as I know that second, third year and even law school shall be harder, I guess I ought to get a grip right? Right? Mmmm... In other news, it's almost Christmas! I am extremely excited (as some may tell from my theme) and shall post a couple of Christmas special blogs. Asta luego. x
Reading in advance still isn't enough either. How do I know this? Because every time I go to lectures and seminars, my lecturers give me ways and things I ought to be doing, that I had no idea I was meant to do. Yes, there is always something to improve on whatever field or circumstance you find yourself in, but when I'm told to improve or 'up my game' it is to such a high extent that I marvel whether I shall ever finish trying to reach there. For example, books. I am a natural reader, but law is about excessive reading, up to the point where you are reading 5-8 books minimum a week, and each chapter of each book could be a book in itself - No joke.
*breathes* It'll get better though. In a way, I embrace pressure, as it shows that I will always be on my toes and giving 110% into all. Also, seeing as I know that second, third year and even law school shall be harder, I guess I ought to get a grip right? Right? Mmmm... In other news, it's almost Christmas! I am extremely excited (as some may tell from my theme) and shall post a couple of Christmas special blogs. Asta luego. x
Wednesday 16 November 2011
Set on the things ahead.
Today I went to an open evening for the Kaplan Law school. It was very useful for giving me all the info I need so far to prepare for post grad as a student lawyer, and after today, I definitely want to apply for a post-grad law vocational course there.
I initially went to their campus for Business studies, but one of the tutors cordially walked me to the correct campus, where I was greeted with chocolate, and a guy who had seen my tweet on going to the open evening, saying I should follow them on twitter (which I am now.) there was wine (white wine!) and I was given a pack of useful info in relation to applying for training contracts/pupillage's and of the law school itself, before having a mini talk on the former topics.
I was really impressed and grateful that they gave a lot of information for law students, despite us not having secured a place there yet. There was a lot of information I received by going there that I have not been told at uni! I think it was also quite encouraging to go there and find such a great atmosphere for working and relaxing. I thank God I live in London, as it was so much more easier for me to travel there, as opposed to some people who had to pay more to travel from out of London.
Going to this open evening, allowed me to set my eyes on the things ahead. It's better for me to study harder now, in the knowledge that that will assist in my being accepted at this and other law schools. I needed to have some sort of focus as to why I am studying so much, because all the books,cases and legislations can sometimes blind, as well as suffocate me.
For now, I shall continue to study hard, gaining work experience wherever I can, so that a few years down the line (when I hopefully secure a 1st or 2:1) I will be one of those taken by Kaplan's gracious arms, to study more law, and get a career in it! Now, where is that book on EU law? :-)
I initially went to their campus for Business studies, but one of the tutors cordially walked me to the correct campus, where I was greeted with chocolate, and a guy who had seen my tweet on going to the open evening, saying I should follow them on twitter (which I am now.) there was wine (white wine!) and I was given a pack of useful info in relation to applying for training contracts/pupillage's and of the law school itself, before having a mini talk on the former topics.
I was really impressed and grateful that they gave a lot of information for law students, despite us not having secured a place there yet. There was a lot of information I received by going there that I have not been told at uni! I think it was also quite encouraging to go there and find such a great atmosphere for working and relaxing. I thank God I live in London, as it was so much more easier for me to travel there, as opposed to some people who had to pay more to travel from out of London.
Going to this open evening, allowed me to set my eyes on the things ahead. It's better for me to study harder now, in the knowledge that that will assist in my being accepted at this and other law schools. I needed to have some sort of focus as to why I am studying so much, because all the books,cases and legislations can sometimes blind, as well as suffocate me.
For now, I shall continue to study hard, gaining work experience wherever I can, so that a few years down the line (when I hopefully secure a 1st or 2:1) I will be one of those taken by Kaplan's gracious arms, to study more law, and get a career in it! Now, where is that book on EU law? :-)
Monday 14 November 2011
Law on TV. (And I don't mean those awful PPI adverts...)
I flicked to BBC1 on Sunday evening, and was initially drawn to the show, having perceived it as a periodic drama (I love em). I continued watching as I became engaged with the case itself (a mentally ill terrorist of the day, attempting to assassinate the King to result in his being hanged for treason.) and how the Barrister Garrow (who actually existed might I add) would argue his case for the defence of this troubled defendant.
I was engaged with this episode from it's commencement to it's dramatic and emotional ending, capturing the audiences undivided attention throughout, whilst still maintaining an easy plot for us to follow. I was not surprised to discover that this successful programme has gone well into it's 3rd season, despite me watching it on Sunday for the first time.
What I enjoyed most about this programme was the ability it had as a whole to widen people's perspectives of the legal world. A lot of people have a distorted view of lawyers, thinking them all liars and apathetic deceivers. Yet this programme (despite it being set in another era) portrayed a degree of realism to the lives of lawyers.
Garrow actually had his own domestic anxieties to concern himself with (his wife attempting to legally own her son,stolen by her 'ex. Yep, normal life.) he did not throw his hands up and say 'I'm done'. He continued to defend the guy no one believed deserved defending. That's the kind of lawyer I aspire to be. I want to give people who otherwise wouldn't have a voice, exactly that. I'd like to represent and aid people who don't have the legal knowledge or confidence to do so independently. For me, that's what Garrow's Law is all about ultimately, and that's why, above all other legal TV shows around, I shall solely watch this one alone, religiously. So, Huzzah to Garrow. :-)
Tuesday 8 November 2011
The choice to voice my opinions.
Today at uni my lecturer ended a seminar by asking us 'If we had 30 days to live, what would we spend it doing?' One 'joker of the class' said he'd spend it having all the sex he wanted. I rolled my eyes, and others tutted in expectation of such a typical response.
Then a woman (we have young people and a few older people studying with us) said the same thing, laughing. At this, I spoke up in disbelief and reproach. I was astonished that she would proudly degrade herself and the reputation of her sex by stating something like this. I was also upset that she made no mention of showing regards to her family, who would be left behind if that actually happened.
This is a woman who has three children, one of them being autistic. I was outraged that she could display such ignorance of how to consider loved ones, but as I looked around, I knew I wasn't the only one who felt this way.
Yet because I was the only one who verbally conveyed my disapproval, she launched an argument, saying that I have no right to judge her or her opinions. I responded (barely audibly as the whole class was in an uproar by now) saying that I honestly did not mean to offend her, but had to state my disapproval of such a statement from such a woman of responsibilities.
I am sure she thought that because the young boy had said it, she was also entitled to. But this boy is one of ignorance, arrogance, inexperience, and little responsibility. A woman of many experiences and responsibilities, cannot align herself to a younger boy like that, thinking it acceptable. I just found it shameful and almost repulsive.
Was I right to voice such repulse, or ought I just to have kept it to myself as others did? I began to question my verbal actions when she suddenly packed her bag and stormed out of the classroom, even though my friends said she was being a bit of a drama queen, and couldn't hack the truth.
The thing is, some people ought to hear such reproof to change their ignorant ways, despite how right they think they are. I am someone who openly accepts constructive criticism, as only my loved ones provide this, so I know it must be for my benefit. Maybe she had never got the training I have growing up, and so now she lives chaotically and irresponsibly, doing as she pleases. There is no excuse for what she said, and I genuinely believe that we must all wake up, smell the coffee and change from our naive behaviours to become better people. Sometimes constructive criticism does that.
Then a woman (we have young people and a few older people studying with us) said the same thing, laughing. At this, I spoke up in disbelief and reproach. I was astonished that she would proudly degrade herself and the reputation of her sex by stating something like this. I was also upset that she made no mention of showing regards to her family, who would be left behind if that actually happened.
This is a woman who has three children, one of them being autistic. I was outraged that she could display such ignorance of how to consider loved ones, but as I looked around, I knew I wasn't the only one who felt this way.
Yet because I was the only one who verbally conveyed my disapproval, she launched an argument, saying that I have no right to judge her or her opinions. I responded (barely audibly as the whole class was in an uproar by now) saying that I honestly did not mean to offend her, but had to state my disapproval of such a statement from such a woman of responsibilities.
I am sure she thought that because the young boy had said it, she was also entitled to. But this boy is one of ignorance, arrogance, inexperience, and little responsibility. A woman of many experiences and responsibilities, cannot align herself to a younger boy like that, thinking it acceptable. I just found it shameful and almost repulsive.
Was I right to voice such repulse, or ought I just to have kept it to myself as others did? I began to question my verbal actions when she suddenly packed her bag and stormed out of the classroom, even though my friends said she was being a bit of a drama queen, and couldn't hack the truth.
The thing is, some people ought to hear such reproof to change their ignorant ways, despite how right they think they are. I am someone who openly accepts constructive criticism, as only my loved ones provide this, so I know it must be for my benefit. Maybe she had never got the training I have growing up, and so now she lives chaotically and irresponsibly, doing as she pleases. There is no excuse for what she said, and I genuinely believe that we must all wake up, smell the coffee and change from our naive behaviours to become better people. Sometimes constructive criticism does that.
Tuesday 1 November 2011
To be a Barrister, or Not to be?
I'm going to an open day for the BPP Law school in one of the London centres this saturday, so i'll be writing up a post on that soon afterwards. I'm ever so excited, and hopefully going there will reinforce the reasons why I wanted to go into law in the first place, and show a bit of an insight as to what I'll expect after my degree.
The trouble is, I still don't which type of lawyer I want to be yet. I have at least three years from now, but I know that'll go swiftly. I know that whichever type of lawyer I become, I shall definitely go into Human rights law, as that interests me most (I wanted to do criminal but my mum opposes.) but I just don't know which type of lawyer. I'd love to be a barrister (I can be quite argumentative and would love to verbally defend) but I'm scared It'd be too competitive and expensive and I know that my skills can't guarantee me the job.
I know becoming a solicitor would also be pricey and competitive, but I feel it may be somewhat more manageable than going into the Bar. I already fear that my ethnicity, poorer background and gender are set backs, and going to uni where a lot of people seem smarter than me doesn't ease those insecurities. Hopefully all shall work out in by the time I reach that hurdle eh?
The trouble is, I still don't which type of lawyer I want to be yet. I have at least three years from now, but I know that'll go swiftly. I know that whichever type of lawyer I become, I shall definitely go into Human rights law, as that interests me most (I wanted to do criminal but my mum opposes.) but I just don't know which type of lawyer. I'd love to be a barrister (I can be quite argumentative and would love to verbally defend) but I'm scared It'd be too competitive and expensive and I know that my skills can't guarantee me the job.
I know becoming a solicitor would also be pricey and competitive, but I feel it may be somewhat more manageable than going into the Bar. I already fear that my ethnicity, poorer background and gender are set backs, and going to uni where a lot of people seem smarter than me doesn't ease those insecurities. Hopefully all shall work out in by the time I reach that hurdle eh?
Grr, Money, Grr...
I've been at uni for about two months, and not a single penny of my loan or grant from student finance has found it's way into my account. Not one. Not even a sixth pence (whatever value that'd have would be more than I have in my account anyhow.) Why? Ask the indecisive student finance.
Every time I fill out yet another form, they find a flaw so significant that they refuse to pay me. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be as infuriated, if my parents were filthy rich (like other friends at uni) or if I had a part time job (which apparently nobody requires me to have.) but I don't. I haven't a penny, my mum's out of work to look after my baby sister, and my dad has another 5 mouths to feed other than my own. I have no idea why this financially instability has befallen on me.
Although my parent's struggle financially, and I live in a supposedly 'deprived' part of London, I have no criminal record, I didn't take part in the summer riots, I don't miss lectures, and I study hard. I wanted to take a career in law for partly this reason. Hopefully when I become a qualified lawyer, I'd be able to help my family and myself gain financial stability, and pay for my baby sis to go to a private school and end up in oxford. Until then, must I live in poverty? And how on earth can an organization which claims to help people, not fulfill it's purpose? Finally, where on Earth do I go from here? I feel as though my hope is dying (and I've applied for copious jobs, they never get back to me.) :(
Every time I fill out yet another form, they find a flaw so significant that they refuse to pay me. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be as infuriated, if my parents were filthy rich (like other friends at uni) or if I had a part time job (which apparently nobody requires me to have.) but I don't. I haven't a penny, my mum's out of work to look after my baby sister, and my dad has another 5 mouths to feed other than my own. I have no idea why this financially instability has befallen on me.
Although my parent's struggle financially, and I live in a supposedly 'deprived' part of London, I have no criminal record, I didn't take part in the summer riots, I don't miss lectures, and I study hard. I wanted to take a career in law for partly this reason. Hopefully when I become a qualified lawyer, I'd be able to help my family and myself gain financial stability, and pay for my baby sis to go to a private school and end up in oxford. Until then, must I live in poverty? And how on earth can an organization which claims to help people, not fulfill it's purpose? Finally, where on Earth do I go from here? I feel as though my hope is dying (and I've applied for copious jobs, they never get back to me.) :(
Tuesday 18 October 2011
Wednesday 12 October 2011
Coming soon to a blogpost near you...
I haven't blogged about my personal life in a while, because my mum believes I'm addicted to blogging and I ought to prove her wrong. But there will be a blog post coming soon about uni, my dreams aspirations and anxieties. Sounds interesting eh? It might not be, but I feel I have to post about it. Watch this space.
Monday 10 October 2011
Should the English legal system be unbound by the ECJ?
At the end of the Conservative's Party conference for 2011, David Cameron (leader of this political party) did mention his strong desire to detach this country from the EU legislative powers completely. But, why? This post will be looking into a couple of legal systems from European countries, comparing them to our countries legal systems (only breifly, this isn't an essay, just a blogpost.) and aim to decipher why it is that the topic to remove ourselves from Europe should even be discussed.
I am going to start with a seemingly irrelevant case in relation to the title, but don't worry, it'll all hopefully make sense by the end (if not, sue me. Don't really, I don't have the money for that...)Anyway, on the 4th of September, Amanda Knox (Accused of murdering Meridith Kercher in 2007) had been acquitted after a successful appeal by the defence after four years of appeals. The outcome was of course a shock to everyone, and I concur with Meredith's brother, when he stated: "We are now left looking at this again and thinking how a decision that was certain two yeas ago has been so empathetically overturned..."
How indeed could the judges acquit miss Knox based on her appeals, even though there was significant evidence to suggest that Amanda Knox did part take in the murder of Meredith? Would this acquittal suggest that the Italian courts were too quick to 'judge' initially, or does this acquittal of a once acclaimed 'She Devil' show confusion, and a certain lack for standing by their previous decisions made? Which brings me unto my next question; are the English legal systems much more secure and predictable than the legal systems in other European countries (like Italy in this example)?
Let's go back in time a little bit. Ever since the Norman Conquest, the English legal system (let's just call it the ELS for short?) has improved century by century, and become more defined and effective, just by the courts applying the simple idea of stare decisis (standing by a previous decision) and submitting to the binding precedents of higher courts in the hierarchy. This has meant that cases in English courts are more predictable, and can therefore act as a deterrent for potential offenders in England. For example, knowing that murdering someone would result in serious and possibly lengthy custodial sentencing, could persuade most people not to murder in the first place.
Yet other European countries do not necessarily follow the same principle of stare decisis in their courts. Let's take Italy for example. Although there is a clear hierarchy of courts in the Italian legal system, it is claimed to be too 'complicated', mainly because there are just too many laws set in place, most of which are dismissed, meaning the Italian public and even Italian lawyers find it difficult to decipher which laws the judges are likely to use, making their cases harder to predict.
If a cases' outcome is unpredictable, this could mean solicitors advising clients not to begin the lengthy and costly litigation process in the first place, resulting in the possible reduction of work for lawyers, and an in balance in the justice system. I am not suggesting that this is the case in the Italian legal system, but merely stating potential calamities which would occur (in any legal system) without a secure principal of precedent.
Moving on from Italy, let's look at another European Legal system, different to England. France. Unlike England, France follows a system founded on 'Written law', not Case law. Although the hierarchy of the French judiciary coincides and is similar to that in England, judges in France play a more active role in the procedural and investigatory process of trials. There are clear benefits to the French legal system (Following written law also promotes comprehension in the outcome of cases like England, and would therefore have a likewise effect) and the book 'Civil law and the Anglo - American lawyer: A case illustrated introduction to civil law institutions and method' by Henry P. De Vries, George A. Schneider, René David States that 'French courts (are) bound by the written law....'
Even though the French legal system refer religiously to written law, surely this must mean that cases would take longer to proceed with because of the numerous laws in relation to the case that they must look into? Also, how can judges in France be certain that their interpretation of these laws they apply in cases are the intended interpretation?
For years now, David Cameron (British PM) has made it known that he wants to abolish the Human Rights act and replace it with an Act which would have no ties to Europe. In a bid to end the Act, Theresa May (Home secretary) falsely claimed at last week's Conservative Party Conference that an illegal immigrant was permitted to stay in this country because 'and I am not making this up' - he owned a cat. She was later proved that this was falsely given information, and it can be argued that Britain has far too many benefits and ties with being involved with Europe, and that taking away our courts being bound to the ECJ and one of their legislations, detaching ourselves could mean cutting ourselves off financially too, at a time when we (beggars) cannot be the choosers.
However, even though there are benefits to our being bound by their legislative statutes, a lot of cases (as Theresa May attempted to state) in Britain, end up with absurd outcomes, because of this restriction of courts having to be bound by the ECJ. There are a couple of examples Mrs May told party members: “We all know the stories about the Human Rights Act: the violent drug dealer who cannot be sent home because his daughter – for whom he pays no maintenance – lives here; the robber who cannot be removed because he has a girlfriend.”
I am going to start with a seemingly irrelevant case in relation to the title, but don't worry, it'll all hopefully make sense by the end (if not, sue me. Don't really, I don't have the money for that...)Anyway, on the 4th of September, Amanda Knox (Accused of murdering Meridith Kercher in 2007) had been acquitted after a successful appeal by the defence after four years of appeals. The outcome was of course a shock to everyone, and I concur with Meredith's brother, when he stated: "We are now left looking at this again and thinking how a decision that was certain two yeas ago has been so empathetically overturned..."
How indeed could the judges acquit miss Knox based on her appeals, even though there was significant evidence to suggest that Amanda Knox did part take in the murder of Meredith? Would this acquittal suggest that the Italian courts were too quick to 'judge' initially, or does this acquittal of a once acclaimed 'She Devil' show confusion, and a certain lack for standing by their previous decisions made? Which brings me unto my next question; are the English legal systems much more secure and predictable than the legal systems in other European countries (like Italy in this example)?
Let's go back in time a little bit. Ever since the Norman Conquest, the English legal system (let's just call it the ELS for short?) has improved century by century, and become more defined and effective, just by the courts applying the simple idea of stare decisis (standing by a previous decision) and submitting to the binding precedents of higher courts in the hierarchy. This has meant that cases in English courts are more predictable, and can therefore act as a deterrent for potential offenders in England. For example, knowing that murdering someone would result in serious and possibly lengthy custodial sentencing, could persuade most people not to murder in the first place.
Yet other European countries do not necessarily follow the same principle of stare decisis in their courts. Let's take Italy for example. Although there is a clear hierarchy of courts in the Italian legal system, it is claimed to be too 'complicated', mainly because there are just too many laws set in place, most of which are dismissed, meaning the Italian public and even Italian lawyers find it difficult to decipher which laws the judges are likely to use, making their cases harder to predict.
If a cases' outcome is unpredictable, this could mean solicitors advising clients not to begin the lengthy and costly litigation process in the first place, resulting in the possible reduction of work for lawyers, and an in balance in the justice system. I am not suggesting that this is the case in the Italian legal system, but merely stating potential calamities which would occur (in any legal system) without a secure principal of precedent.
Moving on from Italy, let's look at another European Legal system, different to England. France. Unlike England, France follows a system founded on 'Written law', not Case law. Although the hierarchy of the French judiciary coincides and is similar to that in England, judges in France play a more active role in the procedural and investigatory process of trials. There are clear benefits to the French legal system (Following written law also promotes comprehension in the outcome of cases like England, and would therefore have a likewise effect) and the book 'Civil law and the Anglo - American lawyer: A case illustrated introduction to civil law institutions and method' by Henry P. De Vries, George A. Schneider, René David States that 'French courts (are) bound by the written law....'
Even though the French legal system refer religiously to written law, surely this must mean that cases would take longer to proceed with because of the numerous laws in relation to the case that they must look into? Also, how can judges in France be certain that their interpretation of these laws they apply in cases are the intended interpretation?
For years now, David Cameron (British PM) has made it known that he wants to abolish the Human Rights act and replace it with an Act which would have no ties to Europe. In a bid to end the Act, Theresa May (Home secretary) falsely claimed at last week's Conservative Party Conference that an illegal immigrant was permitted to stay in this country because 'and I am not making this up' - he owned a cat. She was later proved that this was falsely given information, and it can be argued that Britain has far too many benefits and ties with being involved with Europe, and that taking away our courts being bound to the ECJ and one of their legislations, detaching ourselves could mean cutting ourselves off financially too, at a time when we (beggars) cannot be the choosers.
However, even though there are benefits to our being bound by their legislative statutes, a lot of cases (as Theresa May attempted to state) in Britain, end up with absurd outcomes, because of this restriction of courts having to be bound by the ECJ. There are a couple of examples Mrs May told party members: “We all know the stories about the Human Rights Act: the violent drug dealer who cannot be sent home because his daughter – for whom he pays no maintenance – lives here; the robber who cannot be removed because he has a girlfriend.”
Bearing such absurd cases in mind, do we think of how 'linking arms' to the rest of Europe can benefit us, or how cutting ourselves off could lead to better outcomes in cases and legal matters, bringing ultimate order to our country as a whole. One final question, when taking into consideration the definite ambiguity and variety in European legal systems, is it wise or helpful, for this country to remain entangled with the European legal system, being bound to the ECJ and the Human Rights Act 1998?
Wednesday 5 October 2011
One of my tweets on Cameron's speech on the BBC website. #proudmoment.
Tuesday 4 October 2011
The Wedding of River Song (A Dr Who review...)
*** Spoiler alert for episode 13 season 6 ***
This episode was the last before the Christmas special, and so was supposed to be epic, intriguing and exciting, leaving a massive cliff hanger for the Christmas special. I'll give Steven Moffat (head writer and exec. producer) some credit though. This episode, answered the questions I wanted to know (how would the Dr die without ending Dr Who as a programme, and when would he supposedly marry Melody Pond?), whilst keeping me on the edge of my seat in my mental attempts to decipher how the narrative would play out.
Unfortunately though, as much as I was intrigued, I also found myself beguiled and quite confused in this complex,complicated,and incomprehensible narrative. Now if me being an adult could not grasp this episodes' storyline, I wonder if the 11year olds who this programme is aimed at could?
Let me try to reconstruct the story line for you: Ages ago, there was an episode which showed the Dr dying, and ever since then there have been hints that the future Dr will obviously die also, but that his death would be shown differently, explaining why he had to die.
In this episode, It is explained that the 'silence' (a religious movement) believe that a time will come when all beings will have no choice but to speak the truth, and that's when a question will be asked, a question that must never be answered which the Dr will answer if he is alive. The question is unknown. Following so far? Yes? Okay. So, because the Dr's been 'on the run' time (past, present and future) have intertwined in a way that they shouldn't have, and the Dr needs to touch Melody Pond (the present one) to bring him to the appointed time of his death. Why Melody Pond? Because Melody Pond (the future one) kills him. (His murder is supposed to be her whole reason for existence apparently.) He finds Melody, along with her parents, Amy Pond and Rory (who are visibly younger than her, and were the Dr's companions) who allow Melody and the Dr to marry.
Of course, tracing back to three episodes ago, there were a group of people who transformed themselves into tiny beings living inside a robot which was disguised as any human they wanted it to be, and these people were like the 'time police' travelling through time and torturing aliens/humans who committed serious offences which would affect time. The Dr asks them to transform him, and take his bodily form, so that when he does die, it isn't him dying, it is the robot thingy.
My obvious questions now are this:
- Wouldn't this 'silence' be smart enough to know that it wasn't the actual Dr who had died?
- Can the Dr still travel through time saving lives without being detected?
- Can the Dr still see Amy and Rory?
And finally-
- Is this programme just a little too confusing for adults and kids now?
This episode was the last before the Christmas special, and so was supposed to be epic, intriguing and exciting, leaving a massive cliff hanger for the Christmas special. I'll give Steven Moffat (head writer and exec. producer) some credit though. This episode, answered the questions I wanted to know (how would the Dr die without ending Dr Who as a programme, and when would he supposedly marry Melody Pond?), whilst keeping me on the edge of my seat in my mental attempts to decipher how the narrative would play out.
Unfortunately though, as much as I was intrigued, I also found myself beguiled and quite confused in this complex,complicated,and incomprehensible narrative. Now if me being an adult could not grasp this episodes' storyline, I wonder if the 11year olds who this programme is aimed at could?
Let me try to reconstruct the story line for you: Ages ago, there was an episode which showed the Dr dying, and ever since then there have been hints that the future Dr will obviously die also, but that his death would be shown differently, explaining why he had to die.
In this episode, It is explained that the 'silence' (a religious movement) believe that a time will come when all beings will have no choice but to speak the truth, and that's when a question will be asked, a question that must never be answered which the Dr will answer if he is alive. The question is unknown. Following so far? Yes? Okay. So, because the Dr's been 'on the run' time (past, present and future) have intertwined in a way that they shouldn't have, and the Dr needs to touch Melody Pond (the present one) to bring him to the appointed time of his death. Why Melody Pond? Because Melody Pond (the future one) kills him. (His murder is supposed to be her whole reason for existence apparently.) He finds Melody, along with her parents, Amy Pond and Rory (who are visibly younger than her, and were the Dr's companions) who allow Melody and the Dr to marry.
Of course, tracing back to three episodes ago, there were a group of people who transformed themselves into tiny beings living inside a robot which was disguised as any human they wanted it to be, and these people were like the 'time police' travelling through time and torturing aliens/humans who committed serious offences which would affect time. The Dr asks them to transform him, and take his bodily form, so that when he does die, it isn't him dying, it is the robot thingy.
My obvious questions now are this:
- Wouldn't this 'silence' be smart enough to know that it wasn't the actual Dr who had died?
- Can the Dr still travel through time saving lives without being detected?
- Can the Dr still see Amy and Rory?
And finally-
- Is this programme just a little too confusing for adults and kids now?
Friday 30 September 2011
Here's the email I sent to Mr Miliband (Ed of course....) let's hope he actually replies.
***** ******
Hello Mr Miliband. I would firstly like to congratulate you on your speech
at the labour conference this week in Liverpool.
I did very much enjoy viewing your evident enthusiasm
on this 'New Labour' concept, and hearing the 'promise of Britain' as your motto,
however I do feel that Britain has received far too many 'promises'
for us to believe any of them to have any substantial truth in them any more.
There are two flaws and anomalies I noted during the course of your speech in particular.
One of which was the evident ambiguity of distinguishing the 'predators' from the 'producers',
just how would you propose to go about regulating businesses in such a way as to define them?
Also, in terms of giving those who 'benefit society' priority for housing, how would you
propose to determine who benefits society, if after these people get their homes, stop
their community commitments?
I do understand that there must be an effective equality system where people get what they deserve,
however I do feel that there are grey areas in your tactics for tackling this problem, and it does
seem to me (judging by your speech as I haven't heard of your sentiments otherwise, aside from when
you criticised the public sector union strike which may take place in November.) that your ideas
and approaches to tackle Britain's issues day by day increasingly become more right-wing based.
What is your response to this?
I do hope that you take this email into serious consideration and respond satisfactorily to the
out cry of the public. Thank you very much,
Yours sincerely,
***** *******
You can do so too, via 'Dear Mr. Miliband'
Wednesday 28 September 2011
Ed Miliband is 'pretty normal'? I guess going to Oxford is normal right...
During Ed Miliband's Speech last night he addressed people's views on him, beginning with his joke about his 'nose job'. But when he spoke of opinions of him being quite negative, thinking he was "weird", he was not so 'jokey'. He told the Labour party and all viewers that he is a "Pretty normal guy." it is understandable that as a labour leader and leader in opposition, he would want to gain the countries trust, and persuade them that he is one of us, but the words 'normal' and average do not correlate with this 41 year old. Him going to Oxford immediately detaches himself from the minute percentage of those who go to other (and lower in the hierarchy) institutions. He also made sure he claimed himself as his own man, not in the least like Blair or Brown, which is understandable, as Brown did not gain the public's favour, and neither did Blair toward the end of his office. But Blair was a man who managed to stay in his office for at least three terms, so surely he did something right? Cutting yourself off from a man who had lead a leading government for decades would convey a confusion and ignorance in terms of knowing where your party has come from, and what it has been through. So to me, so far, I have not seen any similarities between Mr. Miliband and myself. Do you?
Tuesday 27 September 2011
Uni life so far…
Okayyyy! I love Uni because I’ve made good, hard working friends who have a crazy streak (exactly like me basically) and so we can spend our lunch in Starbucks either discussing law and politics like nerds, or dancing down the uni corridors like maniacs. So, good times so far! But the hard work has already commenced (though this is the first week) and during lectures, I just thank God I’m competent at writing down notes quickly (lecturers wait for no man) and there’s a Hell of a lot of stuff to remember.. My lecturers are quite cool though, and during seminars they loosing up a bit. So, I’ll be working hard and having fun. I’m glad I’m at uni, and can’t wait for what’s to come! (But bearing in mind it’ll get harder, maybe I can wait…) (as posted on Tumblr.)
Friday 23 September 2011
A joke someone just told me:
Neil: What’s the best cheese for getting a bear out of a cave?
Me: I don’t know, what IS the best cheese for getting a bear out of a cave?
Neil: Camembert. Feel free to share it and have a great weekend.
The sad part is I actually cried of laughter… :s Nevertheless, I think this guy deserves to be followed just because of this joke.
Thursday 22 September 2011
Wednesday 21 September 2011
Troy Davis.
So it has been pronounced that Troy was executed, despite the substantial evidence giving mitigating factors. (I watched it live for an hour after he was due to be executed, but now I have to sleep.) Anyway, I was infuriated when someone I 'follow' tweeted "But on a real tho, no 1 really cares bout the case. After he's killed we will alll go ahead and start gbaa alerting peeps. That's life" (whatever 'GBAA' means I haven't the foggiest.)
Yes, Death is a part of life.Yes, everybody dies. But it does not mean that we should become apathetic towards the ways in which peoples' lives are unnecessarily or unjustly ended. I believe that everyone ought to gain a good quality of life, and those who do, should not become callous and inconsiderate to those who don't. It is attitudes like this which evoke such awful events as the summer riots (which I had to witness) or even on a wider scale, the deaths caused by the twin tower crashes.
The idea that "if someone dies, they die" Is probably what has kept the death row in legislation in a 1st world country like America for so long, and it is time that legislation was scrapped. It does not benefit anybody when a death occurs on both the defendants' side and prosecutions' side of the case, and it is depressing to think that almost a century after Ghandi's death, his words "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" have evidently been disregarded and trivialised by the American Government.
For those who don't care about cases like Troy's, it is time people began to open their eyes to see that the world consists of more people than just themselves, or the people they like, but people they may never have even heard of. Ugh. Rotten ignorant attitude aggravates me immensely. Rant over.
Yes, Death is a part of life.Yes, everybody dies. But it does not mean that we should become apathetic towards the ways in which peoples' lives are unnecessarily or unjustly ended. I believe that everyone ought to gain a good quality of life, and those who do, should not become callous and inconsiderate to those who don't. It is attitudes like this which evoke such awful events as the summer riots (which I had to witness) or even on a wider scale, the deaths caused by the twin tower crashes.
The idea that "if someone dies, they die" Is probably what has kept the death row in legislation in a 1st world country like America for so long, and it is time that legislation was scrapped. It does not benefit anybody when a death occurs on both the defendants' side and prosecutions' side of the case, and it is depressing to think that almost a century after Ghandi's death, his words "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" have evidently been disregarded and trivialised by the American Government.
For those who don't care about cases like Troy's, it is time people began to open their eyes to see that the world consists of more people than just themselves, or the people they like, but people they may never have even heard of. Ugh. Rotten ignorant attitude aggravates me immensely. Rant over.
That was fun. And it was just the enrolment...
On Tuesday 20th Sept I enrolled at my Uni. I instantly made a lot of lovely friends (maybe because everyone wants to latch on to someone initially, but I believe it was my popular charisma that did the trick) But I doubt they'll all be studying law with me as they assembled random students doing random courses to enrol together.
Anyway, it was great, and we had a little Induction/Introduction to how our courses will be. I met one of my lecturers who was a very enthusiastic Caribbean old man. He spoke a lot about the true harshness of just how I'll find my degree, but we also received a lot of examples of their current students who are excelling at our courses. It made me realise that I want to be a barrister. I don't know how the whole day and that ambition directly relate, but I suddenly thought that I ought to exhaust all possible areas of my profession, before settling down into one field. The only problem with this is that it is usually easier for students to either take the solicitor route or the Bar route, Not one after the other. This means I'll seriously have to consider every pro and con for both legal profession before deciding, but at least now I am not ruling out one form of legal profession completely.
I also began to take into perspective how hard it will be for someone like me to qualify as a lawyer, due to my ethnicity and social background. Unfortunately, in a lot of law firms (or even at the Bar) there is the 'Glass Ceiling' ideology, and even just the mere fact that I am a female could be a set back if I want to work in a City law firm. But I shan't let these boundaries stop me. There are countless examples (I had to research this to encourage myself) of female lawyers and/or lawyers of the minor ethnicity (Shami Chakrabarti is my favourite, she's like my ideal celeb :s) who have done exceedingly well, so there is nothing to stop me really.
I did experience some prejudice at my college when I wanted to apply to Universities to study law. A lot of my teachers said I wouldn't get in! Nevertheless, I have a stubborn tendency to prove people wrong, and that's what spurred me on to eventually be accepted to study law. I am going to work more than exceptionally hard, and never doubt for one moment that I can be a success for my family, my ethnicity and myself.
Anyway, it was great, and we had a little Induction/Introduction to how our courses will be. I met one of my lecturers who was a very enthusiastic Caribbean old man. He spoke a lot about the true harshness of just how I'll find my degree, but we also received a lot of examples of their current students who are excelling at our courses. It made me realise that I want to be a barrister. I don't know how the whole day and that ambition directly relate, but I suddenly thought that I ought to exhaust all possible areas of my profession, before settling down into one field. The only problem with this is that it is usually easier for students to either take the solicitor route or the Bar route, Not one after the other. This means I'll seriously have to consider every pro and con for both legal profession before deciding, but at least now I am not ruling out one form of legal profession completely.
I also began to take into perspective how hard it will be for someone like me to qualify as a lawyer, due to my ethnicity and social background. Unfortunately, in a lot of law firms (or even at the Bar) there is the 'Glass Ceiling' ideology, and even just the mere fact that I am a female could be a set back if I want to work in a City law firm. But I shan't let these boundaries stop me. There are countless examples (I had to research this to encourage myself) of female lawyers and/or lawyers of the minor ethnicity (Shami Chakrabarti is my favourite, she's like my ideal celeb :s) who have done exceedingly well, so there is nothing to stop me really.
I did experience some prejudice at my college when I wanted to apply to Universities to study law. A lot of my teachers said I wouldn't get in! Nevertheless, I have a stubborn tendency to prove people wrong, and that's what spurred me on to eventually be accepted to study law. I am going to work more than exceptionally hard, and never doubt for one moment that I can be a success for my family, my ethnicity and myself.
Monday 12 September 2011
well hello.
I take note of each new follower (though there are too many to keep up with ha.) thank you for following. x
Thursday 25 August 2011
Wednesday 24 August 2011
Law related websites I go on a lot for encouragement (in no particular order)...
- http://www.lawessay.co.uk/
- http://lawbore.net/
- http://www.weblegaleducation.com/
- http://l2b.thelawyer.com/
- http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006tgy1
- http://www.solicitorsjournal.com/section.asp?navcode=581
- http://lawyerwatch.wordpress.com/
- http://legalbizzle.wordpress.com/
- http://lpcstudent.wordpress.com/
- http://www.propping-up-the-bar.com/2011/04/why-i-want-to-be-a-barrister/
Sunday 21 August 2011
I got into a Uni to study law!
so excited for sleepless nights, blood sweat and tears due to law studies. so excited. the real battle begins...
Monday 15 August 2011
LawBORED: What has Legal Aid Ever Done To U Lord Jackson?
LawBORED: What has Legal Aid Ever Done To U Lord Jackson?: "By now it is clear what the government intend to do with the cuts to legal aid. Does the sum 350 million ring a bell? Yes, the government a..."
Wednesday 13 July 2011
A new book i'm reading after Wuthering Heights. in this book the author intends to highlight the notion that the judiciary have become so intertwined with and influenced by government that they no longer have as much jurisdiction as they previously did in the 19th century. the author also cleverly indicates just how factual the accusation of law Lords being "Middle-class, Middle aged and middle minded" is. a thoroughly researched, factual and shockingly eye opening book, John Griffith doesn't hold back, and refuses to sugar coat just how political the judiciary has become. all in all, an exceptional book. and this is just my word for it. :)
Tuesday 12 July 2011
Law Actually: Path’s become ‘too dangerous for wheelchair’
Law Actually: Path’s become ‘too dangerous for wheelchair’: "Photo courtesy of James McCauley Not my headline; it’s the witty, attention-grabbing header chosen by the South Gloucestershire Observer..."
another humorous read from a lawyer's blawg.
another humorous read from a lawyer's blawg.
Monday 11 July 2011
my mini booklist, i'll enjoy reading every book :)
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
Mary McCarthy - The Group
Gore Vidal - The last Empire
Sylvia Plath - The Bell Jar
Juliet Gardiner - Wartime
Dawn Powell - Selected Letters of Dawn Powell
John Irving - A Widow For One Year
Anne Michaels - Fugitive Pieces
Sylvia Plath - The Unabridged Journals of Sylvia Plath
Leo Tolstey - Anna Karenina
Anotoine De Saint Exupery - The little Prince
Sunday 10 July 2011
Tuesday 5 July 2011
Ciao for now
okay, i started up this blog to follow law students and blog about law, but i haven't begun uni yet! i usually blog on tumblr so i won't really be using this site much till September or maybe even after then, when i adjust to the hard work at uni (high hopes). having said this, i must bid you adieu! :)
Christ, Coffee, Books. (who says three’s a crowd?)
Today was fantastic. after evangelism with my church ( to which an estimated 50 people gave their lives to Christ), my friend Sharon and I walked down to starbucks to ‘have a cuppa’ (the act totally complimented my blog url! ) anyway, we took loads of pics but using her camera, so when she blogs ‘em i shall reblog to show. till then, all I have are the pics of the bookshop we went to afterwards, before finally settling on our local library to discover hidden novel treasures. this bookshop was awesome, I found well intriguing books, that reminded me of my desire to own my own domestic library someday. someday. it was an awesome day to sum it all up!
Wednesday 29 June 2011
Tuesday 28 June 2011
Friday 24 June 2011
Thursday 16 June 2011
lifeofliterature:
“In late 1926, Agatha Christie’s husband Archie revealed that he was in love with another woman, and wanted a divorce. On 8 December 1926, the couple quarrelled, and Archie Christie left their house in Berkshire to spend the weekend with his mistress. That same evening Agatha disappeared from her home. Her disappearance caused an outcry from the public, many of whom were admirers of Agatha Christie’s novels. Despite a massive manhunt, there were no results until eleven days later, when Christie was identified as a guest at a hotel in Yorkshire, where she was registered as ‘Mrs Teresa Neele’.
Christie gave no account of her disappearance.”
Teresa Neele (by Sator Arepo)
I love the apprentice, and was v sad to see Glenn leave. so i spoke to him on a live web chat via stylist magazine (stylist.co.uk)
Aisha Brown
Added: 12:13 BST
hey Glenn i was very sad to see you leave, but am sure you will do very well in the future! how has being on the show changed your character despite not winning?
Glenn Ward
Added: 12:25 BST
Glenn says:
Hi Aisha. I've seen the flaws in my character and hope to change them to make me a better person. I've learnt so much from the experience. There are also some parts of me that other people have said are great qualities and have been highlighted in the show.
Added: 12:13 BST
hey Glenn i was very sad to see you leave, but am sure you will do very well in the future! how has being on the show changed your character despite not winning?
Glenn Ward
Added: 12:25 BST
Glenn says:
Hi Aisha. I've seen the flaws in my character and hope to change them to make me a better person. I've learnt so much from the experience. There are also some parts of me that other people have said are great qualities and have been highlighted in the show.
Tuesday 14 June 2011
Feel free to have a cuppa :)
Coffee: The Good News
More than half of American adults drink coffee every day. Recent scientific studies suggest moderate consumption may help reduce some disease risks. The interactive graphic below contains information about some of coffee's possible health benefits. These studies are observational, meaning that researchers draw conclusions based on differences between the number of disease cases in coffee drinkers versus non-drinkers.
You can also learn facts about coffee consumption, view a comparison of the amount of caffeine in common beverages, or learn about some of coffee's downsides by clicking on the icons in the left navigation bar.
Via http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/multimedia/flash/2010/coffee/benefits.html
More than half of American adults drink coffee every day. Recent scientific studies suggest moderate consumption may help reduce some disease risks. The interactive graphic below contains information about some of coffee's possible health benefits. These studies are observational, meaning that researchers draw conclusions based on differences between the number of disease cases in coffee drinkers versus non-drinkers.
You can also learn facts about coffee consumption, view a comparison of the amount of caffeine in common beverages, or learn about some of coffee's downsides by clicking on the icons in the left navigation bar.
Via http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/multimedia/flash/2010/coffee/benefits.html
Monday 13 June 2011
mother knows best. oh yes.
Come to think of it we (asuming you who reads this is young) actually receive a whole lotta wisdom from those above us. Most of the time we ignore it. Sometimes we pretend to accept it, other times we acknowledge it. But do we actually take it on board? If we did, we wouldn’t have so many things to complain about as much as we do. I mean, what those above us say is from their experiances, and there’s a saying that goes “a wise man learns from other people’s experiances” if we as young people wish to be a whole lot brighter and have unneccesary burdens lifted, we must listen and act upon what we hear. Just saying.. Xx
a cynist? pft.
So, my pastor made me realise why I don’t want to marry. I know I’m only 18 so I shouldn’t be thinking about marraige per se, but every young person wonders about it asit’s likely to be part of our future. Anyway so I realised it’s because I’m a perfectionist. This doesn’t mean I’m perfect, it means I wish to be, which would inevitably lead to depression because being perfect is impossible! knowing that someday some guy I’ve met will dive into my life, and conform it for his comfort freaks me out. All the ways I’ve been used to would have to change. All that I dream and know would be changed to suit him. My so called ‘perfect’ ways of doing things would be in a sense distorted for the sake of a man I’ve only known for a little while. But marraige isn’t about who sleeps with the light on and who doesn’t, or who blasts music in the shower whilst the other whispers doing chores, it is about the unity of two becoming one through love. Love never holds back, and love never holds on to negativity. It provides freedom in peace, to the extent that it would almost seem like childlike trust and foolish generosity. So someday I may marry, maybe I won’t. But if the time should come, I won’t let my fears of someone taking over my finances get in the way of life-long joy. I will let love take control. Spoken like a true cynist eh?! I don’t think I can call myself that anymore haha. Much love, Aisha Brown. X
Wednesday 8 June 2011
Tuesday 7 June 2011
Monday 6 June 2011
Sunday 5 June 2011
Saturday 4 June 2011
Thursday 2 June 2011
my rare negativity..
Why do I get so irritable? Usually I’m a “Happy-go-lucky, couldn’t care less” kind of person but then sudden outbursts of a critical, cynical, analytical and patronizing beast awakens. Maybe it’s because I hardly share what I’m really feeling. If someone says something stupid and asks me “that was stupid wasn’t it” I won’t say “well duh” I’ll say “oh don’t worry we all have our moments.” But I only do this on the basis that the moment I truly speak my mind, I’ll offend everyone everyday, and I don’t want to be the bad guy. So I guess I’ll just keep my critical opinions to myself even when people beg me to voice them, because “there’s power in the tongue” - Proverbs 18:21
pre law degree
okay because i haven't started my law degree yet the things that i post will not be law based, which is quite ironic because the whole point of this is to blog about law. but then again, a blog also gives people windows to voice what they might not necessarily voice verbally, and so I think that even when I begin my LLB Honors degree in Law i'll blog more than just 'Law', though my law based adventures may consume the majority of my blog.
going through a lot of Law blogs and listening to my friends' advice who already study law, i appreciate how hard this degree will be to get through, but i simply cannot wait. i currently live in London, but i'll be going to a Uni out of London to study, leaving everyone behind and kind of starting afresh studying something i'm most compelled by. Not that i despise my life in London, but i am someone who needs space from my mega family and I love to try new things. in short, i am ultra excited about going to Uni to study Law out of London. i just have to make sure I get the grades to get in...
going through a lot of Law blogs and listening to my friends' advice who already study law, i appreciate how hard this degree will be to get through, but i simply cannot wait. i currently live in London, but i'll be going to a Uni out of London to study, leaving everyone behind and kind of starting afresh studying something i'm most compelled by. Not that i despise my life in London, but i am someone who needs space from my mega family and I love to try new things. in short, i am ultra excited about going to Uni to study Law out of London. i just have to make sure I get the grades to get in...
okay i'm not new to the whole blogging thing, i've had a blog for a while now on tumblr ;but i haven't had a blog on this blogger website, so my blog will initially start off looking quite boring, but bare with me all ye millions of followers. i joined this blog for two reasons:
1. i wanted to make a blog where I can follow law students (as I am soon to become one come September fall)
2. my previous blog is exposed to all those who know me, so I can no longer voice my feelings, emotions or what i'm going through in the knowledge that no one I know will criticize or be nosy to know what's up with me.
so, this is my new blog, let's see how this'll go...
1. i wanted to make a blog where I can follow law students (as I am soon to become one come September fall)
2. my previous blog is exposed to all those who know me, so I can no longer voice my feelings, emotions or what i'm going through in the knowledge that no one I know will criticize or be nosy to know what's up with me.
so, this is my new blog, let's see how this'll go...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)