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? :-)

Law on TV. (And I don't mean those awful PPI adverts...)

On Sunday I watched Garrow's Law for the first time. I must admit, after the poor representation of the courts in The Jury, I found myself discouraged yet again (despite my lecturers warnings) at the misinterpretation of the legal world by media, even though the main focus of that show was on the public anyway.

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. :-)

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.

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?

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.) :(