*/
Reaching for the remote
Memory is the mother of all wisdom.
Paddy Corkhill, our unreconstructed senior junior, telephoned me last week with an unusual question: ‘Do you ever get a feeling in court that you can’t quite summon up the energy to stand up and object to something?’ I was about to say ‘no’ when I realised the answer was ‘yes’. I added that by the time I had resolved whether or not to moan, the moment had passed. Paddy became quite enthusiastic. ‘Your facial muscles start to move, don’t they? And your body tightens slightly, but, as you say, the opportunity slips.’ Then a thought struck me. ‘Why are we having this conversation, Paddy?’
It turned out that he had a cousin, Laura, who is a psychologist. She had recently entered his social bubble under the new freedoms granted to us. Laura has been studying the effects of remote meetings and thought that Paddy might be good fodder for her research. She had wanted to know whether use of a remote format inhibited questions from within a group. I now saw the point of his first question.
I had just attended a remote Chambers’ Meeting organised by the Twist brothers. Usually unable to form any opinion until they know which point of view is on the winning side, their persistence in organising Zooms and Skypes and Teams showed a violently ambitious side to their characters I had long suspected.
A surprisingly large number joined, as I could see from a disturbing little number counter in the right bottom corner of my screen. Hetty Briar-Pitt left the rural delights of her stables to tell us she was not taking part as she had recently switched on her mobile phone in the bath before realising it was an incoming FaceTime call. In her embarrassment she had dropped the thing beneath the bubbles. Thankfully there were bubbles. As a result, she had lost confidence in aspects of this new technology.
I noticed how speedily the whole thing went. It was entitled ‘meeting the new challenges of a changed economic climate’ and was conducted by Roderick Twist. While there was quite a good deal on what the challenges were, it was a little short on how we were to meet them. An earnest junior called Imogen McShane was, I think, proposing we should leave Chambers, rent a couple of conference rooms in the Strand and otherwise work from home. Fortunately, or unfortunately depending on where you stand, the feedback became so bad we couldn’t hear much of it. This was not helped by someone leaving his microphone open while secretly watching Catweazle from the 1970s on Talking Pictures.
Catweazle had been transported in time to the Seventies from Norman England where he had been a magician – played by the wonderful Geoffrey Bayldon who later found fame as the man in the tower with the impossible riddle in Fort Boyard. Quite a few of us in the meeting were feeling much the same puzzlement with the modern world as exhibited by Catweazle throughout the two series.
However, when Roderick said ‘unmute and speak if you have any questions’ it all seemed too problematic to bother; the moment seemed to have been lost. Interruptions involved people talking over each other and then stopping, starting and stopping again. Only Imogen made a sustained effort but her voice had now elongated in a bass pitch as if she was being pulled by way of stretching into a large Black Hole.
I looked at the faces on screen. It was alarming how you could see every twitch and movement, every slight facial nuance. Since my screen only afforded a selection, I had no idea who might be looking at me. I became irrationally worried that something compromising might be behind me but felt that looking to see might draw attention to it should my face be on someone else’s screen.
What was weird was that all the things one sees in court, everything taken in by looking around the courtroom, was completely lost in this medium, even though I could see people in close-up. It is a worry I have often had about live-link evidence in court. You see things you should not – the witness fidgeting and so on – but not things you should such as their reaction to questions and, indeed, their look while you are asking the question which may make you, forewarned, change it or drop the subject altogether.
I have concluded that if ‘remote’ is going to be the new norm, we may need a lot of Lauras to teach us how to use it properly.
Memory is the mother of all wisdom.
Paddy Corkhill, our unreconstructed senior junior, telephoned me last week with an unusual question: ‘Do you ever get a feeling in court that you can’t quite summon up the energy to stand up and object to something?’ I was about to say ‘no’ when I realised the answer was ‘yes’. I added that by the time I had resolved whether or not to moan, the moment had passed. Paddy became quite enthusiastic. ‘Your facial muscles start to move, don’t they? And your body tightens slightly, but, as you say, the opportunity slips.’ Then a thought struck me. ‘Why are we having this conversation, Paddy?’
It turned out that he had a cousin, Laura, who is a psychologist. She had recently entered his social bubble under the new freedoms granted to us. Laura has been studying the effects of remote meetings and thought that Paddy might be good fodder for her research. She had wanted to know whether use of a remote format inhibited questions from within a group. I now saw the point of his first question.
I had just attended a remote Chambers’ Meeting organised by the Twist brothers. Usually unable to form any opinion until they know which point of view is on the winning side, their persistence in organising Zooms and Skypes and Teams showed a violently ambitious side to their characters I had long suspected.
A surprisingly large number joined, as I could see from a disturbing little number counter in the right bottom corner of my screen. Hetty Briar-Pitt left the rural delights of her stables to tell us she was not taking part as she had recently switched on her mobile phone in the bath before realising it was an incoming FaceTime call. In her embarrassment she had dropped the thing beneath the bubbles. Thankfully there were bubbles. As a result, she had lost confidence in aspects of this new technology.
I noticed how speedily the whole thing went. It was entitled ‘meeting the new challenges of a changed economic climate’ and was conducted by Roderick Twist. While there was quite a good deal on what the challenges were, it was a little short on how we were to meet them. An earnest junior called Imogen McShane was, I think, proposing we should leave Chambers, rent a couple of conference rooms in the Strand and otherwise work from home. Fortunately, or unfortunately depending on where you stand, the feedback became so bad we couldn’t hear much of it. This was not helped by someone leaving his microphone open while secretly watching Catweazle from the 1970s on Talking Pictures.
Catweazle had been transported in time to the Seventies from Norman England where he had been a magician – played by the wonderful Geoffrey Bayldon who later found fame as the man in the tower with the impossible riddle in Fort Boyard. Quite a few of us in the meeting were feeling much the same puzzlement with the modern world as exhibited by Catweazle throughout the two series.
However, when Roderick said ‘unmute and speak if you have any questions’ it all seemed too problematic to bother; the moment seemed to have been lost. Interruptions involved people talking over each other and then stopping, starting and stopping again. Only Imogen made a sustained effort but her voice had now elongated in a bass pitch as if she was being pulled by way of stretching into a large Black Hole.
I looked at the faces on screen. It was alarming how you could see every twitch and movement, every slight facial nuance. Since my screen only afforded a selection, I had no idea who might be looking at me. I became irrationally worried that something compromising might be behind me but felt that looking to see might draw attention to it should my face be on someone else’s screen.
What was weird was that all the things one sees in court, everything taken in by looking around the courtroom, was completely lost in this medium, even though I could see people in close-up. It is a worry I have often had about live-link evidence in court. You see things you should not – the witness fidgeting and so on – but not things you should such as their reaction to questions and, indeed, their look while you are asking the question which may make you, forewarned, change it or drop the subject altogether.
I have concluded that if ‘remote’ is going to be the new norm, we may need a lot of Lauras to teach us how to use it properly.
Reaching for the remote
Sam Townend KC explains the Bar Council’s efforts towards ensuring a bright future for the profession
Giovanni D’Avola explores the issue of over-citation of unreported cases and the ‘added value’ elements of a law report
Louise Crush explores the key points and opportunities for tax efficiency
Westgate Wealth Management Ltd is a Partner Practice of FTSE 100 company St. James’s Place – one of the top UK Wealth Management firms. We offer a holistic service of distinct quality, integrity, and excellence with the aim to build a professional and valuable relationship with our clients, helping to provide them with security now, prosperity in the future and the highest standard of service in all of our dealings.
Is now the time to review your financial position, having reached a career milestone? asks Louise Crush
If you were to host a dinner party with 10 guests, and you asked them to explain what financial planning is and how it differs to financial advice, you’d receive 10 different answers. The variety of answers highlights the ongoing need to clarify and promote the value of financial planning.
Most of us like to think we would risk our career in order to meet our ethical obligations, so why have so many lawyers failed to hold the line? asks Flora Page
If your current practice environment is bringing you down, seek a new one. However daunting the change, it will be worth it, says Anon Barrister
Creating advocacy opportunities for juniors is now the expectation but not always easy to put into effect. Tom Mitcheson KC distils developing best practice from the Patents Court initiative already bearing fruit
Sam Townend KC explains the Bar Council’s efforts towards ensuring a bright future for the profession
National courts are now running the bulk of the world’s war crimes cases and corporate prosecutions are part of this growing trend, reports Chris Stephen