Diary of a Working Woman
Passionate, hard-working, fearless Educationalist, Psychologist and mother, Johnette Barrett talks to a selection of working women who have gone through many challenging experiences, often having to undergo many conflicting roles. Johnette unravels the secrets of being a successful woman in today’s world.
Diary of a Working Woman
Inside the Mind of a Homicide Prosecutor
Behind the formal wigs and gowns of the British legal system stands a remarkable woman who's redefining what power looks like in one of the world's oldest professions. Heidi Stonecliffe KC takes us into the rarely-seen world of criminal prosecution, where she specializes in complex homicide and organized crime cases.
From her working-class roots and becoming the first in her family to attend university, Heidi shares how a teenage encounter with "To Kill a Mockingbird" sparked her legal journey. Now, as only the fourth Crown Prosecution Service barrister ever to take silk, she offers profound insights into what justice really means beyond the courtroom drama.
What's truly captivating is Heidi's unexpected emotional response to prosecuting killers – sadness. Not just for bereaved families or victims, but also for defendants whose lives are forever altered by momentary decisions. Despite standing face-to-face with some of the UK's most dangerous criminals, she maintains a profound belief in humanity: "I don't believe that people are inherently evil."
The conversation delves into the psychology of courtroom dynamics, the vicarious trauma of handling disturbing evidence, and how cross-examination truly works (hint: it's nothing like TV shows). Heidi also addresses the troubling rise in knife crime among increasingly younger people, highlighting systemic issues that require intervention beyond the justice system.
For women contemplating legal careers, particularly those from non-traditional backgrounds, Heidi offers invaluable guidance, emphasizing that career setbacks often become defining moments. Her advice to "be brave" encapsulates what's needed to succeed in demanding professions – the willingness to risk failure in pursuit of meaningful work.
This episode provides a rare, honest glimpse into a world most people only experience through dramatized versions. Discover what carrying the weight of justice really means from someone who's redefined the role while never losing sight of her humanity.
A new podcast in which Johnette Barrett, educational psychologist, seeks out inspirational working women who have transformed their lives and that of others through their courageousness and compassion.
The conversations that follow are sometimes eye-opening, sometimes heart- breaking and sometimes humourous.
Diary of a Working Woman (DOAWW) is hosted by Buzzsprouts .com.
Email: diaryofaworkingwoman@yahoo.com
Instagram: doaww podcast
Website: https://www.buzzsprout.com/2227789
Can I keep a stone? I love these ring lights, by the way. Yeah, it's like I suddenly don't look like a corpse.
Speaker 2:She stood face to face with gang leaders, murder suspects and some of the most dangerous criminals in the UK, and she's not flinched once Behind the title of King's Counsel. Heidi Stonecliffe KC is a working woman who's rewritten what power looks like in one of the oldest professions in the world. She's the first employed barrister ever elected as Vice Chair of the Bar Council, senior Advocate at the Crown Prosecution Service and a specialist in complex homicide and organised crime trials. Today she's here to talk about what it really means to carry the weight of justice, the toll of prosecuting killers and surprising things that keeps her grounded.
Speaker 2:Welcome to Diary of a Working Woman and welcome, heidi Stonecliffe-Casey. Thank you, jeanette, you're most welcome, so I am absolutely delighted. I think it'd be really good to first of all start with how we've made this connection, and just very quickly. So Heidi and I met at the gym during body pump classes and we just happened to get talking one day and we were fascinated by each other's careers and I was so fascinated in all of what Heidi has accomplished in her life that I had to have her on this show. Heidi, before we launch into this juicy topic because it's juicy to me anyway first of all tell us a little bit about your childhood and what inspired you to practice law.
Speaker 1:So I grew up in Kent. I'm an only child. This is where my parents had been to university. My father left home and actually left school at the age of 14. So he had no formal education. My mum had worked as a secretary for most of her life and my father had worked for the railways. But they kind of instilled in me from a really young age the idea of hard work. They'd always worked, and so I saw that from a really young age and wanted to do something useful.
Speaker 1:I was lucky to go to a selective but state girls' grammar school, which was pretty progressive at the time, and I initially wanted to be a vet, but my maths wasn't good enough and so I decided I was reading from my English classes To Kill a Mockingbird, right, yeah. And it's a book that still stays with me now. That's the power of someone using their voice Atticus Finch's character to use a voice, even in unpopular circumstances at the time, to make a difference, and, regardless of what the outcome of the case was in that book, the fact that it was more important for him to make sure that Tom Robinson, the character who was accused, had that voice when ordinarily he wouldn't, and so that struck me and I thought maybe it's something I wanted to do. How?
Speaker 2:old were you at?
Speaker 1:the time, so I must have been about 15. Right, and at that time there was no internet, I think youngsters nowadays don't know how. So there were libraries, those buildings where you went and sort of filed through things, and I found all of these sort of dusty pictures of barristers in stripy trousers, men, and decided that that was what I wanted to do At a time when I knew no one who was a barrister, and none of my family.
Speaker 2:Yeah, it's extraordinary, because weren't you the first person in your family to go to?
Speaker 1:uni.
Speaker 2:University yeah, that's remarkable. So what were they like when you told your folks that you wanted to go to university? You wanted to study law.
Speaker 1:What was the reaction? So my mum and dad were really proud. They were really supportive and you know they supported me all the way through as much as they could. There wasn't a huge amount of financial support that they were able to give. So I worked for most of my degree and I worked for most of my vocational studies I worked for during my pupillage, which is the training period as well, but I remember when I was called to the bar. So that's your ceremony, just as you're about to start your career, and my parents both being there and look back now, sort of 29 years down the line and taking silk and it feels like yesterday. And my parents were so proud when I got so because I'd never heard the term no taking silk.
Speaker 2:So please, for anyone out there, I've got no idea what does it mean? Because it's prestigious, right, it's a coveted thing, you know, in the world of law, yeah, so what are silks?
Speaker 1:So they used to be under the Queen's reign Queen's Council. They are now King's Council. So the history is that you were appointed as one of his or her majesty's council, and so it's called silk, because you wear a different gown. You wear a silk gown. Um and around, about 10 percent of barristers, probably less, become silk so it's just 10.
Speaker 2:So it's a prestigious role, yeah, and position.
Speaker 1:So, yeah, well done you like 10 percent across the whole of the uk, across the whole of the bar of england, and so there's around 18,000 barristers Right and in fact there's probably less, certainly less than 1,000, you know a few hundred silks at the moment.
Speaker 2:And how many?
Speaker 1:silks are women, not enough. It's a low percent. I think around about 14, 15%. It's fluctuating.
Speaker 2:It's getting better Trusting all women who apply get it right. Okay, if that makes sense. Yes, it does make sense, that's really good. So did you know that you wanted to be? You know, have the silk. Is that the pinnacle of the profession? Is it?
Speaker 1:I don't know. I mean, when I started out it was kind of like silks and judges were like the unicorns of the profession. They're these mythical creatures. I never thought it would happen to me. To build a portfolio, to make an application, you have to have 12 cases of substance and complexity to make the application and then suddenly judges who were prepared to act as a referee for me when I put my application in were asking me have you thought about it? I did a pivotal case in birmingham where a judge wrote to the director of public prosecutions afterwards and said, on the basis of what I saw over these six months, she should apply for silk. A time I'd ever thought about it. That was back in 2030, that's a great testimonial, isn't it?
Speaker 2:wonderful rules, ethics, right and wrong. As a child growing up, did you have a strong sense of justice? Were you the one that stood up for your friends from yonder dog, for you know, any wounded party? What were you like as a child in terms of your morals?
Speaker 1:yeah, I think, um, my parents had always instilled I never, I don't really think I saw it as a sense of morality, but a sense of doing the right thing. And I still feel that now, regardless of whether it's in work, whether it's in my personal life. If there is someone who needs championing, if there's someone who needs encouragement, I feel like you have a responsibility, particularly when you get more senior, to help those who are coming through the system. And I just think that's something that, as a senior member of any profession, you give back, don't you? Yeah, exactly, you give back, don't you? Yeah, exactly, you give back Exactly.
Speaker 2:Yeah, you nurture, you empower and you uplift the next generation of potential barristers. So I know, in your role as well, you lecture, don't you? So just say a little bit about that.
Speaker 1:So I'm an advocacy trainer, which means that I train pupil barristers so people who are just starting out in the profession and new practitioners, which means that I train pupil barristers so people who are just starting out in the profession and new practitioners. And I also helping and teaching on the advanced international advocacy course that's run at Keeble college every year. And I also I'm a visiting lecturer for one of the bar schools, so the vocational training period and I also do some teaching for police officers and for lawyers. It's just another side of it. It's kind of it's the same thing that we were just talking about. It's helping others with the experience that you have, yes, passing it on.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah, and is there one burning question that most of the students tend to ask you?
Speaker 1:yeah, what is it? How do you deal with nerves? Yeah, how do you deal with nerves? Do you ever get nervous? To which my answer is always yeah absolutely.
Speaker 2:It's natural, isn't? It's a natural instinct, you need it yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1:And so it's really about reassuring them and saying everyone gets nervous, everyone suffers from nerves. When I stand up to open a case, there is a sense of trepidation, but I think it's about recognizing that those nerves actually are useful to you. They make sure that you're prepared. They're almost a sense of excitement You're about to stand up and explain something that matters. So I've always said if people say that they don't get nervous, that's when they should be worried.
Speaker 2:Maybe, maybe, yes, maybe. Yeah, because the stakes are high, absolutely Incredibly high.
Speaker 1:So, before we talk about prosecution, you were on the other side, weren't you?
Speaker 2:Yeah, I was for 10 years. For 10 years, yeah, what made you switch to the other side?
Speaker 1:It's not for any moral reason. There are some people who only defend and say that they could never prosecute. There are some people who only prosecute and say they could never defend. I think it's important to do both. You don't take on board a moral stand in relation to your perspective that you're dealing with. For me, everyone has the right to representation. Everyone has the right to have their voice heard in court. We are simply there to act as a mouthpiece, and so, for me, I think it's important that you do both, because you can see both sides.
Speaker 2:You can see both sides. Is there a side that you prefer, now that you've done both?
Speaker 1:It's about both that I enjoy. Yeah, prosecuting you're kind of building a case up from start often and you're creating something to try and make sure that the jury can understand the facts, to try and create a fair environment for the jury to make a decision. When you're defending, you know, you really do feel the weight of responsibility as well there, um, so I think both sides have their appeal and I wouldn't I wouldn't rule out going back to defending right and doing both.
Speaker 2:Yeah okay, so let's start in the courtroom then. So what does it feel like, physically and emotionally, to stand just a feet away or so from someone accused of taking another person's life? I can't begin to imagine what that must feel like.
Speaker 1:So I was thinking about this and I think the key word there is accused. We always have to remember that, particularly as a prosecutor, that you're not there to secure a win. You're not there to secure a conviction at all costs. You are there as an officer of the court, an honest, reasonable guide through the evidence for the jury to be able to make a fair, rational decision.
Speaker 1:If I'm thinking about the feeling, I thought about this recently, for me and this is going to sound odd there's often an overwhelming feeling of sadness. Sadness because you have a bereaved family, often in courts, who are having to relive and deal with the trauma that they've suffered again in an alien, often quite frightening environment. So you know you have a responsibility and a duty of care to them. Sadness that the victim, often in homicide cases, is a young person whose life has been cut short, whose potential has been cut short. But sadness going back to the person that is in the dock and potentially that you're cross-examining.
Speaker 1:Sadness because, statistically, at the moment knife crime is on the rise. One only has to look at the statistics that, particularly amongst young people, victims are getting younger, defendants are getting younger. Sadness that there is a life there, a potential life that, for a moment from a second action is potentially going to be changed forever, and the sadness for me is that really we need to do more outside the criminal justice system around education, around family support, around belonging and education. That means that people are not routinely carrying knives, because the real problem now is knife crime, and so it sounds odd to say sadness, but it really is. I take no pleasure when, at the end of a trial, if there is a conviction, you potentially have young men with promising lives ahead of them who are going to spend a considerable amount of time in custody.
Speaker 2:It is really heartbreaking. And I know you're saying there's an increase in knife crime time, but it's been there for what appears to be decades. It seems like decades. It's been there for a very long time and so someone you know with an education background there's an awful lot of education that goes on, not just in schools but in the local community. You know they're aware there are the resources. So we. You know youth clubs and increasingly you know those have been closing, but there are some. And so you know youth clubs and increasingly you know those have been closing, but there are some. And I think you know the parents and the local community are more aware of life crime and try to protect their young to the best of their ability and obviously it sometimes feels as if we're failing in that regard. Yet you see them, they're getting younger and younger. They're appearing in court and you said the sadness. I mean, isn there usually a compelling story that's driven?
Speaker 1:them. There's always a human story behind any case. Often it's a very sad human story. Often there is a story of children in care, difficult parenting issues, domestic violence, domestic violence, drugs, poverty, all of those societal issues which are not solved by the criminal justice system um which actually need to be solved from the root cause absolutely that emphasis again on prevention, isn't it?
Speaker 2:yes, it's a preventative measures that just are not right and just not getting those right. Yes, because more and more young people from all sort of backgrounds are getting caught up in this. Yes, and it's tragic. So I I can empathize with you. Know you saying you feel the weight of sadness, yeah, when you're in the courtroom with them, you know, and obviously, uh, in terms of the victims families as well, and the huge sadness and loss and something that they will probably never, ever be able to rise above. You might have seen the programme Adolescence. Yes, yeah, I'm sure you've watched it Extraordinary acting.
Speaker 2:Extraordinary acting, but again just showing a snapshot of a family's life and the repercussions of what can go wrong with these young people. So you know, you said there's always a story, there's always a reason, there's always a reason behind what's driven them. But do you sometimes walk away feeling that justice wasn't served?
Speaker 1:Do you know what? I don't, and after 29 years, that's quite a bold statement to make. I think the system we have in this country with the jury system is incredibly fair. I think it's the only proper system to determine those really difficult cases, to determine whether someone is guilty or not guilty and for people to feel that they have had a fair trial, because ultimately, that's what it's about.
Speaker 1:It isn't, as I say, about securing a conviction. It isn't about incarcerating someone. It isn't about, you know, vengeance. It's about working out what has gone wrong and trying to reach a fair conclusion as to that. So I actually feel that very often, justice is done, and I think part of that goes back to particularly when you're dealing with homicide cases or where there has been a death. As a prosecutor, it's about explaining the sentencing framework to families, that if someone is convicted, what is likely to happen, what the possibilities are, and making sure that they understand what the maximum penalties are in certain circumstances, and listening to them and communicating with them so that you make sure that everyone feels that justice has been done at the end of a case.
Speaker 2:Do you think that some people are just born killers? No, you don't believe that.
Speaker 1:No, I genuinely don't. I think every single person that I have prosecuted started out as a child. It's obvious, we all started out as a child. But there has to be an inherent heart of goodness in people. I don't believe that people are inherently evil. I know we hear a lot about it in salacious headlines evil, you know, the face of a killer, the face of evil.
Speaker 2:I think there's a, however small it might be, there's a nugget of humanity in everyone the problem is when we miss it, when you miss it, because there is, there's the evidence that shows. You know, there's certain traits that young people, young children, can display to be. It's got to be compelling. It can't just be one or half a dozen, it's got to be lots of them. You know lack of empathy, there's no remorse when things have gone wrong, no sense of morality, evilness towards animals. Perhaps you know all that sort of thing. I suppose that, together with all the other life factors that may affect the young person's healthy growth, such as domestic exposure to domestic violence and abuse, other solvent abuse or what have you, or poverty itself, peer pressure, all of it, you know, if you're vulnerable as a young person, then are we all potentially vulnerable to making that wrong decision in a snapshot moment.
Speaker 1:I think there is so much intersectionality between personal circumstances and familial circumstances that I think it's a very brave person to say that they would never have found themselves in a particular circumstance, and so I think that's about displaying empathy when you're prosecuting particularly younger defendants, understanding that at some point in their lives there was a really bad decision made and trying to think about what led them to that so that you can understand the mindset. But I don't think I've ever thought that anyone I have personally prosecuted has been, at the heart, truly evil.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah, Because they say that with people who go on to murder. For some of them it's like instinctive, it's a sudden, it's just honest, and then others it's premeditated isn't it. Yeah, so for the ones where they're planning it that's a harder call, isn't it?
Speaker 1:That's a harder call, isn't it? That's a harder call, I mean, when you have none of us could have failed to have seen the terrible, terrible events around Sarah Everard's house years ago that was planned. It was horrific and the terrible traumatic toll that that took on her family and her friends and the community and the light it shone on the terrible traumatic toll that that took on her family and her friends, the community saved, you know yeah and the community and the light it shone on violence against women and girls?
Speaker 1:Yes, absolutely, which is still an issue. I think I understand why it's difficult for people to say that someone who could commit a crime like that is not, at their heart, evil. That's not my job to determine, but I can understand how people can think that. Yeah, indeed.
Speaker 2:Okay, so you specialise in cases involving gangs and firearms and complex joint enterprise trials. So what's the most challenging part of prosecuting organised crime? Because is there not? Is there an increase in organised crimes? It appears to be. Every other day you've got some scammer on your phone.
Speaker 1:I mean organised crime can cover a multitude of things. When I a lot of the organised crime that I've prosecuted has been drug importations and drug distribution supply networks. I mean, for me, as you said, a lot of organised crime involves multiple defendants and what barristers tend to call multi-handed cases, because there are a number of defendants. As a prosecutor, that means that what you're having to do right at the beginning is you're having to consider the evidence in the context of each defendant, but holistically as well. So you're having to work out well, if I put this piece of evidence forward against this defendant, might it do violence to my case against this one over here? So you're almost thinking about it like a 3D chess game.
Speaker 1:And then, on top of that, what you're doing is you're having to constantly assess the value of each piece of evidence. So where you might start at the beginning of a case, the candle may not be worth the prayer on a piece of evidence or an application later on. And something else I think that is fundamental to prosecuting those multi-defendant organised crime cases or any case, really is disclosure. I think we've all seen headlines where prosecutors, when disclosure isn't done properly by prosecutors, things go catastrophically wrong. Post office, yes, horrific, horrendous miscarriage of justice, and one of the reasons for that is because there were disclosure failings. And as a prosecutor you have to keep an eye on that at every single point.
Speaker 1:So when you've got a multi-handed case, you're thinking about it in a 3D way. You're thinking about whether there is any evidence that might assist the defence case for any defendant or undermine yours against any defendant. But I think the fundamental thing is you have to make sure that you are fair. Fairness is at the heart of our system, because if the public don't see a fair system, they lose trust in it. And if the public lose trust in the criminal justice system, we have a huge problem on our hands and do you think that the public have got 100 faith and trust in the criminal?
Speaker 2:it does happen, don't they? And the question, you know, was justice really served? Was that a fair? You know, and I don't want to bring the police into it, but they do come into it because they're part of the criminal law system in the country. So I don't know.
Speaker 1:So I think when the public come into contact with the criminal justice system whether they're jurors, uh, whether they are witnesses I think that's when the public can appreciate the value of the criminal justice system complexity, the complexity of it, the complexity and how hard the criminal justice system works for the whole of society. But I wonder sometimes whether the public really understands that the criminal justice system is right at the bedrock of a properly functioning society. So when we hear news stories now about the backlogs, about legal aid being cut, yeah, about the risk to jury trials, um, I wonder sometimes whether the entire public actually understands how fundamental that is to a properly functioning society.
Speaker 2:yeah, yeah, um, and I think I think it's one of those institutions as you say is, unless you've had direct contact, you have no real idea, no working knowledge of what actually goes on. I've never been in a courtroom, I've got very little insight of what I see on TV or watch on programmes, you know. So, yeah, it is a fascinating thing, but in terms of the organised crimes, which is the most you say, I mean I don't know.
Speaker 1:I mean at the moment, I mean organised crime can cover a whole multitude of things. I mean, I think drugs, it's still big. It's still big Organised crime when it comes to I mean you could put gang crime in that category as well. I think that there is a problem. I think they are difficult cases sometimes to prosecute because you have so much to do as a prosecutor and whilst you're juggling all of those different issues that I've just explained, as a prosecutor you've also got to show that you're in control from the outset. As a prosecutor, you're front loading a lot of the work, so you're putting together case summaries, you're putting together openings, you're putting together jury bundles. You have to show that you're in control from the very outset so that there is a there is a degree of a lack of chaos around it. It needs to be cohesive doesn't it absolutely?
Speaker 2:yeah, he said. And in the case of modern day slavery, is there much of that we haven't heard so much in the news of things. Is that still?
Speaker 1:it still features um and I think it is still an issue and I think it cuts across a lot of cases that we see coming through the courts um, with young girls, with young boys as well, being recruited into gangs, and I think we shouldn't underestimate what that is. When we think, when we say the words modern slavery, I think the public might have a particular view in their head which it probably only touches the tip of the iceberg of what we're talking about. When we say modern slavery. It can cover a multitude of issues and I think it's really important, where cases raise an issue of modern slavery, that we do our best to make sure that we get to the bottom of that. And we've now got the national referral mechanism which looks into allegations or allegations, suggestions of modern slavery, and it's important that that happens so that there's fairness.
Speaker 2:So, in terms of boys and girls, have they been channeled into a particular route?
Speaker 1:You know, is it the girls with the I mean from my own personal perspective, what I saw a lot of um, before I took silk, when I was dealing with a lot of drug cases. We saw a rise in county line dealing. Yeah, and unfortunately that involves youngsters on occasion running drugs. Yes, um, because it gives them a sense of belonging. Because it gives them a sense of belonging, because it gives them a sense of worth, going back to what we said at the beginning, where they're not getting it elsewhere, their love's not being there. And what I've also seen with young girls is young girls feeling beholden to, potentially coerced and controlled in relationships or simply thinking that in order to demonstrate their love, they're going to hold things like guns or knives or drugs. And again it goes back to that feeling of sadness that these are often youngsters at that real sort of pivotal moment in their lives when you and I were Absolutely Just made the wrong decision at that time.
Speaker 1:Yeah, when you and I were going to university or we were studying, or thinking about our future. It's that path in the road.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that fork in the road, true crime fans if you've got any true crime fans out there.
Speaker 1:Um obsessed with the ah moment every time when a single piece of evidence completely changed the trajectory of a murder case so can I just say at the outset yeah, I'm an advocacy trainer, um, particularly when you're training pupils and people at the very start of their career, um, there is a tendency for some people to think that cross-examination a has to be cross. It doesn't. As someone said to me once you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. And also that you know there's almost that striving to suddenly get someone to go okay, ok, you've got me, you're too good for me. I have never seen that happen in 29 years. Maybe that's my fault, so it's rare that you get those moments, certainly not in a homicide case. But I remember about 10 years ago I was doing a multi-handed drug case and it was to do with a telephone number that was pretty critical in the case I spotted that one of the defendants who'd said that his phone contact had only been friends and family and a dog breeder this still sticks in my head and that he hadn't called anyone involved in the drug trafficking. And before I cross-examined him, I was going back through phone schedules and I suddenly spotted that he'd called this critical number. Don't know why it had suddenly got out of that stage, but that's where it happened and I remember checking it, checking it, checking it around the officer and said just tell me, is this the number that I think it is? And she said oh my god, wow, that was a humbling. And I said, right.
Speaker 1:So when I cross-examine the defendant, cross-examination is a lot to do with structure tactics. There's a lot of preparation that goes into cross-examination and psychology and psychology. And so I thought this is going to be the last point I leave the jury with. And I remember, you know, cross-examination is about boxing people in and sort of closing it off and building and building. And I remember the moment when I said that's not correct, because that number that you're calling, who is that? Again, I think he said dog breeder or something and I said no, it's not. Look at the jury bundle on this page. That's the principal supplier. And I remember the defendant standing there and looking at me and it was the. I remember sort of I don't like looking at juries. I think it's a bit hammy, but I remember sort of flicking a sideways. Look, the juries were sat there like that and you could have heard a pin drop. Yes, I'm sure. Oh my goodness, I think it's the only time when I've ever had that moment.
Speaker 2:And what was his reaction? Silence, just silence, literally silence.
Speaker 1:And that's a really difficult thing. In a social situation, silence feels awkward and we want to try and fill it. In a courtroom situation, when you're cross-examining, sometimes what isn't said is more powerful than what is said and you have to let that silence run. And I think my last response was something like I don't have anything else. And sit down.
Speaker 2:The most powerful thing.
Speaker 1:Nothing further. Thank you, your Honour, nothing further. Yes, I'll serve it to say and sit down the most powerful thing, I think, nothing further. Thank you. Yes, so that's the only time I've ever happened, but it's so rare that you get those. Oh, my goodness, you're so good, you're too good for me and what is it?
Speaker 2:is that people you know, once they stand, that, even if they're not telling the truth, are they just so composed that they're just so fixed on one? Yeah, what? And they're just not going to be.
Speaker 1:Yeah, you know I think sometimes people will create a narrative in their heads and they stick with, and that's what I should say.
Speaker 2:Sometimes it's as much about what's not said than what is said. Yeah sure, psychology was part of your training. It's not any sort of non-verbal behavior or language non-verbal cues are really important non-verbal cues are incredibly important. You know the action of the hand, the twitching of the eyes going up to one, yeah, you know, to the top left everyone has a poker tell.
Speaker 1:The question is can you work it out? Yeah, while you're on your feet I've seen it really obviously.
Speaker 1:Sometimes, as you say, people can't look you in the eye, um, but other times people will have a verbal tick, if I can, yes, yes, yeah or uh, or there will be a shift or they're a motor tick and it's. It's not about abusing that, it's not about playing up to that, it's just about recognizing it. Advocacy is a lot more than just what you say when I'm teaching youngsters. It's just about recognising it. Advocacy is a lot more than just what you say when I'm teaching youngsters. It's about listening as much as talking. How does someone answer a question? What is the answer to that question? How do they give that answer?
Speaker 2:How do you emotionally decompress after handling such high-stake cases, often violent cases? Do you ever take the stories home, because often we take our jobs home with us? No, we shouldn't, but we do we shouldn't.
Speaker 1:It can be really difficult. I think you know, when you're dealing with homicide cases, you're, as I've said, you're often dealing with bereaved families yeah, who are conscripts to our system at a really traumatic time. We can't underestimate how important it is to make sure we communicate with victims' families and witnesses, so often you're absorbing their trauma. You are often looking or listening to material that is traumatic, and I think we're now recognising in the profession that there is this real risk of vicarious trauma and a lot is now being done which I'm really pleased to see around how to deal with that vicarious trauma. Our current chair at the Bar Council, barbara Mills, king's Council is full-throated behind well-being of the profession and actually treating it as a continuing professional development. It's not an also-ran. Don't leave these things until you get to crashes. No, until you get to burnout. Yeah, exactly. So I think a lot more work is being done around vicarious trauma. I would be frankly lying if I said I've never taken on that emotional side of things right yeah, and that can be very difficult.
Speaker 1:I mean, I an example I dealt with a homicide case about a year and a half ago and it was. It was a horrible murder. It was a son on his mother and she had no other family in this country other than him. And I spoke at the beginning about trying to be a voice for people. She had no voice, and so the prosecution team myself, my junior and the officers were her voice.
Speaker 1:But as a part of that, I had to listen to a lot of recordings that he'd made of him talking to his mother, and sometimes those recordings were very aggressive and very upsetting, particularly because I knew how they ended and I was listening to them. Over the christmas break and my partner came out of his study, which is next to mine, I was sort of sat there with my head in my hands and he said are you okay? And I said no, um, this is really hard to listen to because I know how this ends, but I have to make sure her voice is heard and so, in order to do service to the case, in order to do justice to what happened to her, that had to be done.
Speaker 2:So you're listening to those recordings, so did you have to then do like sort of a transcript, so you've got exactly what you said.
Speaker 1:Yeah, so I did a schedule of. I mean, there were hundreds and hundreds of recordings and I spent most of the christmas break listening to them some christmas yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1:Well, this is the unseen work of the criminal bar. You know people think it only happens 10 to 4 in court when we're in court, that a lot of the work happens outside of it. Um, so I scheduled them and I had to think about which ones were important to the issue in the case that the jury needed to hear, and there were about 10 or 12 that we ended up relying upon and some of those ones that had struck home with me. I remember saying to the police team and my junior this is the reality of what was going on. This this potentially wasn't a loving relationship and I think the jury need to hear this in order to understand the context of what happened. And I remember when we played those recordings in court. It was quite powerful. And I remember the usher in our court, who was wonderful. She'd been at the court for decades, and she stopped me that afternoon as we were about to leave and said I've been doing this job for a really long time and nothing has ever struck home as much as that.
Speaker 1:And I think it wasn't done gratuitously. It was done in order to explain to the jury the other side of Because she wasn't there to defend yourself. She wasn't there to defend. She wasn't there, was she? No? And I remember when we, the jury, were out for quite a while, as they should be, because it was a big thing to consider. It's a lot of evidence. Uh, they did convict the defendant. I say now, janet, I I'm usually indifferent as to what the verdict is as a prosecutor, it's a win if we get a jury to make a decision, right, right, but for this it wasn't about feeling a sense of yes, it was just feeling that we had done justice to her memory. And I I'm not ashamed to say that when we went back up to our conference room after the verdicts, um, both myself and the really senior murder squad officer in the case both shed a tear at that point.
Speaker 2:So I mean, yeah, that's really sad, isn't it? Yeah, that's a depraved. I'm just saying was it? Was it deprivation, you know?
Speaker 1:in terms of what it led up to it, it was there were all sorts of issues going on there, but it was. It was a. It was a mother-son relationship that had broken down to a catastrophic level, and it was desperately sad to again come back to that point about sadness for her life to have ended in the way that it did.
Speaker 2:And did he show any remorse? You're talking about empathy. Remorse, no remorse. He felt perfectly justified in what he did.
Speaker 1:No because I think, for him. He never accepted that he had been responsible, right, and this goes back to the point about people having to have a narrative in their head. It's a coping mechanism, isn't? It goes back to the point about people having to have a narrative in their head, absolutely now I it's a coping mechanism and I can kind of twist my brain around that to understand it. But it is. Sometimes it's very difficult for people to accept it's denial, isn't it?
Speaker 2:yeah, in the strongest sense. Just denies it didn't happen. It wasn't me, I'm not at fault oh, my goodness me. So in many professions, um like my own, we have supervision. Yes, so I'm assuming that, as a barrister, you have supervision, there's no supervisory structure. I mean, is there not a process or this difficult?
Speaker 1:As I've said, wellbeing is being taken much more seriously now. When I first started out in the profession, if you'd used the word wellbeing, people would have Put you in airy-fairy. Yeah, if you'd used the word well-being, people would have put their airy fairy yeah, exactly, it's all terribly fluffy. It's not, it's. It is fundamental to being a good practitioner. If you are not, um well, if your welfare is not taken care of, you can't do the job to the best of your ability, and I think people are starting to take it more seriously now yeah yeah, um, and for me the gym the gym the gym.
Speaker 1:There's a story behind that. To people who are watching this, probably not a good idea to go to. But, um, uh, the cats. My partner, my partner is in a and I think that actually helps because he can ground you he can ground me when I'm having a moment of histrionics, because sometimes they happen. He's very good at sort of calming it all down.
Speaker 2:That's really important. Yeah, it really is, and it's really good that you're practising that self-love and you're giving yourself time out of your hectic schedule to look after you.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and I think that's really important. The one piece of advice I would give to anyone, whichever profession they're in, when they find themselves reaching that point, is take some time out to reflect.
Speaker 2:Yeah, absolutely take some objective time out to reflect, because when you're in it, you can't do that, you can't. So, um, we're going to be racing through to the end. So we talked a bit at the beginning. About only 14 percent of us has been silks. 40 percent% of silks are women.
Speaker 1:Yes, so in terms of women, yes, I think we're at around about the 20%, possibly under, actually. So how?
Speaker 2:has that shaped the way that you're treated by colleagues, colleges and even jurors when they see you come out in your lovely silk gown and your lovely wig, with your yeah?
Speaker 1:Right. So, yeah, I'm not necessarily sure it makes a huge difference seeing you come out in your lovely silk gown and your lovely wig, with your yeah, um, right, so, yeah, um, I'm not necessarily sure it makes a huge difference, but maybe that's just my perspective. Um, I mean, look, the figures in terms of diversity amongst people who take silk are still not good. No, I mean, that's probably an understatement. Yeah, and although there are great strides being made in relation to race at the bar, gender at the bar, equality at the bar with those protected characteristics, there is an awful lot more to be done. And and that's part of the reason why I wanted to take silk while I was in employed practice because employed practitioners again, it's very rare to take silk as an employed practitioner. I was the fourth person in the cps to take silk since nine, since the cps has been in existence. Why is it so rare? I think because traditionally the employed bar, so people in employed practice, weren't considered to be advocates, and silk king's council, queen's council, as it was, is an award for excellence in advocacy. So traditionally it's been difficult for employed practitioners to take silk.
Speaker 1:But it's now opening up and I think it was really important for me to take silk in the cps to actually sort of send a message out there to say not only can you do this as a woman, not only can you do this as a woman from you know a normal I don't like the word normal, but a different background but you can also do it having taken a non-traditional route through your practice. There's one other Silk in the organisation and he's very much the same. You know, we wanted to do it to have a voice, and it does give you a voice. And it goes back to what I was saying earlier, that when you have that voice, with great power comes great responsibility. You have a responsibility to use it Definitely, to use it to bring others through. And so in terms of how colleagues and judges and juries see me, I'm not sure, maybe it's just me I never really think that people do see me as any different, but I now consider myself to have a responsibility.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and I know you take your job very seriously. I do. You're very ambitious and you just go for things that you know. There's lots of firsts when you look at your career trajectory, which is amazing, which means that you know you're a pioneer, aren't you, in your field, which is, which is really good. So if, um, uh, if someone listened to this is dreaming of a career in criminal law yes, especially a young woman from a working class background, which is how you started.
Speaker 1:Yes.
Speaker 2:What do you wish you had known when you started? So I thought about this.
Speaker 1:What do I wish I'd known. I actually did a lecture at the Intercourt College of Advocacy recently, which was the Dean's Lecture, and it was to students who were just starting the course and it was kind of a letter to my 21 year old self. And I think you know, just reflecting on that one, several lessons the career that you imagine at the start, that sort of linear career, is often not how it turns out. And I think you have to embrace those moments of change, embrace those moments where you think this isn't what I expected as opportunities. And I wish I'd known that some of the setbacks, the hurdles, the obstacles whatever word you want to use were actually going to be some of my most important defining moments in my career.
Speaker 1:And I did have a breezing start to my career and I remember reflecting on that, at my silk ceremony I had a moment just to sit there on my own. One of my very dear friends who'd taken silk previously said if you get a moment, just take it in. And I remember almost doing a mental Rolodex of all of those difficult hurdles and thinking I'm actually glad that I had that. I'm glad because it means that it's that path less traveled, and so the thing that I would say is you know, it doesn't have to go the way you expect it to go from the outset. Embrace those moments of change and realize that they can actually be your defining moments. And I think you know, know, imposter syndrome looms large in all of us. Anyone who says that they don't have it, yeah, yeah. But I wish I could go back now and say be brave, yeah and being brave.
Speaker 2:It sounds like very two simple words. Be you know, be brave. Be brave, it's not being brave is actually exposing yourself to potential failure, and there are lots of people who would not actually try anything that's not outside of their comfort zone, because they're afraid of that failure yeah, so be brave.
Speaker 2:And so for women who may have already or may already be in a career, but have always fancied themselves in your role, what would you say to them? You know, be brave. I mean, do it hard when you've got responsibility. Yes, it is, and everything. And you know how do you, how to do what's their first step?
Speaker 1:so, in terms of first step um, I think it's great if people have had a previous career before they come to the bar right, particularly when you're dealing with the public facing bar. So, whether it's family law, whether it's crime or whether it's one of the other public facing areas, you're bringing a huge amount of human life experience with you and I actually see that as a bonus. So I would say, firstly, embrace all of your skills, and I would also think about whether you do it metaphorically or literally, making a list of those transferable skills. Work out what it means to be a barrister. Often that's self-employment. Now a a lot more, it's employed practice. What are those skills that you need to be a barrister? Advocacy, communication, written advocacy, being able to put things down on paper in a structured way and then work out what skills you've got in your current role and where they transfer over.
Speaker 1:The other thing I would say is, if you're thinking about going down the route of going to bar school in order to do your vocational training, um is join one of the four ends of court so grazing, inner temple, middle temple or lincoln's in and get involved with the in. Get involved with their outreach um projects, because we do an awful lot of work reaching out to people who might be thinking of coming into the profession so that you can maybe get a mentor, so that you can go to court with someone. Go and sit. If you are going to do publicly funded work like crime or family, go and sit in a courtroom. Go and see what it's like, because you might do that. You might think it looks kind of cool and then you go and see it and think actually this is not for me. Indeed, get as much experience as you can so that you're coming at it from an informed, absolutely it's a lot of money, isn't it to do the bar, isn't it?
Speaker 1:it is. I think that's a hurdle for a lot of it is, but what there is out.
Speaker 1:There is a lot of help by way of scholarships, which is why I say join one of the ins of court, because I'm a scholarship uh panel, interview and chair and you know we give out scholarship awards every year to people who I love doing those interviews, because there are real sliding door moments where you think but for this scholarship this person might not be able to pursue this career right and it it is worth applying um to to see if you can get scholarship and funding to do the bar course, to do a conversion course.
Speaker 2:If you don't ask, you don't get, you don't get. And how many years would people be looking at from beginning?
Speaker 1:So if you've done a degree, if you've done a law degree, you would then be applying to do the bar professional training course, the BPTC, which is a year, or you can do it part time, which would be two years, and then you will be doing 12 months in pupillage, sometimes a bit longer, which is the sort of apprentice side of it. You're not on your feet in court in your first six years shadowing people to see how the job is done, and then in your second six you're doing your own work and then hopefully, you get a tenancy in chambers or you get an employed position. So I think from sort of a standing start you're looking at at least a couple of years.
Speaker 2:And if you haven't got a degree but it's not in law.
Speaker 1:So you can do what's called the Graduate Diploma in Law, which is a conversion course which means that you learn all of the core subjects over the course of a year. Again, you can do it part time. Again, the INS offers scholarship for those sorts of courses and then, once you've completed that, you'd go on to do the bar professional training course just, it's just been so insightful to just think about what your role.
Speaker 2:you know what it stands for and you're such a pillar in the, in the community, aren't you, in terms of justice? You are you and you've been ambitious and you've reached the top and you're going places and you've gone places, but it is, you know, homicide, organised crime. It's something that touches all of our lives and, if not directly through a friend or family member. So I think you know, I think it's important for people to understand a little bit about how courts work Absolutely.
Speaker 1:I think if the public saw that value, they would understand why there really does need to be more funding, more investment and a ring fencing of criminal justice as well, so that it is protected and it is preserved and that the public are properly served.
Speaker 2:And then, in terms of the young people increasingly high numbers of young people who have come through the criminal system it's about pouring more resources and money into preventative work in the community, isn't it? You know? So those people are not actually trying to find security, yeah, elsewhere. You know that vulnerability is replaced by one of love and security.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and it's about not thinking about criminal justice system here, family justice system here, social mobility here. It's a collective. We have to get all parts of that right to try and divert people at a much earlier stage, absolutely.
Speaker 2:Well, Heidi, thank you so much for your time today. It's been amazing. I'm sorry that you couldn't have come with your silk gown.
Speaker 1:I know I'm so sorry. I was actually going to bring it and then I forgot that would have been lovely, but anyway, I've got some photographs.
Speaker 2:You have, and so some photographs have been in your lovely silk gown and congratulations once again, and keep on doing a great job.
Speaker 2:Thank you very much. Thank you for having me. Yes, see you in the uh. See you in the gym. Thanks for tuning in to diary of a working woman. I hope you found this episode as motivating and uplifting as I did. Please follow me at at do work podcast on tiktok and instagram. For now, I want to say-bye and keep striving to be the best version of yourself that you can possibly be, wearing all the many hats that working women do, sending you love.