Author thinks the witness to a crime can decide who the Crown calls as expert witness.
Expert witness is a therapist who was treating the witness to the crime. Expert witness is married to a lawyer. Expert witness has been discussing the background with lawyer husband. The person accused of the crime is the crime scene witness'father. Author thinks the lawyer husband can represent the accused and this is not a conflict.
Lawyer husband is actually employed in a government legal department and author thinks lawyer husband can, whilst still employed, act as a defence lawyer.
It's tosh. Did nobody bother to edit or proof read it?
Is it just me who bothers about stuff like this?
Please or to access all these features
Please
or
to access all these features
AIBU?
To get annoyed by a badly written novel with serious factual mistakes
501 replies
PhaedraIsMyName · 27/07/2014 18:01
OP posts:
Don’t want to miss threads like this?
Weekly
Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!
Log in to update your newsletter preferences.
You've subscribed!
Please create an account
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.