Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Other subjects

Flip

Original poster

Could someone with a criminal conviction and a law degree not know what 'spent' means in relation to a conviction?

17 replies

GreenPenguin · 16/05/2009 22:06

I've recently found out that someone in my team has an unspent criminal conviction - not an issue in itself - but didn't declare it on the application form. This is quite serious in my line of work.The explanation is that he didn't know what 'spent' means. In order to support him, I need to believe that through not being at uni that day, or not listening to his lawyer, there's a chance that he's unaware of the term. Not having a law degree or a criminal conviction myself (as he does), I'm struggling. Any MNers with law degrees and/or convictions - I'd welcome your view please.

OP posts:

FabulousBakerGirl · 16/05/2009 22:07

I don't have either but someone with a law degree has to know what spent means, surely??

fryalot · 16/05/2009 22:09

Haven't got a law degree or a criminal conviction, but I do know what "spent" means.

I can't really believe that he doesn't understand what it means.

I can, however, believe that he is terrified that you will sack him and is trying to wriggle his way out of it.

Is he otherwise good at his job and do you have any qualms about keeping him on? If you want to keep him, you could always have a chat and explain that you want to keep him on but you can't if you feel he is lying to you, see if he comes clean

backthen · 16/05/2009 22:14

My experience of knowing someone with a criminal conviction tells me that in terms of getting a job you're very aware of the year and month your conviction becomes "spent" and spend a lot of time thinking about that day.

Because you know that up to that moment someone could find out and you'll be back to square one again.

I have some sympathy for him. It's very difficult to get a job if you declare a conviction and it would limit you. I don't believe his story though.

Original poster

GreenPenguin · 17/05/2009 06:50

Thanks. Your replies are really useful. The real issue here is breach of trust, but I see that he wouldn't have known that when putting in the application. He knows that I know as I spoke to him about it and gave a chance to explain. Tricky one!

OP posts:

ilovemydogandMrObama · 17/05/2009 09:19

Sorry, but I don't believe it.

Is he saying that spent convictions were taught via one lecture during criminal law, which he happened to miss This is just such a juvenile attitude. And he's saying that it wasn't in the textbook? Thought students were responsible for the information they missed during lectures anyway?

Even if his lawyer didn't explain it to him, which is possible, there is usually the set of papers from the court which explains it. So he missed these too?

And finally there is the application. Does is simply ask about spent convictions, or does it explain it?

here's the worrying factor. Even if he missed the one lecture in criminal law (or employment) where it was discussed, and his lawyer failed to explain, and the court didn't send his conviction to him: He didn't bother to ask for clarification as to what a spent conviction was before signing the application form, and as am employer I would wonder about someone who lied to get a job.

TotalChaos · 17/05/2009 09:23

Got a law degree. It may well not have been taught on the first degree course. But he would have definitely seen the term "spent"conviction on application forms and should have had the wit to research the topic if in any doubt. And if he is a qualified solicitor he would have been aware of having to be a fit person to be a solicitor, and of the potential significance of any convictions, it was definitely taught on the LPC.

MANATEEequineOHARA · 17/05/2009 09:35

No law degree, but having got myself in a little bit of trouble as an 'off the rails teenager' I know very well what it means and don't belive he doesn't. Depending on the situation I could have an awful lot of sympathy for him, peple CAN really change, and it can be such a horrible, depressing reminder of a person you once were, that you have moved on from in all other ways, still influencing your life.

Quattrocento · 17/05/2009 09:38

I don't believe that he doesn't know what spent means - and I do believe that he is prevaricating know

sybilfaulty · 17/05/2009 09:41

I'm a lawyer and don't think that it is something covered on the undergraduate course. It would be on the professional course, so if he is a sol he should know, but the mere fact of a law degree would not fix him with knowledge.

I agree, though,that his lawyer should have explained it or he should have had the wit to ask about it if he saw something in relation to a conviciton on his form and did not know what it meant. That would be more worrying than the fact of the conviction itself - depending on what it was for of course!

HTH

SusieDerkins · 17/05/2009 09:42

I don't believe for a second that he doesn't know what it means. I have a law dgree and I am a solicitor. I remember that when I did my degree (waaaay too long ago now ) you had to fill in a form revealing convictions and they wouldn't let you in if you had a conviction. I think I'm right in saying that the law soc might not let you in either, depending on the nature of the offence, partic if it's dishonesty related.

Incidentally, on our first day of uni we were given a talk about the importnace of keeping out of trouble and financially solvent and the risks we would face if we did not.

ilovemydogandMrObama · 17/05/2009 09:44

Spent convictions are covered in employment at undergrad iirc

sybilfaulty · 18/05/2009 00:20

He may well know what it means but different offences get declared spent at different points. It depeds what he's done.

Did the Q ask him to declare all convictions(inc those which may be spent) or all convictions ?

ILove - I did not study employmwent law at university so if it had been me I may not have known.

KingCanuteIAm · 18/05/2009 00:24

TBH, I have no degree or conviction but I know what spent means, however, if I didn't know what spent meant but I did have a conviction and the question came up on a job app... I would make darn sure I found out before I put the app in.

I think he is leading you on myself.

FluffyBunnyGoneBad · 18/05/2009 00:25

I have a law degree, not all uni's teach law the same way. The one I went to was more case based and didn't go into things like this too much. I wouldn't have known what this ment from the LLB but know from media etc. People are supposto be honest and upfront with their employers, he should have said what had happened, whether spent or not.

PortAndLemon · 18/05/2009 00:26

I have a law degree. I do know what "spent" means, but I'm pretty sure it was never mentioned on the degree course (I didn't do an option in employment law). So it's quite possible that he wouldn't be familiar with the term (although this would suggest a reasonably dismal grasp of general knowledge).

kickassangel · 18/05/2009 00:38

i know what spent is, as a teacher, i have to declare ALL convictions, however old they are.

depends what it was he did. can't even traffic offenses, which end up in court (this happened toa teacher colleague of mine, & we had a big discussion whether he should declare it), be a conviction? if it's something like this, though not right, it is understandable that he hoped to get away with it. if more serious ...

also, do you wish to support him? si there any other way in which he isn't trustworthy, or is the only concern? still, i would think it highly improbable that he doesn't know.

anyway, as he has probably arleady been told, ignorance is not a defense. it was his conviction, and his duty to know what he signed on an application

hobbgoblin · 18/05/2009 00:52

To be honest, right now I'd be moving on from the issue of whether he knew what 'spent' meant and having a chat about honesty, trust, responsibility and how the best way to regain all of the above is by being as transparent as humanly possible now.

It is very easy for any of us to tend towards white lies when the chances of being discovered aren't great and the consequences are not huge. However, in the position of having had his fingers burned already, one would hope that he had come to the conclusion that in his shoes honesty really is the only way forward in terms of his career.

I agree with whoever said above that if he knew not what spent meant, the fact that he was filling in a section on convictions and he knew he had one, this was the time to mention it regardless of what he felt the form may or may not have been asking regarding the specifics of his conviction.

Flip