Memoirs of a radical lawyer by Michael Mansfield (Bloomsbury 2009. ISBN 9780747576549) and Policing Controversy by Sir Ian Blair (Profile books 2009. ISBN 9781846683046)

Memoirs of a radical lawyer by Michael Mansfield

Michael Mansfield is a man who has taken on the most controversial cases of our times and has taken a leading role in inquests, most notably those relating to Princess Diana and Dodi Al Fayed, Stephen Lawrence and Jean Charles De Menezes. This is truly a collection of memoirs because where Mansfield mentions a case in detail it is to highlight what went wrong or right or what needs to be changed in our legal system.

In the chapter ‘The frontiers of forensic science’ he balances his concerns for both parents and children in abuse cases. This gives the reader a well- rounded picture of the debate regarding child abuse. For those of us considering a career at the Bar, Mansfield recalls some advice he received from a judge during his presentation of a case. The advice was priceless and undoubtedly useful to all; ‘be clear, concise and non-repetitive’ also ‘speak with conviction, observe the general reaction and be wary of the judicial seduction that begins ‘well, Mr. Mansfield isn’t this what you really mean?’ A final piece of advice is that ‘a dispassionate delivery just does not work’ whilst adding that ‘the day I walk into court not feeling fear will be the day I stop practising: if you’re not worried you get lazy and take things for granted.’

This one sentence sums up the message we should all take from reading this book; ‘none of us should ever sit back and think there is nothing we can do.’ Every chapter revolves around this sentence and should be the motto of every radical lawyer. Mansfield also pays tribute to all those who have influenced his career and those that have been involved in his radicalism.

Personally, this is his best book yet.

Policing controversy by Sir Ian Blair

I would like to firstly point out that the account this book makes of the Jean Charles De Menezes incident and that which Michael Mansfield makes differ somewhat and if one wants a full understanding of the issues surrounding this incident then the two books have to be read in conjunction with each other.

In Mansfield’s book, Memoirs of a radical lawyer, his mother said to him ‘never trust a man in uniform’ and this is where his long-standing suspicion of the police originated. Sir Ian Blair’s book vindicates Mansfield’s suspicions about the police. Sir Blair’s accounts of the police system emphasize that many errors of judgement and miscalculations by the police inevitably led the public to lose faith in the Metropolitan Police Authority.

Mansfield asks some unnerving questions of our police officers. Among them is whether it was the ‘urgent manhunt’ that led to De Menezes death? Sir Ian Blair says differently arguing that one of the biggest problems the police authority faced was that they were ‘trying to deal with twenty-first-century terrorism with nineteenth-century legislation.’ But the rapid legislation that was developed only caused havoc as it unsuccessfully sought to take away human rights rather than emphasize them.

Secondly, Mansfield persistently voiced a plea to the public saying ‘if we are right to believe that there is a universality about certain intrinsic values and rights, then it matters not where the invasion or denial takes place.’ We should all question the methods of policing that put our society at risk instead of protecting us and we should all stand to defend those who fall victim to the inadequacies of the police.

One noteworthy theme from Sir Ian Blair’s book is the threat of politicising the police that parliament poses. Sir Blair stresses that unless the police are left to work independently of parliamentary scrutiny in emergency situations then the police will lose its autonomy. However, I am completely for parliamentary scrutiny of the police because every public authority needs to be accountable to parliament or the Judiciary.

Finally, what happened to the image and idea that lay behind a police force? The police force as first imagined was ‘dressed as civilians, unarmed, a police force for the people, not for the state, as Peel had imagined. However, it is hard to imagine this kind of police force when there is a growing number of armed-police patrolling the streets, increased deaths caused by the police and unnecessary interference with the freedoms of individuals taking photographs in London.

Shirah Zirabamuzale is in the third year of a Law LLB