Comments on: SRA slaps trainee with restrictions after assault conviction https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/09/sra-slaps-trainee-with-restrictions-after-assault-conviction/ Legal news, insider insight and careers advice Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:37:34 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.2 By: Anonymous https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/09/sra-slaps-trainee-with-restrictions-after-assault-conviction/#comment-1231997 Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:37:34 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=223748#comment-1231997 Did he shout “guilty!”, impersonating your voice, when you were arraigned?

]]> By: Anonymous https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/09/sra-slaps-trainee-with-restrictions-after-assault-conviction/#comment-1231861 Thu, 04 Sep 2025 10:57:31 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=223748#comment-1231861 I had a bent solicitor change my plea in court, behind my back. I complained to the sra who weren’t interested. Didnt want to know. So much for upholding trust in the profession. Complained 4 times, but the sra aren’t interested. Appears that they are happy to protect bent solicitors.

]]> By: Anon https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/09/sra-slaps-trainee-with-restrictions-after-assault-conviction/#comment-1231850 Thu, 04 Sep 2025 09:16:02 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=223748#comment-1231850 Surely a criminal conviction of a racially aggravated offence has to be an automatic strike off? Game’s gone

]]> By: Hot take https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/09/sra-slaps-trainee-with-restrictions-after-assault-conviction/#comment-1231786 Wed, 03 Sep 2025 20:39:47 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=223748#comment-1231786 Racism should be treated as seriously as dishonesty. A solicitor can’t be trusted to trusted to deal with clients and handle their sensitive matters if they hold their race against them.

]]> By: Raj king https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/09/sra-slaps-trainee-with-restrictions-after-assault-conviction/#comment-1231758 Wed, 03 Sep 2025 16:45:17 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=223748#comment-1231758 In reply to SRA.

I know someone who got on roll after 13 years of living with S.43, while working as trainee with SRA approval.

Now he is a busy and successful Solicitor for the last 8 years.

]]> By: SRA https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/09/sra-slaps-trainee-with-restrictions-after-assault-conviction/#comment-1231735 Wed, 03 Sep 2025 13:33:07 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=223748#comment-1231735 In reply to Dudley.

In practice, the SRA won’t give its permission to him being employed, so this effectively amounts to a strike off.

]]> By: BHC https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/09/sra-slaps-trainee-with-restrictions-after-assault-conviction/#comment-1231713 Wed, 03 Sep 2025 09:34:40 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=223748#comment-1231713 In reply to Dudley.

No one has been struck off for leaving documents on a train. Someone was (initially) struck off for lying about leaving documents on a train.

]]> By: Harper https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/09/sra-slaps-trainee-with-restrictions-after-assault-conviction/#comment-1231712 Wed, 03 Sep 2025 09:21:40 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=223748#comment-1231712 You can’t strike someone off the roll if they’re not on the roll in the first place.

]]> By: Dudley https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/09/sra-slaps-trainee-with-restrictions-after-assault-conviction/#comment-1231710 Wed, 03 Sep 2025 09:00:37 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=223748#comment-1231710 So if you get a common assault and a racially aggravated public order offence, you essentially get a slap on the wrist. But if you leave a document on a train, you get struck off?

]]>