Archive for June 10th, 2010



From: Matt Muttley, CEO and Managing Partner

To: Partners

1.  America: The BP saga continues and with it I am pleased to report that  our growth will continue on the back of this most unfortunate and tragic man-made disaster.  The CFO, Dr Hans Calculus, advises that our holdings in BP were sold at a pleasing price and on behalf of the partners I have sanctioned a naked short sell on the BP position which should net further profits, allowing us to increase our holding in BP at a future date – which I suspect will not be long in coming. President Obama appears to share the confusion which many Americans have about England, Britain and United Kingdom.  He now appears to be confusing BP with Britain.  Anti-British sentiment in the United States can only serve our interests at the firm however and our psyops unit will continue to ferment discord on twitter to further improve this position.  I have written to President Obama to this effect…

Dear Mr President,

BP is an oil company.  Britain is the schmUK  helping you with your war mongering in Iraq and Afghanistan.  You will note, being a lawyer yourself, that the words ‘helping’ and  ‘with’ predicate that we are your ally.   Our country is next to Europe on Google Maps. You may recall our former prime minister, Mr Gordon Brown,  referred to Obama Beach at a recent memorial  to celebrate the memory of those who fell in battle on D-Day.  You were there. That is Europe.

Kind regards

Matt Mattley,
CEO and Managing Partner, Muttley Dastardly LLP

Strength & Profits

2.  Government: I note with pleasure that Mr Cameron gave short shrift to President Rumplestiltskin of Europe on the matter of our European friends having a look at our budgets in advance.  I am pleased to report that consultancy advice we gave to the Prime Minister – for which we charged a deficit friendly fee, by which I mean the same fee but dressed up to look like a discount – went down well and that Europe is now to see the budget the moment the Chancellor stands up in Parliament.  The fact that everyone in Britain will be able to do the same on  BBC television  did not occur to The President of Europe, so Mr Cameron was particularly pleased at the humour in our advice and promises to consult again when he is troubled by the Europeans.

3. Law & Order: There have been some pleasing developments.  It is always a pleasure when government starts looking into Law & Order.  With the Human Rights issue being kicked into the long grass with a Commission, and confusion reigning at the Home Office and The Ministry of Justice on the ‘Kill a Burglar’ project it shouldn’t be difficult to ferment some discord on the issue of legal aid, extradition, rendition and the like to force some good old fashioned knee jerking changes in the law to benefit us and the legal profession generally.   I have asked our esteemed Director of Education, Dr Strangelove, to distribute some articles throughout the blogs and post on twitter about US use of torture, rendition and other matters which can only lead to further advice being requested of us by government ministries; impacting as it does on the role of our own government in such matters in the past.

4.  Politics: The Labour Party has saved itself from general ridicule by coming up with a plan to bring it further ridicule – by manipulating the rules and persuading MPs to nominate Diane Abbott so there is at least someone who doesn’t wear a navy suit, a white shirt and a red tie, standing for leader.  It would be most advantageous to us if Diane Abbott became shadow home secretary.  She knows a great deal about civil liberties and is better placed than anyone else on the Labour opposition front bench to give the government a hard time on civil liberties reform and secret evidence and the like.  Partners may have missed the election of Simon Hughes as deputy leader of what is still, bafflingly, called the Liberal-Democrat Party.  The implications are that Hughes will be a de-stabilising influence in the coalition.  This together with the ever simmering Vince Cable can only ensure a gradual parting of the ways and the beginning of the end for the coalition.  It is likely that an election will be fought not in the early part of 2011, but in the Autumn.  Labour may well be in a position to take advantage of the general ridicule of the electorate for the flawed policies of the present government as they start to reveal very real pain to many and general dissent and alarm in the land.

Partners will be interested in this observation by Guido Fawkes….in connection with Mr Hughes:

It looks like tuition fees, which Willets is less than subtly hinting are rising, will be the first coaliton dividing battle. Funny how obvious the correlation is between being disgruntled and being a failed former leadership contender. Ming, Kennedy and Hughes could whip up quite a yellow rage about this one, and many more to come…

I look forward to our lunch in the partners dining room at 1300 hours.  Eva Braun is laying on some entertainment for us.   I believe that she has found a dog which can sing Italian Opera and dance at the same time.

That is all.


Strength & Profits

Read Full Post »



To: Partners

From: Dr Strangelove, Director of Education


1.  I have been asked to provide a position paper on Diversity, the need for it and, in particular, the public PR stance to be taken by Muttley Dastardly LLP.  There is also the matter of the present government’s softening up of the British public as a prelude to Operation Blitzkrieg to close down some universities and raise the fees to sensible and acceptable levels. This will be considered, in preliminary form, in a further memorandum.

2.  I shall also take opportunity in my next memorandum to update partners on progress in relation to our discussions with law schools on the matter of a tailored LPC for our next intake of cannon fodder.


1.1  Clearly, we are not at all interested in diversity.  Our view has always been to recruit the best; over recruiting to take the very best out of the gene pool and, thereby, inconvenience other law firms.   Prudence dictates that our private practices remain private and, indeed, all trainees sign a marvellously incomprehensible non-disclosure document when they join which takes care of any ‘leakage’ to the press.   We have had no resistance to this NDA;  the trainees are easily bribed with  an extra £2000 and the prospect of a lunch with the managing partner at some point during their period of training.   We do have to have a public statement on diversity which will satisfy hacks from the law magazines and the more serious law bloggers.

1.2 Consistent with our practice of getting others to work for the greater good of our partnership, I would like to refer you to a piece I found on Lawyerwatch only this morning, while I was dissumulating and putting “psyops black tweets” out on twitter – a daily routine agreed at the last partner’s meeting…

The Bar Standards Board has “adopted” (their interesting turn of phrase) and published the report of a major review of pupillage training for the Bar The press release marking this occasion trumpets pupillage as the “best and fairest way of preparation for the profession and there are no plans to change its fundamental nature.”  Much is made of its fairness on the basis that

  • The numbers of men and women undertaking pupillage are nearly equal. Sometimes the proportion of women slightly exceeds that of men.
  • 22.4% of pupils were drawn from a very wide range of ethnic and cultural backgrounds, exceeding the proportion of ethnic minorities found in other professions.

To be sure to ram the point home the press release further adds, “The Bar is proud of the diverse nature of the new entrants and the fact that access to pupillage appears based on ability and merit.”

The Lawyerwatch post goes on, interestingly, to make this point…

The report’s own research makes the point rather more clearly than the BSB appeared inclined to do(at p. 37):

  • “The profile of pupils tends to be less diverse than the profile of university students, with a significant drop in representation of working-class students.
  • “There are proportionately fewer female pupil barristers than there are female university graduates.”

A little ‘adjustment’ of the above, replacing ‘pupillage’ for ‘training’ and ‘trainees’ for ‘pupils’ should do the trick…and, after all, how long is a piece of string? and, as for the definition of ‘nearly’?!

We are, of course, ‘immensely proud of the diverse nature of new entrants and the fact that access to Muttley Dastardly LLP is based entirely on merit and ability’.  Only schmuks hire losers.  Fortunately, there are a few law schmuks out there. The fact that there are more women than men graduating makes it fairly clear that it is more difficult for women to get pupillages if the numbers are roughly equal, and it would appear that those from working class backgrounds continue to have a problem fitting in at the Bar.  I suspect the same is true for many City Law firms.  Fortunately, we could not care less here, so long as they have a work ethic and understand that they work for the greater good of the partners and not their self aggrandisement or career advancement.  The latter comes (in time), of course,  if they are made of the ‘right stuff’.

1.3  I think that addresses the diversity issue.   I can have this printed up, distributed and get it out on the usual press guff run.  Consistent with our ‘best practice’, I shall assume that if I do not hear from you, I am authorised, as a partner with you, to issue this on our collective behalf.

Dr Strangelove
Partner Muttley Dastardly LLP, Director of Education

Strength & Profits

Read Full Post »