{"id":14443,"date":"2023-07-10T23:48:44","date_gmt":"2023-07-10T23:48:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/?p=14443"},"modified":"2023-11-23T09:46:36","modified_gmt":"2023-11-23T14:46:36","slug":"case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808","title":{"rendered":"Case Summary: R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"h-legal-principles-and-key-points\"><strong>Legal Principles and Key Points<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In the criminal case of R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808, the wording of and meaning of \u201ccounsel| was deliberated in relevance to the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 s.8.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The takeaway from this case is that in terms of the 1861 Act, \u201ccounsel\u201d, given its natural meaning, did not imply the commission of the offence, the offence was established if there was counselling and the principal offence was committed by the person counselled acting within the scope of his authority and not by accident.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Facts of the Case<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The Appellant (A) was indicted for murder.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The case against her was that she had counselled Z. to murder the victim. Z pleaded guilty to murder firstly denying wanting to kill the victim but proceeding to anyway.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Crown had to prove that A counselled Z.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The directions to the jury were that \u201ccounsel\u201d within s.8 of the 1861 Act meant to incite, solicit, instruct or authorize or to \u201cput somebody up to something\u201d.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A was convicted as killing was in the scope of the instruction or authorisation.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A appealed, the appeal was on the grounds that the judge had failed to put the jury by his direction a defence raised, namely that counselling required a substantial causal connection between he acts of the counsellor and the commission of the offence and that no such causal connection existed on the facts<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Issues in of R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Did the fact that Z refused to murder the victim but later went \u2018berserk\u2019 and killed the victim anyway, have a causal link between the counselling of A.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Held by Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Appeal dismissed.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Parker L,J., Tudor Evans J, Sir John Thompson<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>the true construction of section 8 of the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 (as amended) \u201ccounsel\u201d had no implication of any causal connection between the counselling and the principal offence; that the natural meaning of the word did not imply the commission of the offence.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The offence under section 8 was established if there was counselling and the principal offence was committed by the person counselled acting within the scope of his authority and not by accident.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Therefore, the direction was accurate.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Parker L.J<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cWhosoever shall aid, abet, counsel, or procure the commission of any indictable offence, whether the same be an offence at common law or by virtue of any Act passed or to be passed, shall be liable to be tried, indicted and punished as a principal offender.&#8221; Pg.110<\/p><div id=\"caree-1037747717\" class=\"caree-within-the-content caree-entity-placement\" style=\"margin-left: auto;margin-right: auto;text-align: center;\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/10\/MRF-169650-in-article-336x280-1.png\" alt=\"\"  srcset=\"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/10\/MRF-169650-in-article-336x280-1.png 448w, https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/10\/MRF-169650-in-article-336x280-1-300x250.png 300w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 448px) 100vw, 448px\" width=\"448\" height=\"373\"  style=\"display: inline-block;\" \/><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Legal Principles and Key Points Facts of the Case Issues in of R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808 Held by Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Parker L,J., Tudor Evans J, Sir John Thompson Parker L.J \u201cWhosoever shall aid, abet, counsel, or procure the commission of any indictable offence, whether the same be an offence at [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":13103,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-14443","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-case-summaries","8":"entry"},"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v24.4 (Yoast SEO v27.5) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Case Summary: R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808 | Careerinlaw.net | UK<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In the criminal case of R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808, the wording of and meaning of \u201ccounsel| was deliberated in relevance to the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 s.8.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Case Summary: R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In the criminal case of R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808, the wording of and meaning of \u201ccounsel| was deliberated in relevance to the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 s.8.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Careerinlaw.net | UK\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2023-07-10T23:48:44+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-11-23T14:46:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1920\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1080\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Boris Ignachkov\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Boris Ignachkov\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Boris Ignachkov\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/8fdee476362bf382fd21700bd5a45bfa\"},\"headline\":\"Case Summary: R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-07-10T23:48:44+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-11-23T14:46:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808\"},\"wordCount\":417,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Case Summaries\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808\",\"name\":\"Case Summary: R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808 | Careerinlaw.net | UK\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-07-10T23:48:44+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-11-23T14:46:36+00:00\",\"description\":\"In the criminal case of R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808, the wording of and meaning of \u201ccounsel| was deliberated in relevance to the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 s.8.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg\",\"width\":1920,\"height\":1080,\"caption\":\"Case Summary Careerinlaw Cover Photo\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Case Summary: R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/\",\"name\":\"Careerinlaw.net | UK\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Careerinlaw.net | UK\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/Careerinlawnet-United-Kingdom-Cover-Photo.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/Careerinlawnet-United-Kingdom-Cover-Photo.png\",\"width\":1920,\"height\":1080,\"caption\":\"Careerinlaw.net | UK\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/8fdee476362bf382fd21700bd5a45bfa\",\"name\":\"Boris Ignachkov\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/33b22c61b285e32cec7b03ee9d87678f2b2f6aeb3d82f210db749e350d39e0a4?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/33b22c61b285e32cec7b03ee9d87678f2b2f6aeb3d82f210db749e350d39e0a4?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/33b22c61b285e32cec7b03ee9d87678f2b2f6aeb3d82f210db749e350d39e0a4?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Boris Ignachkov\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/careerinlaw.net\\\/uk\\\/author\\\/boris\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Case Summary: R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808 | Careerinlaw.net | UK","description":"In the criminal case of R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808, the wording of and meaning of \u201ccounsel| was deliberated in relevance to the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 s.8.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"Case Summary: R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808","og_description":"In the criminal case of R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808, the wording of and meaning of \u201ccounsel| was deliberated in relevance to the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 s.8.","og_url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808","og_site_name":"Careerinlaw.net | UK","article_published_time":"2023-07-10T23:48:44+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-11-23T14:46:36+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1920,"height":1080,"url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Boris Ignachkov","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Boris Ignachkov","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808"},"author":{"name":"Boris Ignachkov","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#\/schema\/person\/8fdee476362bf382fd21700bd5a45bfa"},"headline":"Case Summary: R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808","datePublished":"2023-07-10T23:48:44+00:00","dateModified":"2023-11-23T14:46:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808"},"wordCount":417,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg","articleSection":["Case Summaries"],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808","url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808","name":"Case Summary: R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808 | Careerinlaw.net | UK","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg","datePublished":"2023-07-10T23:48:44+00:00","dateModified":"2023-11-23T14:46:36+00:00","description":"In the criminal case of R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808, the wording of and meaning of \u201ccounsel| was deliberated in relevance to the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 s.8.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/Case-Summary-Careerinlaw-Cover-Photo.jpg","width":1920,"height":1080,"caption":"Case Summary Careerinlaw Cover Photo"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/case-summary-r-v-calhaem-1985-qb-808#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Case Summary: R v Calhaem 1985 QB 808"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#website","url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/","name":"Careerinlaw.net | UK","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#organization","name":"Careerinlaw.net | UK","url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/12\/Careerinlawnet-United-Kingdom-Cover-Photo.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/12\/Careerinlawnet-United-Kingdom-Cover-Photo.png","width":1920,"height":1080,"caption":"Careerinlaw.net | UK"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/#\/schema\/person\/8fdee476362bf382fd21700bd5a45bfa","name":"Boris Ignachkov","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/33b22c61b285e32cec7b03ee9d87678f2b2f6aeb3d82f210db749e350d39e0a4?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/33b22c61b285e32cec7b03ee9d87678f2b2f6aeb3d82f210db749e350d39e0a4?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/33b22c61b285e32cec7b03ee9d87678f2b2f6aeb3d82f210db749e350d39e0a4?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Boris Ignachkov"},"url":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/author\/boris"}]}},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14443","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14443"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14443\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13103"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14443"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14443"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/careerinlaw.net\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14443"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}