The High Court has recently paved the way for former Assistant Police Commissioner Clint Rickards to be admitted to the Bar as a Barrister and Solicitor. This has caused significant controversy - both inside and outside the profession. Despite being found "not guilty" of criminal charges laid against him in recent times many people find it hard to believe that despite all of this he is as squeaky clean as he would have people believe.
What do you think? Is he a fit and proper person to be admitted to the Bar especially as he has been found "not guilty" or do you think that this somehow cheapens the legal profession in the eyes of the public and those who have to use it? Is he entitled to the benefit of the doubt?

UPDATE!! Yesterday (28 November 2008) Clint Rickards was admitted to the Bar at the High Court in Auckland. We can tell you that a great many within the profession are totally appalled that a man of his admitted "character" can be admitted into the profession. Does this diminish the standing of the profession in the eyes of the public???