A couple of legal matters that have passed in the last week do concern me, as I think scriptwriters belonging to Sopranos television show have written our criminal justice system.
The first matter, regarding the retrial of David Bain. I cannot understand Justice Panckhurst’s decision to hold pre trial in a closed court? If the misguided judge did it in the fairness of justice, then on what basis? The media and the interested public want exposure to this case. We are entitled to the full judicial process, because this case will set a precedent and prove a point that our justice system is flawed and dangerously dysfunctional. Cutting all ties with Privy Council was a cunning mid night dangerous move by Liarbour.The Supreme Court is the Dames horse stable !! Doh Graham, remember silly judge the case went to England, Privy Council and back .Everybody saw it on TV ? If he thinks NZ media presence would prejudice a fair trial he is clearly mistaken.The jury pool in New Zealand is diminishing by the second and if this crackpot judicial decision was made in the name of fairness then I'll eat me hat! To be fair the stat's are 335,000 people were called up last year for jury service and 70,000 did not reply to the request. Who can blame not wanting to witness a rort system?
No wonder his kiwi bench colleague Justice John Hansen has said that our entire justice system needs a radical rethink.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4419661a6427.html
Closed court for Bain legal arguments
The Press | Friday, 29 February 2008
The first legal arguments for the retrial of David Bain were held behind closed doors in Christchurch yesterday.
Justice Graham Panckhurst had originally indicated that he would hold the pre-trial hearing in open court and make suppression orders, but he reversed that decision yesterday.
Bain's convictions for murdering his family in Dunedin in 1994 were quashed by the Privy Council last year. The retrial is set to begin in August. The judge told the High Court in Christchurch yesterday that he had been approached by counsel for the prosecution and for Bain in chambers before the hearing.
The judge said he was satisfied that the discussions were sensitive and could have implications for a fair trial.
He said he had been wrong to contemplate hearing the discussion in open court.
The media and public were then excluded, although Bain supporter Joe Karam and the police officer in charge of the case were allowed to remain.
Karam said later he could not comment on the hearing.
The judge reserved his decision.
The second matter, the below article makes my blood boil. Name me just one other organization that gives pay rises when they are failing to deliver the service that they were intended for?The public should be in a rage over this ? This is a sad indictment , bloody pay rises when serious criminals are being set free, because case loads and trial delays are littering a systematic failure .The lawyers win again. A Law Commissioner has said our law books are in a chaotic mess and a High Court judge said our justice system needs a radical rethink. Hey judge quick pay those green fees and hide those TAB tickets! Corrupt bastards and don't worry 'cause the cops are in boots and all.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/thepress/4416673a19718.html
Court costs: judges win $30,000 pay rise.
Wednesday, 27 February 2008
High Court judges have set the benchmark for fat pay increases, pocketing an extra $30,000 a year.
The rise will take their salaries to $345,000.
Judges also have an amount of up to a third of their salary paid into a superannuation scheme, and expenses of between $4100 and $7900.
In deciding to give High Court judges a 9.4 per cent salary increase, Remuneration Authority chairman David Oughton highlighted the need to attract and retain people with skills and a reputation to match the best in the legal profession.
"Remuneration in the top ranks of the legal profession, from which High Court judges will continue to be drawn, continues to move ahead of judicial remuneration."
Oughton said in his explanatory note to the salary determination that the state will never, nor should, match private sector incomes, but had to take them into account.
The New Zealand Law Society has cited pay as one issue affecting the means to attract candidates, who can potentially earn more as barristers, to the bench. The 130 full-time District Court judges, who were the big winners last year with a $30,000 pay rise, only got half that this year, moving up the pay scale $15,000 to $260,000. Court of Appeal and Supreme Court judges will earn $361,000 ($340,000) and $385,000 ($363,000), respectively.
Heading the judicial pay scale is Chief Justice Dame Sian Elias who earns $412,000 _ up $24,000 from last year, but at least $50,000 behind the state sector's highest paid female bureaucrat, the chief executive of the Justice Ministry, Belinda Clark, who earns between $460,000 and $470,000. Prime Minister Helen Clark gets $375,000 a year. _Dominion Post
No comments:
Post a Comment