Skip to main content

More of what you need to know part 2

So the first rule is to never trust an investigating official whether they be a policeman, from social welfare, Housing New Zealand or whatever. This is principally for two reasons. One is they may not have proper training as an investigator and so they come to their work with a preconceived position. And two if they have received training within an institution such as the police or the serious fraud office or someother bureaucratic organization they will be embued with a certain culture. That stems from the fact that the government is a monopoly and is accordingly accountable to no one. You can count the elections we have as accountability because all that is doing is electing representatives and we all know what they are like. No the real government is unelected and it consists of government departments and those who run them. They are accountable to noone and you cant count the state services commissioner because he is one of them. So accordingly if you are being investigated for a crime by the government there is a 90% chance they will have made up their mind that you are guilty. So what is the practical step that you can take to deal with this. The step you can take is not to talk to them. You dont have to make a statement. In some circumstances you can be compelled under pain of imprisonment to provide information or make statements. However as a rule and I am generalizing here there are very few situations where evidence obtained by compulsion form the accused themselves can be used as admissible evidence in court. The other reason why you should not make a statement to people who are investigating you for a crime is that that statement has the potential if it is incriminating to do all the investigating work for them. Any holes in their case will be filled up by that statement. You will have no option but to plead guilty or be found guilty in those circumstances.Remember it is very easy to arrest someone for committing a crime but it is not so easy to prove it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How do Defence Lawyers sleep at night.

How do defence lawyers sleep at night?
I must admit when I saw the photos I was totally creeped out. It took me a while to get over them.  I had a flashback of defending a person charged with having sex with a woman who had an IQ of around 70. I agonized about the case and taking it to trial. But it was resolved on the court steps with a guilty plea and no prison sentence. A week of hot showers finally washed the case off me. I don’t think I did many more cases after that involving sexual crimes. Not because I wouldn’t or couldn’t. But perhaps word got around that I didn’t like women being raped and those defendants didn’t gravitate towards me. I felt more at home defending people charged with stealing vast amounts of money, sometimes off old people in Rest Homes. Was there something about the fact that no blood was spilled which enabled me to shut off the devastation inflicted on these victims? Did I have a fatal flaw? Should I get psychotherapy? Should I change to family law, where I…

Be wary

Be wary of the lawyer who says he can get you off the charge without knowing anything about it. Look for a lawyer who is nosy and wants to know what happened. Sometimes the lawyer who says no problem I can get you off this very serious charge will change their minds just before you are about to be arraigned before the jury and say I think you should plead guilty. A trained monkey can tell people to plead guilty. You might be better off with a lawyer who appears a little pessimistic but when the bullets start to fly doesnt wave the white flag.

David Bain.

The distressing thing about the David Bain case is that there are many more cases like that where people have been convicted of murder on the shonkiest of evidence. Take for example the case of Gail Maney who is serving a sentence of life imprisonment for the murder of Dean Fuller Sandys in 1989. She was convicted of murder at her first trial but this was over-turned because the Trial Judge did not put the defence adequately to the jury. She was convicted again at a retrial in 2005. On appeal to the Court of Appeal one of the appeal court judges was the judge who failed to put her defence at the original trial. Does that sound fair to you.Three court appeal judges.You need two to win and one of the judges was the previous trial judge. Fuller Sandys was allegedly murdered by Steven Stone at the behest of Gail Maney in the garage of her Henderson house in 1989. His body was never found. His car was found at a west coast beach some time after he disappeared. It was alleged that he was d…