Skip to main content

The circle is complete.

Sometimes you can view a case that appears to be overwhelming.What other explanation can there be for the situation other than the guilt of the accused. The danger with the present system we run is that people cannot afford to represent themselves properly in Court. The investigation and prosecution system in New Zealand and the Prison system for that matter has become corporatized to such a high degree that the individual in society is simply overwhelmed and defenceless  in the face of the complete resources at the disposal of the Crown. These resources are not just the investigation and prosecution resources but also control of the media. In the opposite camp the resources devoted to funding the defence of people are meagre and deliberately so. The last thing the government wants is for one of its corporate departments to wreck the work carried out by another of its departments. So unless you are rich you are at the mercy of the Court system. A system that is so cynical in its view of the individual that people are presumed to be guilty by all those people within  the system. After all their salary is being paid. This corporatization is reaching its zenith with private prisons and the creation of a Public Defenders Office. All functions are now within the realm of one corporate entity. This is a very worrying development from a constitutional point of view as all sectors of the Court system are now controlled by the executive. There is now no longer any separation of powers in the Court room itself. When Defence Counsel themselves are employed and controlled by the executive branch of government i.e. they are state servants the circle is complete. You can readily understand the prosecution being employed  by the executive afterall they are representing the government. But when the defence bar is employed by the executive who are they representing. Are they representing the defendant or are they representing the executive. When the chips are down and the hard unpopular decisions have to be made who does a state servant owe allegiance to. The state of course how could it be any other way. Its interesting to note that practically all the senior lawyers in the PDS are drawn from a state background. I know you dont have time to be worried about all this. You have your everyday life to lead. So thats why I thought you might be interested in a post that presents the argument. I would be interested to hear your views. Have a great day.

Comments

  1. Maua Faleauto6:59 PM

    The same attitude is revealed in the Law Reports as only those cases which support the State line make it into the reports-inconvenient common law lies on the files of lawyers who achieved inconvenient results.

    Inconvenient argument in the law courts is often completely ignored and no written record is made.

    This hegemony corrodes the very fabric of our society.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

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…