Hard News: Veitch
619 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 17 18 19 20 21 … 25 Newer→ Last
-
Islander, yes that's who I was referring to.
What I meant was that they believe that some areas of the law don't reflect the community's sense of justice and are attempting to have the law changed to better reflect (their understanding of) community views. The same options are open to all of us.
I am not saying for a second that I agree with their beliefs.
-
As it happens, yes.
OK, not total disagreement then.
-
I think Kracklite et al were not gossiping but instead discussing real experiences and trying to draw from their own knowledge to try and clarify what is going on so publicly for Mr Veitch. It may not help him but it may help someone who reads this thread.
Thank you, Bart, that was my intention. I think that Kerry made a vital and necessary - and deeply moving - contribution.
Cheers for that. i felt a bit of a twit later when i saw 16,000 views on this thread - i do tend to forget this is a public forum and not just my cosy PA village, but what the hey. And Bart's quite right about it reaching out to others, i am contacted from time to time by people going through similar stuff, coz they know I'll get it.
Just humanity, bro.
-
Events like Boyle's performance open up hegemonic cracks in the edifice of our consensual understandings about concepts like beauty, work, entertainment and even value.
Jesus wept, professor. Bags I get to pinch that bit about 'hegemonic cracks in the edifice of our consensual understandings' for an essay, sacha?
-
Be my guest, Kerry - it's a distillation of several thinkers rather than a quote from any of them. I'm sure Giovanni and others with fresher knowledge would be able to tease out the inspirations. And I'll bet there are simpler ways of saying it, somewhere. I look forward to hearing how it flies for you.
-
Our legal system is half a step advanced from "trial by combat", especially in the civil area, but not much less in the criminal area.
Mark. I'd be the first person to agree that the system isn't always perfect. But, by and large, it works reasonably well for most people who use it. Most people who curse the legal system are actually complaining about the court system and its cost and complexity, and there is some justice to those complaints.
But, speaking as a commercial lawyer, most of my clients never go anywhere near the courts, and generally most of them are happy with their outcomes. Indeed, most people who use the legal system don't go anywhere near a courtroom.
Bashing the legal system and its inequities is like blaming Corrections every time someone on parole kills or hurts someone. The system's an easy target, but nobody can actually think of a better way to do things. But we'll just blame the entire system anyway.
Assuming that you mean the "Sensible Sentencing Trust", I would disagree with you to an extreme.
Islander, yes that's who I was referring to.
I thought for a moment Mrs Skin was referring to a two-bit outfit churning out dross and highly subjective opinion masquerading as fact. But then I realised she wasn't referring to the Sunday Star Times.
-
Did people see the Sensible Sentencing Trust page in Arabic? Roughly translated it says:
In the name of Allah, the Beneficient and Merciful.
Bro. Chur.
The SST is the secret NZ branch of the Muslim Al Quaida Brotherhood. In order to avoid the wrath of Helen Clark and her lesbian satanist clique, we have disguised ourselves as good old Kiwis with backgrounds in the police and politics.
Soon we will be able reveal ourselves. Following the success of the "three strikes" laws, we plan to implement full sharia law in NZ, including the right to beat ones wife as part of good husbandly correction. If thwarted in this, we will hijack four trolley buses and crash them into the beehive.
Keep this to yourselves for now, lads.
As-Salāmu Alaykum
Sheikh Al Garth el-Vicar -
Assuming that you mean the "Sensible Sentencing Trust", I would disagree with you to an extreme.
Islander, yes that's who I was referring to.
I thought for a moment Mrs Skin was referring to a two-bit outfit churning out dross and highly subjective opinion masquerading as fact. But then I realised she wasn't referring to the Sunday Star Times.
In my world, MSM stands for Men who have Sex with Men. It took me aaages and one or two double takes to work out what it stands for here.
Rich, that's hilarious.
-
But then I realised she wasn't referring to the Sunday Star Times.
Nor none of these neither. Personally, I reckon the Samoan Swat Team is more deserving of the acronym than any of the mangy local contenders.
-
Most people who curse the legal system are actually complaining about the court system and its cost and complexity, and there is some justice to those complaints.
Fair cop, I am referring to the court system. Not about the cost and complexity - I'm not a fan of taking a simplistic approach - but about the lack of anything approaching truth, let alone justice.
I've chaired a jury where we could not convict, because of the Crown solicitor's incompetence. They had the evidence, they just didn't present it properly. They ballsed up the forensic presentation and we had to let the bastard go, though we really knew he'd done something, to commit the same violent crime again.
It's not about justice - it's about who has the best lawyer on the day
-
And sometimes not even that..
-
Bashing the legal system and its inequities is like blaming Corrections every time someone on parole kills or hurts someone. The system's an easy target, but nobody can actually think of a better way to do things. But we'll just blame the entire system anyway.
a moneyless system would be better.
-
My preference, with lawyers, is to spindle, fold or mutilate ;-)
(My brother is a lawyer and my wife was one, for the humour-impaired)
-
I'm lost for words at the mentality behind that column.
I bought both sunday papers (fool me once....).
Somehow I ended up reading the Ratshit Saunders account of the day in court, which contained a sentence that went something like: 'didn't Kirsten look sooo adorably cute in her little secretaries outfit'.
After that, the rest of the papers were covered in my spew, which kinda made the Paul Holmes column unreadable.
-
a moneyless system would be better.
Please indulge my curiosity and explain how that would work.
After that, the rest of the papers were covered in my spew, which kinda made the Paul Holmes column unreadable.
Rich, it wasn't your spewing that made the Holmes article unreadable.
-
Rich, it wasn't your spewing that made the Holmes article unreadable.
Nah. Just, like, more of the same.
-
With regards to the Sensible Sentencing Trust release: I was pleasantly surprised, but to pinch an adage that Craig's often offered up in similar circumstances, even a broken clock tells the right time twice a day...
-
That release was from July last year, well before any sentence...
-
Please indulge my curiosity and explain how that would work.
Shit. put my foot in it this time. Fresh off watching 'Zeitgeist Addendum'. I'll have a go nevertheless ScottY as I imagine my ramblings might inspire someone with a clue to make some realistic provisions. I'd envisage something not indifferent to those other pillars of civilization; Education, Health, etc
0. An oath should be taken requiring a higher standard of ethics.
1. Private legal practice is outmoded. All legal representation is provided by the state. (a significant pay cut for some)
2. All jurors are trained ethically bound lawyers (for Mark)
3.Name suppression is done away with, the notion of innocence until proven guilty is reemphasized.
4. Defendant's jobs are protected by law until proven guilty.
5. Lawyers are more or less randomly allocated case by case.
Obviously you'll find some glaring holes in that ScottY, but I'd be interested to see what kind of thoughts and ideas other people have.
-
and that the same ex assistant commissioner of police chose to resign rather than face the 15 internal charges of sexual misconduct,after telling us all on the steps of the court,(just like tony veitch)that he would fight every charge tooth and nail
That's probably not a fair representation of Rickard's decision to resign.
I suspect the police were trying to do everything they could to get him to resign, rather than have to put him through the disciplinary process. There's a statute of limitations in the police internal disciplinary procedure, so all his historical actions in relation to Louise Nicholas would have been excluded. Probably the worst things they could have done him for were his actions around the court case - turning up in his uniform, his statement after the other two were convicted. The internal procedure probably would have been a mockery in the eyes of the public, and they probably couldn't have dismissed him at all.
Rickards probably resigned when it became clear that the police were never going to allow him to serve again, and that the process was going to be dragged out as long as possible to prevent that. Whatever he got out of the whole thing, it was enough for him to agree to move on and start trying to work in a different field.
-
2. All jurors are trained ethically bound lawyers (for Mark)
Not a good idea. They'd spend their time arguing legal interpretations, rather than the facts presented. That's why lawyers aren't allowed to sit on juries now.
-
5. Lawyers are more or less randomly allocated case by case.
Would have to be Lawyers of chosen field to defend/prosecute cases of said field surely Mark
-
2. All jurors are trained ethically bound lawyers (for Mark)
Not a good idea. They'd spend their time arguing legal interpretations, rather than the facts presented. That's why lawyers aren't allowed to sit on juries now.
They're not being paid any extra to sit on juries. I think quite the opposite. They'd be less bamboozled that the ordinary citizen and want to get off unpaid work as soon as possible.
-
5. Lawyers are more or less randomly allocated case by case.
Would have to be Lawyers of chosen field to defend/prosecute cases of said field surely Mark
Yes. Definitely.
-
2. All jurors are trained ethically bound lawyers (for Mark)
This would at least double the number of lawyers we'd need in New Zealand.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.