21 June 2008

Assault trial aborted

| DJ
Join the conversation
16

I am looking beyond why a witness wasn’t the subject of a subpoena in this instance and am questioning the actions of the visiting Judge – just who does he think he is? http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/06/18/2278222.htm

Is visiting Sydney Judge Justice Roger Gyles accountable to the people of Canberra or even the victim? If Justice Gyles comes down to the ACT to help out, I homestly don’t mind as I’m guessing he would be more likely to impose a term of imprisonment than our lot. Ok, he slams the DPP for the situation but to refuse to postpone the trial is another matter . Surely the victim has the right to have the matter put before the Court and the accused the right to test the evidence.

Join the conversation

16
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

DJ said :

Isn’t that why we, as tax payers, pay them so much?

DPP lawyers are not, to my knowledge, very well paid at all.

Anyway, I don’t have a problem with this. Gyles J is simply smacking down the DPP for failing to come up with the goods. They have to make a case against the defendant and they failed to construct one for trial. Surely an incentive not to stuff up next time round.

Spideydog said :

In their defence, they do run “numerous” cases at the same time in high volumes. Mistakes can happen and they are only human.

Isn’t that why we, as tax payers, pay them so much?

Oh Vic, BTW, I forgot to say……that explains a lot.

Thanks Spideydog, sometimes the best things are unexpected 🙂

I thought it was a lovely poem (it did come out of nowhere though??)

If it had of been written about me, I still would have laughed 😉

Ant

DPP does not equal Police.

Back to the all nighters on RSVP for you

I just want to give you a big hug Ant! If you really are a girl.

Oh, the police/police wannabes evidently want me to remind them of how pathetic our police are. Well, as this thread plainly demonstrates, I don’t need to as it’s all too evident.

And I wouldn’t have, but it seems my comments were wanted, so there they are.

So does this trial cancellation mean the guy is let off the hook now????

Will there be another trial or not?

Vic Bitterman10:12 pm 21 Jun 08

Headbonius said :

There is an old fart called Ant,
About Coppers he loves to rant.
He’s a silly old fool
A real fcuken tool
His brain is not a giant

Hmmmm I didn’t see Ant post in here, but hey, whatever floats your goat.

You do know that our Ant is a girl??

There is an old fart called Ant,
About Coppers he loves to rant.
He’s a silly old fool
A real fcuken tool
His brain is not a giant

The spiking of this charge has had one of two adverse effects. If the accused would have been found guilty, that may have been some comfort to the family of the victim. They lose that. But, if he would have been acquitted (and the fact that police charge someone does not mean that person is guilty or will be found guilty), he may have recovered some of his reputation. And he lost that. Overall unsatisfactory.

DJ – The appeal/review options would be pretty limited. But the decision was one that was probably open to His Honour. Gyles J, by the way, is a judge of considerable experience (appointed after a stellar careeer) and his judgments seem pretty safe and reasonable (on the ones I have read). He is a Federal Court judge who is one of a number described as “additional judges” of the ACT Supreme Court. They are appointed under s 4A of the Supreme Court Act by the Executove (Government) of the ACT.

A judge has a very high level of protection from dismissal, and there are good reasons for that in terms of judicial independence. Dismissals are pretty rare and usually follow a substantial criminal conviction (although one was considered in the case of Bruce J of the NSW Supreme Court, who was notoriously slow due to a psychological codition). Judges are accountable for the judicial actions only to the law and those courts that review their decisions.

In their defence, they do run “numerous” cases at the same time in high volumes. Mistakes can happen and they are only human.

But won’t there be a retrial?

What were the other options – delay for 6 weeks?

If they had gone ahead, would this lack of a witness have caused a loophole the defence could have used to get the trial aborted anyway – if they didn’t like the result??

I can’t just really get past the fact that the DPP should have managed to remember to call their witness in plenty of time.

The victim has no rights ???? apparently.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.