Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

We'll switch your business
to Led lighting for Free*

Chief Magistrate Ron Cahill excused

By Skidbladnir - 11 November 2009 17

Attorney-General Simon Corbell’s statement on the matter
ABC interview with Ron Cahill.
ABC news report.

Who said our legal apparatus moved slowly?

[Ed] More news on this inquisition.
I look forward to being exonerated, has the ABC.
More on what Simon Corbell had to say from the CT.
And lastly from the ABC how the Chief Magistrate will be allowed to finish off his homework before he either leaves gracefully to retirement or is cast out by the ACT government.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
17 Responses to
Chief Magistrate Ron Cahill excused
rossau 7:00 pm 18 Nov 09

I am referring to the Magistrates Court. [see 20:23, 12 Nov 09].
That court will not guarantee you a ‘considered opinion’ with commensurate penalty. That court will find too often warranting appeal with commensurate cost while the territory scambles to limit access to appeal in the higher courts. Ouch!

TAD 3:15 pm 13 Nov 09

One of the three front runners.

Funny that one of the others is SA Deputy Chief Magistrate Andrew Cannon who recently successfully sued the Attorney General of his own state for $200K for defamation.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/cahill-under-investigation/1666204.aspx?storypage=0

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/sa-settles-magistrate-defamation-case/story-e6frg6nf-1225760692800

I hope he gets the local job.

TheObserver 2:36 pm 13 Nov 09

Why did the other magistrates complain? Easy – one of them is tipped as a front runner for the Chief’s job and the other is a good mate of this ‘pretender’ – they are often seen together. No brainer.

baldilocks 5:57 am 13 Nov 09

Post # 11 – “As examples I cite the strongly held belief -oft announced in private by practionioners on both sides of the court- that justice is frequently not metred out by that Court.”

Which Court are you referring to – the Magistrates Court or the Supreme Court? The Supreme Court is the one which usually gets the stick, but you appear to be saying the main problems are in the Magistrates Court. Explain.

rossau 8:23 pm 12 Nov 09

Isn’t it time that Corbell himself was shown the door?
Isn’t it time that long-running problems endemeic to that Court be resolved through changes no matter how controversial?
As examples I cite the strongly held belief -oft announced in private by practionioners on both sides of the court- that justice is frequently not metred out by that Court.
If and when Cahill goes, there should be thanks and much noise.

Granny 4:07 pm 12 Nov 09

Ron Cahill is the best. He is the people’s chief magistrate.

steveu 8:24 pm 11 Nov 09

This is a shame that one of the few decent magistrates around has been treated this way. Im my opinion, he has obviously brought the local government to account too many times, and this is a way of them sending a message to him and his colleagues.

sunshine 7:22 pm 11 Nov 09

i think that there’s more to the story then the public have been advised.
still doesn’t make it a nice situation for a much respected individual to be in.

sunshine 7:20 pm 11 Nov 09

CoolRhubarb said :

Whoa. Time for a sanity check. What did we learn yesterday that we didn’t know before. According to the Attorney-General, the person involved in the case over which the special magistrate from Victoria was to preside, related to a “public figure known professionally and socially to the Chief magistrate before the proceedings commenced.”

wasn’t the interstate magistrate the person that the CMag knew both personally and professionally?

sunshine 7:17 pm 11 Nov 09

TAD said :

Very sad and grubby thing to happen to a bloke I have so much personal respect for.

couldn’t agree more – have nothing but respect for the man and so do many of the criminals in this state – he has always tried to be as fair as possible and do what is best for all concerned

CoolRhubarb 9:21 am 11 Nov 09

Whoa. Time for a sanity check. What did we learn yesterday that we didn’t know before. According to the Attorney-General, the person involved in the case over which the special magistrate from Victoria was to preside, related to a “public figure known professionally and socially to the Chief magistrate before the proceedings commenced.”

Why did it take until yesterday for that to emerge. Doesn’t tell me who it was. Doesn’t seem to offend the suppression order. By the way the Chief Magistrate, according to the Canberra Times, actually made the suppression order.

We’ve learnt something from the Chief Magistrate’s barrister’s comments as reported in the Canberra Times (page 1): “It’s not uncommon in both the Supreme Court and the Magistrates Court when a visiting Judge or special magistrate has been appointed, for whatever reason, to have prepared for that visiting judge or magistrate written material that will help in the preparation of the matter.”

Ahh, if that is a well known practice why did the two magistrates to complain to the Attorney-General.

There is a thing called the Rule of law – that says amongst other things (I think): that no one is above the law. Let us all stand to remember Lionel.

The Attorney has acted properly.

sepi 9:14 am 11 Nov 09

Yes – not a nice way to go out into retirement.

Does anyone actually understand the charge? He gave briefing notes to a visiting magistrate – was he trying to help the guy out, or speed things up, or was he trying to influence the outcome of the trial?

TAD 6:33 am 11 Nov 09

Very sad and grubby thing to happen to a bloke I have so much personal respect for.

cleo 1:18 am 11 Nov 09

More waiting time, one less magistrate!

Skidbladnir 8:46 pm 10 Nov 09

i swear I hadn’t finished putting this one together…

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site