13 November 2013

Eastman loses another lawyer

| johnboy
Join the conversation
27

The ABC reports that in his quest to have at one time hired every criminal lawyer in Australia David Eastman has lost another one as the inquiry into his murder conviction rumbles on.

Mr Willee QC was Eastman’s third senior counsel since the inquiry was ordered in September last year.

The defence team is now in the hands of Mark Griffin who has asked for some delay to allow him to catch up with the case.

Eastman told the court, via videolink from Canberra’s jail, that he had total confidence in Mr Griffin QC.

Join the conversation

27
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

Dilandach said :

IrishPete said :

Dilandach said :

Robertson said :

Dilandach said :

Just a pity that the system is content with pissing money up against the wall for this case. What is the point of going through it all really?

I’ll tell you exactly why: so long as Eastman is behind bars for this crime he likely didn’t commit, the Italians who likely did commit it and the AFP cops who were in cahoots with them, are getting off scot-free.

Which is why he should be medicated, have him help his own case. If he’s guilty or innocent, let justice be done. Instead we get this circus that everyone seems content on continuing. Wasting time and money.

How many times do I have to say he can’t be medicated?

IP

That’s your qualified medical opinion that it *can’t* be done?

No, it’s not a medical opinion it’s a legal fact. You can only be forced to take medication while detained in a hospital or in the community under a Psychiatric Treatment Order (and if you still refuse under the PTO, you must be taken to hospital for it to be administered). Even if kept in a hospital, after a not very long period of time (I think it might be 10 days) the Tribunal must approve the treatment. Good luck winning that legal argument with Mr E before 2020.

IP

IrishPete said :

Dilandach said :

Robertson said :

Dilandach said :

Just a pity that the system is content with pissing money up against the wall for this case. What is the point of going through it all really?

I’ll tell you exactly why: so long as Eastman is behind bars for this crime he likely didn’t commit, the Italians who likely did commit it and the AFP cops who were in cahoots with them, are getting off scot-free.

Which is why he should be medicated, have him help his own case. If he’s guilty or innocent, let justice be done. Instead we get this circus that everyone seems content on continuing. Wasting time and money.

How many times do I have to say he can’t be medicated?

IP

That’s your qualified medical opinion that it *can’t* be done?

BimboGeek said :

Also in some jurisdictions the process begins adversarial but if the judge isn’t impressed he can ask questions, do independent research and so on. I believe Honkaz does this but law school was over 10 years ago so now I might be the one with crossed wires now.

Still, it’s a good idea. The winner shouldn’t always be the guy with the better lawyer.

They’d have chucked you out of law a school for that final comment alone.

The only winners in the adversarial system are rich lawyers.

IP

miz said :

Deref, you don’t want the inquisitorial system. Really. The test of guilt is way lower, namely ‘the balance of probabilities’. At least, and for all its faults, we have the ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ test. I know which one I’d go for if I was charged with an offence.
I learned this at Uni, BTW – we had a German lecturer who never failed to tell us how much better our system was because of this.

Whereas if I was a victim, I would want a system that held people to account, unlike the vast majority of rapists and child abusers who are acquitted or not prosecuted because our adversarial system stacks the deck in their favour..

Silvio Berlusconi with his army of lawyers would never have been convicted n Australia. That seals it for me.

IP

c_c™ said :

miz said :

Deref, you don’t want the inquisitorial system. Really. The test of guilt is way lower, namely ‘the balance of probabilities’. At least, and for all its faults, we have the ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ test. I know which one I’d go for if I was charged with an offence.
I learned this at Uni, BTW – we had a German lecturer who never failed to tell us how much better our system was because of this.

It’s not that simple. Germany’s standard of proof is quite abstractly defined, but still favours the defendant. On the other hand France, which is a civil law system employing inquisitorial trials for criminal proceedings does use the “beyond reasonable doubt” standard.

Adding to the complexity, the Police in various countries have different standards for when they can investigate someone, and in Germany it’s apparently quite strict.

Lecturer was probably getting his wires crossed a bit, because civil and common law both have dual meanings in legal parlance.

Also in some jurisdictions the process begins adversarial but if the judge isn’t impressed he can ask questions, do independent research and so on. I believe Honkaz does this but law school was over 10 years ago so now I might be the one with crossed wires now.

Still, it’s a good idea. The winner shouldn’t always be the guy with the better lawyer.

miz said :

Deref, you don’t want the inquisitorial system. Really. The test of guilt is way lower, namely ‘the balance of probabilities’. At least, and for all its faults, we have the ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ test. I know which one I’d go for if I was charged with an offence.
I learned this at Uni, BTW – we had a German lecturer who never failed to tell us how much better our system was because of this.

It’s not that simple. Germany’s standard of proof is quite abstractly defined, but still favours the defendant. On the other hand France, which is a civil law system employing inquisitorial trials for criminal proceedings does use the “beyond reasonable doubt” standard.

Adding to the complexity, the Police in various countries have different standards for when they can investigate someone, and in Germany it’s apparently quite strict.

Lecturer was probably getting his wires crossed a bit, because civil and common law both have dual meanings in legal parlance.

Deref, you don’t want the inquisitorial system. Really. The test of guilt is way lower, namely ‘the balance of probabilities’. At least, and for all its faults, we have the ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ test. I know which one I’d go for if I was charged with an offence.
I learned this at Uni, BTW – we had a German lecturer who never failed to tell us how much better our system was because of this.

IrishPete said :

Dilandach said :

Robertson said :

Dilandach said :

Just a pity that the system is content with pissing money up against the wall for this case. What is the point of going through it all really?

I’ll tell you exactly why: so long as Eastman is behind bars for this crime he likely didn’t commit, the Italians who likely did commit it and the AFP cops who were in cahoots with them, are getting off scot-free.

Which is why he should be medicated, have him help his own case. If he’s guilty or innocent, let justice be done. Instead we get this circus that everyone seems content on continuing. Wasting time and money.

How many times do I have to say he can’t be medicated?

IP

Five! Is it five? What do I win?

Robertson said :

Affirmative Action Man said :

Eastman is clearly barking mad & has been for a long time. There is plenty of evidence to support that he was a total nutter long before the Winchester issue.

If Eastman is allowed to be involved in the review it will go nowhere.

Exactly. If we want the whole issue solved, we need to do it in the absence of Eastman himself being in any way involved.

The reverse of this coin is, why has our justice system allowed Eastman to muddy the waters so comprehensively and for so long? Why did the AFP hire a psychologist with the express purpose of designing a complex project to mentally destabilise Eastman? Why is that “doctor” considered fit to practice despite a clear breach of his hippocratic oath? Why are the AFP and the DPP not under investigation for their long history of shenanigans in this case? They’ve presented an obviously faked and key witness statement, they’ve studiously avoided obvious leads, they’ve engaged in psychological warfare against a convenient nutter, and they’ve managed to make him convict himself despite not having any evidence whatsoever tying him to the crime.

Psychiatrist, not psychologist. Apart from that, you make a fair bit of sense – this wasn’t particularly ethical behaviour by the doctor… Maybe he didn’t think he would get away with waterboarding back in the 1990s. Little did he know.

IP

Dilandach said :

Robertson said :

Dilandach said :

Just a pity that the system is content with pissing money up against the wall for this case. What is the point of going through it all really?

I’ll tell you exactly why: so long as Eastman is behind bars for this crime he likely didn’t commit, the Italians who likely did commit it and the AFP cops who were in cahoots with them, are getting off scot-free.

Which is why he should be medicated, have him help his own case. If he’s guilty or innocent, let justice be done. Instead we get this circus that everyone seems content on continuing. Wasting time and money.

How many times do I have to say he can’t be medicated?

IP

Robertson said :

Deref said :

The more I read about this kind of thing, the more convinced I become that our adversarial legal system is a crock of shite compared to the European inquisitorial system.

You forget that an inquisitorial system by appointed magistrates is even less independent of government than our imperfect system. Because the inquisitor has to use his own initiative to compile the dossier that will lead to prosecution, he exposes himself to some very nasty blowback from the government of the day if his work puts at risk the commercial interests of that government or its supporters. Hence most inquisitors pick and choose their targets and avoid touching anything dangerous.

Of course, recent Italian history is replete with the consequences of very brave prosecutors ignoring their personal interests in favour of going after the bad guys:
http://www.euronews.com/2013/10/23/the-battle-front-in-the-fight-against-the-mafia-goes-eu-wide/

Deref said :

The more I read about this kind of thing, the more convinced I become that our adversarial legal system is a crock of shite compared to the European inquisitorial system.

You forget that an inquisitorial system by appointed magistrates is even less independent of government than our imperfect system. Because the inquisitor has to use his own initiative to compile the dossier that will lead to prosecution, he exposes himself to some very nasty blowback from the government of the day if his work puts at risk the commercial interests of that government or its supporters. Hence most inquisitors pick and choose their targets and avoid touching anything dangerous.

IrishPete said :

So in short if he’s mentally ill he’s innocent, and if he’s guilty, he’s not mentally ill.

But is he heavier than a duck?

The more I read about this kind of thing, the more convinced I become that our adversarial legal system is a crock of shite compared to the European inquisitorial system.

Dilandach said :

Robertson said :

Dilandach said :

Just a pity that the system is content with pissing money up against the wall for this case. What is the point of going through it all really?

I’ll tell you exactly why: so long as Eastman is behind bars for this crime he likely didn’t commit, the Italians who likely did commit it and the AFP cops who were in cahoots with them, are getting off scot-free.

Which is why he should be medicated, have him help his own case. If he’s guilty or innocent, let justice be done. Instead we get this circus that everyone seems content on continuing. Wasting time and money.

And to me, Eastman’s case is irrelevant. There is a much more important issue at stake, which is finding the culprits for this crime, from the triggerman and his driver to their employers and including their Australian-based supporters & protectors, (which include a bloke whose statue adorns the ACT LA foyer, which should give you an inkling as to how deep the problem runs).

milkman said :

Dear David Eastman (if you’re reading this),

You’re a LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY motherf*cker.

Lots of love,
The Helpful Fairy.

He isn’t reading it. Someone can print it off and mail it to him, if they want.

IP

Robertson said :

Dilandach said :

Just a pity that the system is content with pissing money up against the wall for this case. What is the point of going through it all really?

I’ll tell you exactly why: so long as Eastman is behind bars for this crime he likely didn’t commit, the Italians who likely did commit it and the AFP cops who were in cahoots with them, are getting off scot-free.

Which is why he should be medicated, have him help his own case. If he’s guilty or innocent, let justice be done. Instead we get this circus that everyone seems content on continuing. Wasting time and money.

Affirmative Action Man said :

Eastman is clearly barking mad & has been for a long time. There is plenty of evidence to support that he was a total nutter long before the Winchester issue.

If Eastman is allowed to be involved in the review it will go nowhere.

Exactly. If we want the whole issue solved, we need to do it in the absence of Eastman himself being in any way involved.

The reverse of this coin is, why has our justice system allowed Eastman to muddy the waters so comprehensively and for so long? Why did the AFP hire a psychologist with the express purpose of designing a complex project to mentally destabilise Eastman? Why is that “doctor” considered fit to practice despite a clear breach of his hippocratic oath? Why are the AFP and the DPP not under investigation for their long history of shenanigans in this case? They’ve presented an obviously faked and key witness statement, they’ve studiously avoided obvious leads, they’ve engaged in psychological warfare against a convenient nutter, and they’ve managed to make him convict himself despite not having any evidence whatsoever tying him to the crime.

Dilandach said :

Just a pity that the system is content with pissing money up against the wall for this case. What is the point of going through it all really?

I’ll tell you exactly why: so long as Eastman is behind bars for this crime he likely didn’t commit, the Italians who likely did commit it and the AFP cops who were in cahoots with them, are getting off scot-free.

Dear David Eastman (if you’re reading this),

You’re a LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY LOONY motherf*cker.

Lots of love,
The Helpful Fairy.

Affirmative Action Man said :

Eastman is clearly barking mad & has been for a long time. There is plenty of evidence to support that he was a total nutter long before the Winchester issue.

If Eastman is allowed to be involved in the review it will go nowhere.

I refer you to my post just before yours. Schizophrenia develops in young adulthood, so if he is unwell of course he has been for a long time. I doubt he has ever been properly assessed, as to do so would require a certain degree of cooperation, something he is not known for.

IP

Affirmative Action Man7:37 pm 13 Nov 13

Eastman is clearly barking mad & has been for a long time. There is plenty of evidence to support that he was a total nutter long before the Winchester issue. If Eastman is allowed to be involved in the review it will go nowhere.

Dilandach said :

IrishPete said :

Dilandach said :

Forcibly medicate him and be done with it.

If he’s guilty or not, allowing him to be in this state isn’t good for everyone involved.

Can you enlighten us on your medical qualifications, and his diagnosis, and the medication you are recommending?

Anyway, forcible medication requires a Treatment Order which must be made by the ACAT (formerly Mental Health Tribunal) which is essentially a kind of court. Can you see where I am going with this? You might finally get some medication into him around 2020. And I don’t mean twenty minutes past eight in the evening.

IP

Yes, because you need a medical doctorate to see that he’s not of sound mind and hasn’t been for a long time. Some pretty strong anti-psychotics would be the order of the day.

Just a pity that the system is content with pissing money up against the wall for this case. What is the point of going through it all really? He’s not going to help his case and I doubt people are working extra hard to get him out of the situation.

But it seems that some are just content with him bronzing up and wasting everyone’s time, the outcome of all this is a forgone conclusion anyway.

There’s no such ting as a “strong antipsychotic”. They are all “strong”.

I would be surprised if you have seen him recently, so all you are “seeing” is media reports of his behaviour, and a bit of rumour and innuendo from people who know people who work in the prison.

There are plenty of people with psychotic illnesses who are untreatable – they do not respond to any medications. You could always try ECT, and I bet people would pay big bucks for for tickets to that event. But the chances of success are pretty slim.

He’s not the only really annoying person who doesn’t have schizophrenia – he’s just the one who was convicted of murdering a Top Cop. Generally people with schizophrenia are considered too disorganised to have done what he is convicted of (the amount of careful planning and covering of tracks). So in short if he’s mentally ill he’s innocent, and if he’s guilty, he’s not mentally ill.

IP

Is this the Mark Griffin, QC from Adelaide?

Dear oh dear….

And to think the DPP and AFP have always maintained that Eastman’s inability to hold onto a lawyer was some sort of cunning underhanded plan on Eastman’s part…

I notice on the ABC article that is linked, there is a photo showing a bloke holding Eastman by the arm. I wonder if that bloke is being asked to assist the Inquiry in any capacity? He has the look of somebody who surely knows a lot about the affair.

IrishPete said :

Dilandach said :

Forcibly medicate him and be done with it.

If he’s guilty or not, allowing him to be in this state isn’t good for everyone involved.

Can you enlighten us on your medical qualifications, and his diagnosis, and the medication you are recommending?

Anyway, forcible medication requires a Treatment Order which must be made by the ACAT (formerly Mental Health Tribunal) which is essentially a kind of court. Can you see where I am going with this? You might finally get some medication into him around 2020. And I don’t mean twenty minutes past eight in the evening.

IP

Yes, because you need a medical doctorate to see that he’s not of sound mind and hasn’t been for a long time. Some pretty strong anti-psychotics would be the order of the day.

Just a pity that the system is content with pissing money up against the wall for this case. What is the point of going through it all really? He’s not going to help his case and I doubt people are working extra hard to get him out of the situation.

But it seems that some are just content with him bronzing up and wasting everyone’s time, the outcome of all this is a forgone conclusion anyway.

Dilandach said :

Forcibly medicate him and be done with it.

If he’s guilty or not, allowing him to be in this state isn’t good for everyone involved.

Can you enlighten us on your medical qualifications, and his diagnosis, and the medication you are recommending?

Anyway, forcible medication requires a Treatment Order which must be made by the ACAT (formerly Mental Health Tribunal) which is essentially a kind of court. Can you see where I am going with this? You might finally get some medication into him around 2020. And I don’t mean twenty minutes past eight in the evening.

IP

Forcibly medicate him and be done with it.

If he’s guilty or not, allowing him to be in this state isn’t good for everyone involved.

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.