A LEttrr to KB

**spudchucka** · 13th April 2005, 21:48

Originally Posted by Jeremy

Now there is one thing I remember from legal studies in 6th form, is that Judges are are completely free to make up new laws on the spot.

I think you had better re-read that text book.

**Krusti** · 13th April 2005, 21:48

Originally Posted by spudchucka

I'd like to see that confirmed. I'd be surprised if it isn't reckless causing death.

Especially seeing that the Causing death part is the easy part to prove!

**Ixion** · 13th April 2005, 21:49

Originally Posted by spudchucka

Have a read of young Oliver's story and see what the likely differences are between his case and the case at hand.

http://www.justice.govt.nz/education...fullstory.html

Well, Oliver had smoked a joint . Bad point. He also had a bad record. This might have influenced the prosecutor's choice of charge, but would be irrelevant to the actual case, since a person's record can't (normally) be brought forward at the trial. (Nothing specifically to indicate racing here)

So Oliver and the Asian girl both went through a red light . Oliver had the joint (though he wasn't charged with being under the influence of drugs so that may not be very relevant). But the girl in this case has the added factor that she didn't stop, and the death was (it appears) due to this . If she had stopped when she hit the Falcon he might not have died. She continued on , somehow, past the first car she hit, and ran over the biker. Which to my mind makes things much worse

So I personally don't see a big difference. But once again, the prosecutor has heard her story. We haven't.

**spudchucka** · 13th April 2005, 21:53

Originally Posted by Ixion

Well, Oliver had smoked a joint . Bad point. He also had a bad record. This might have influenced the prosecutor's choice of charge, but would be irrelevant to the actual case, since a person's record can't (normally) be brought forward at the trial. (Nothing specifically to indicate racing here)

There are some cases where a persons record is relevant.

**Zapf** · 13th April 2005, 21:53

Originally Posted by Jeremy

Now I'm certainly not a lawyer (nor training to become one, a BSc(CompSci) is what I want). But I always thought that you could be charged with the sum of all the crimes commited.

So lets see:

Running through a red light. 25 demerit points? plus a fine
Breaching terms of license. 25 demerit points. plus $400 fine. Obviously breaking the road rules is breaching your license terms.
Unsafe driving. (More demerit points?) plus fine.
Hitting another a vehicle (does this come under willfull damage of another's property?), fine + replacement costs. Normally your insurance would cover you but as I've noticed if you look in the fine print usually if you commit a crime then they don't have to cover you if they don't want to.
Fleeing from a crime scene (jail time + fine?)
Not stopping at an accident (fine + demerit points?)
Reckless driving causing death. (fine + demerit points + jail time)

Now there is one thing I remember from legal studies in 6th form, is that Judges are are completely free to make up new laws on the spot. So there's nothing to stop the judge adding more to the sentence because you should never be in a position where you are unable to brake and stop an accident.

interesting... but from my understanding, when you are defending a traffic ticket. You can't be charged with more than what you have been issued. E.g if you got ticketed doing 70km in 50k zone. The JP's (acting Judge) can't charge you with 80km/h instead.

I suppose it could be the difference if its a "civil" or "criminal" matter / court.

**Krusti** · 13th April 2005, 21:55

Originally Posted by spudchucka

There are some cases where a persons record is relevant.

Normally only taken into account when considering sentencing

**spudchucka** · 13th April 2005, 21:59

Vehicular manslaughter or agravated careless, dangerous or reckless driving requires a number of ingredients to be met before manslaughter can be laid.

**Zapf** · 13th April 2005, 21:59

spudchucka,
On another note, is there any way people can report redlight runners?

**Ixion** · 13th April 2005, 22:01

Originally Posted by spudchucka

There are some cases where a persons record is relevant.

Yes, which is why I said normally.

Originally Posted by spudchucka

I understand that, what I'm asking is whether it could actually be succesfully prosecuted. I'd like the people that slagged off the police at the start of the thread to give some thought to what they were actually saying.

With respect, and having re-read the whole thread, I don't think anyone was slagging off the police. People were angry at a perceived inadequacy of punishment, but that was (and correctly should be ) directed against the
courts and the "system" rather than against the police. The only reason the police would not charge her with something more serious is because whoever makes the decision (I assume it is the police in this country) didn't think they could win a case based on a more serious charge. I don't think that people are slagging off the police (or intending to) when they say "that sucks" (and once again, we haven't heard her story. If we did maybe we would agree that the lesser charge was the correct one.But naturally people will express an opinion based on the only information they have )

**Jeremy** · 13th April 2005, 22:03

Originally Posted by spudchucka

I think you had better re-read that text book.

sorry, I need to rewrite it with capital letters in the right place.

Judges are completely free to make court decisions.
The Law is the complete sum of all court decisions, Statutory laws and a variety of minor things.

Judges can't change Statutory laws. They can however change the Law due to their court decisions having legal precedence in lower courts. Thus any court decision made in the high court (sneakers aren't allowed to be worn inside the court room) holds true in all lower courts. However if the Supreme court or previous Privy court decisions were of else (you must wear sneakers in court) then that would overrule previous court decisions and come into effect in lower courts (district courts).

So there would be nothing to stop the Judges as long as there wasn't a higher court decision made (and it's in the High court so only Privy, Supreme and previous High court decisions would count) from saying that you must always been in complete control of you vehicle at all times.

**Krusti** · 13th April 2005, 22:04

But... the simple fact that she has been charged with Reckless implies she had intent. It was not an accident.

**chickenfunkstar** · 13th April 2005, 23:08

Sorry to hear about your friend Wari,

I never like hearing about things like this, especially when it seems so avoidable.

Hope the driver gets whats coming to her.

**Krayy** · 14th April 2005, 09:44

(Puts on pessimist hat....)

Most likely outcome of this whole thing will be that judge will hand done either short prison term (a few months) or couple of hundred hours community service with a $10k ish fine, but her parents will stump up $40k (isnt that what a lifes worth in NZ based on that case in the Waikato petrol station) and commyute it to no prison, 100 hours community service and defer the fine due to it being her first offence.

(Puts on slightly liberal hat....)
My personal opinion is that yes, the perpertrator of the crime is suffering in their own way, but if the legal sytems stumps up a few "sacrificial lambs" and throws the book at them AND introduces parental responsibility for under 20s for a few years, it will breed this kind of criminal neglect out of the community in stuff all time.

Since NZ is pretty much an authoritarian state (under Labour at least), and none of the politicos in this country want to bang the "when in Rome" drum for the sake of a few million educational bucks (except Winston, but he doesnt have a shit show of passing up anything, especially a free meal from Kermadec) the roads will be full of immigrants who blatantly flaunt the law, buy fake licenses, kill bystanders, bikers and other innocents and (literally) get away with murder.

I suppose its up to the lobbyists and media to get the message through, nad maybe a public referendum will force a law change, but don't hold you breath, just keep your eyes open when you're on your bike.

P.S. Damn door lock grommit didn't do the job, anyone got another idea?

**Zapf** · 14th April 2005, 10:43

Originally Posted by Krayy

(Puts on pessimist hat....)

Most likely outcome of this whole thing will be that judge will hand done either short prison term (a few months) or couple of hundred hours community service with a $10k ish fine, but her parents will stump up $40k (isnt that what a lifes worth in NZ based on that case in the Waikato petrol station) and commyute it to no prison, 100 hours community service and defer the fine due to it being her first offence.

(Puts on slightly liberal hat....)
My personal opinion is that yes, the perpertrator of the crime is suffering in their own way, but if the legal sytems stumps up a few "sacrificial lambs" and throws the book at them AND introduces parental responsibility for under 20s for a few years, it will breed this kind of criminal neglect out of the community in stuff all time.

Since NZ is pretty much an authoritarian state (under Labour at least), and none of the politicos in this country want to bang the "when in Rome" drum for the sake of a few million educational bucks (except Winston, but he doesnt have a shit show of passing up anything, especially a free meal from Kermadec) the roads will be full of immigrants who blatantly flaunt the law, buy fake licenses, kill bystanders, bikers and other innocents and (literally) get away with murder.

I suppose its up to the lobbyists and media to get the message through, nad maybe a public referendum will force a law change, but don't hold you breath, just keep your eyes open when you're on your bike.

P.S. Damn door lock grommit didn't do the job, anyone got another idea?

remember we or our fathers where all immigrants at one stage or another. And remember not all asian's are rich. A lot of the students (asian) are here on their own hard earned money trying to get an education that is more valued in Asia and living on a dime.

What is needed is driver education, and that is not just education about road rules. But about road manners...

2cent...