David Bain vs The Crown - game over

[Madness]

The guy was guilty!

That's very prejudicial of you Ed. You know no more about this case than the rest of us here which is about five-eighths of sweet fuck all. Certainly not enough to go screaming "guilty". You should ask for forgiveness from your imaginary friend for being so short-sighted.

Why let him off in a stupid technicality? What if next time he kills one of your loved ones?

Based on what I know about the case Scummy has shared with us (as much as you do) he wasn't "let off in a stupid technicality" at all. The case was thrown out because the popo had failed (once again) to meet the requirements of THE LAW. If my loved ones were killed and the defendant walked under the circumstances Scummy has described I'd be angry as fuck - with the NZ Police.

I bet you think you possess common sense, too...

No more or less than the average bloke. You on the other hand are obviously well short of average.

Sharpen up Ed.

[Madness]

The cop wrote down the correct time - but the lawyer went hair-splitting about the cops accuracy in reading the time - NOT that his client 'only got nne minutes and fifty seconds' per se - but that it might not have been a full 10 minutes.

And a person would REALLY suddenly change their mind in a second?

None that I've met - when asked at the end of their ten minutes they have already made up their mind - some before the ten minutes even starts.

"Walk a day in my moccassins" instead of sniping away on a key-board - oh and tell me what you do so's I can find fault with you/your workmates/procedure etc??



Nah, don't worry about it, I'm above doing that.

And apart from that, even if I did so it would be as productive as your criticisms - nowt will change because of them.

Oh, cry me a fucking river why don't you!

The job of the popo is to uphold the law by working within the law. If you pillocks can't do that effectively it's either because the law needs re-writing to make it simpler for you cunts to understand or you chumps just aren't up to the task.

I hope the driver in question didn't injure anyone, it would suck if that were the case.

Sharpen up, NZ Police.

[scumdog]

If my loved ones were killed and the defendant walked under the circumstances Scummy has described I'd be angry as fuck - with the NZ Police.

Now THAT'S the Kiwi way

Slap the drunk driver on the back and blame the cops.


Don't worry, Judges don't accept technicilities the same way they use to, a lot of loopholes (badly written laws) have been blokes off.

So there's less chance of you needing to be 'angry as fuck'.

BTW: How should those that shoot through to Aussie be handled, how should the cops nail that technicality???

[98tls]

That's very prejudicial of you Ed. You know no more about this case than the rest of us here which is about five-eighths of sweet fuck all.



Based on what I know about the case Scummy has shared with us (as much as you do) he wasn't "let off in a stupid technicality" at all. The case was thrown out because the popo had failed (once again) to meet the requirements of THE LAW. If my loved ones were killed and the defendant walked under the circumstances Scummy has described I'd be angry as fuck - with the NZ Police.



No more or less than the average bloke. You on the other hand are obviously well short of average.

Sharpen up Ed.

Wonder what would happen in such a case if a judge grew some balls and told the defendants lawyer to stop wasting his time and convicted said defendant.Many in this country would applaud i am guessing but no doubt there would still be an uproar from the tree huggers.

[Madness]

Now THAT'S the Kiwi way

Slap the drunk driver on the back and blame the cops.

I'm certainly not slapping anyone on the back. Fact is, the guy wasn't convicted therefore he should be considered innocent until proven otherwise. It's the law and if you don't like it maybe it's time for a career change?

Don't worry, Judges don't accept technicilities the same way they use to, a lot of loopholes (badly written laws) have been blokes off.

So there's less chance of you needing to be 'angry as fuck'.

Law changes won't eradicate popo incompetence though so there's always a chance, eh?

BTW: How should those that shoot through to Aussie be handled, how should the cops nail that technicality???

In the case of someone rowing a boat or kayaking, there's probably fuck all that can be done. This probably never happens though in reality. If defendants are escaping to overseas countries through an airport whilst on charges or worse, on bail, then someone's fucked up, again. Who's held accountable when this happens? That's right, fucking no-one.

Now THAT'S the Kiwi way.

[98tls]

Oh, cry me a fucking river why don't you!

The job of the popo is to uphold the law by working within the law. If you pillocks can't do that effectively it's either because the law needs re-writing to make it simpler for you cunts to understand or you chumps just aren't up to the task.

I hope the driver in question didn't injure anyone, it would suck if that were the case.

Sharpen up, NZ Police.

Katman...is that you?

[Madness]

Wonder what would happen in such a case if a judge grew some balls and told the defendants lawyer to stop wasting his time and convicted said defendant.Many in this country would applaud i am guessing but no doubt there would still be an uproar from the tree huggers.

It would have gone to the High Court on appeal and if the case was thrown out in the District Court as Scummy has intimated, I'd say the appeal would be successful. The law is the law. These pricks get paid good money to uphold it and get all the support of the Crown Law Office. There's no excuse, it just amazes me it so long for a clever defence lawyer to think of it.

I'd hazard to guess that you'd be pretty stoked if you were the defendant in question, tree-hugger or not.

Katman...is that you?

Great minds...

[scumdog]

I'm certainly not slapping anyone on the back. Fact is, the guy wasn't convicted therefore he should be considered innocent until proven otherwise. It's the law and if you don't like it maybe it's time for a career change?



Law changes won't eradicate popo incompetence though so there's always a chance, eh?



In the case of someone rowing a boat or kayaking, there's probably fuck all that can be done. This probably never happens though in reality. If defendants are escaping to overseas countries through an airport whilst on charges or worse, on bail, then someone's fucked up, again. Who's held accountable when this happens? That's right, fucking no-one.

Now THAT'S the Kiwi way.

(a)Doesn't worry me.

(b)Tell me how you propose to eliminate this 'incompetence'

(C)And you know I wasn't talking about boats or kayaks. - So how WOULD you expect that 'technicality' to be eliminated?

C'mon man, you're starting to bore me...

[98tls]

It would have gone to the High Court on appeal and if the case was thrown out in the District Court as Scummy has intimated, I'd say the appeal would be successful. The law is the law. These pricks get paid good money to uphold it and get all the support of the Crown Law Office. There's no excuse, it just amazes me it so long for a clever defence lawyer to think of it.

I'd hazard to guess that you'd be pretty stoked if you were the defendant in question, tree-hugger or not.



Great minds...

You only have to read the court news in any paper throughout the country to see how much support coppers get,sfa.

[Madness]

(a)Doesn't worry me.

(b)Tell me how you propose to eliminate this 'incompetence'

(C)And you know I wasn't talking about boats or kayaks. - So how WOULD you expect that 'technicality' to be eliminated?

C'mon man, you're starting to bore me...

A) Why did you bring it up then?

B) By instilling a culture of accountability in the NZ Police, just as there is in almost every other Govt. Department / Private Sector.

C) Are there not Police stationed at every International Airport in this country? If so, are they only tasked with searching for minute amounts of Cannabis and chatting up Flight Attendants? It's hardly what I would call a technicality anyway. If you (the popo) don't want a defendant to travel overseas do something about it within THE LAW.

I'm not here to entertain you Scummy, I certainly don't get paid for that so I refuse to be held accountable for it.

[Madness]

You only have to read the court news in any paper throughout the country to see how much support coppers get,sfa.

I'm not talking about hot cups of tea & cuddles. I'm talking about legal support from above, of which they get a metric shit-load more than any defendant.

[scumdog]

I'm not here to entertain you Scummy, I certainly don't get paid for that so I refuse to be held accountable for it.

WELL!
That's the end of a beautiful relationship....

[scumdog]

C) Are there not Police stationed at every International Airport in this country? If so, are they only tasked with searching for minute amounts of Cannabis and chatting up Flight Attendants? It's hardly what I would call a technicality anyway. If you (the popo) don't want a defendant to travel overseas do something about it within THE LAW.

HAH!
Let's see you get that legislation changed..

"Nah mate, off to my brothers wedding, I'll be back in time for Court no sweat..."

So I guess (notice I said guess) your idea would be: "You are summonsed to Court on xxx date, you are required by law to surrender your passport forthwith" - or somat similar?


The boredome is getting worse...

[scissorhands]

I have spawned a monster

[Madness]

HAH!
Let's see you get that legislation changed..

"Nah mate, off to my brothers wedding, I'll be back in time for Court no sweat..."

So I guess (notice I said guess) your idea would be: "You are summonsed to Court on xxx date, you are required by law to surrender your passport forthwith" - or somat similar?


The boredome is getting worse...

How is this any different to failing to appear simply because they've absconded to Gore? It's not!

I think it's you lot that are struggling and maybe need a law change, I couldn't care less.