Court - What to expect

[The Stranger:Me]

Well for a start:


Make it so if somebody pleads not guilty then that sticks, no going back - none of this dragging out the process knowing they're guilty .

This is to stop the normal process of when they realise they are screwed and having stalled for months they at the last minute, change plea to guilty to get 'credit for an early guilty plea' and a lesser sentence.

Ditto for the cops. None of this changing the charge at a later point.
For example, charging someone for dangerous, going to court, pleading not guilty, going to court and having the judge tell the cops to go back and consider careless without loss of license, going to court to find out that the cops are sticking to dangerous and set a hearing date then going to court only to find lo and behold the Police have changed the charge to careless with no loss of license on the day of the case.

18 months delay without me stalling one minute - and hey, I'm only too happy for Patrick to verify that one.

They trump up the charge so as people think they get a bargain and take the guilty plea when they get the real charge. This practice is so wide spread that it was noted as a big time waster by lawyers in a review of court proceedings.

You wouldn't expect petty cat and mouse antics like this from a professional law enforcement agency serious about reducing the burden on the court system. The Police aren't serious about this, so don't even bother with trying to blame others until your house is in order.

[scumdog]

Ditto for the cops. None of this changing the charge at a later point.
For example, charging someone for dangerous, going to court, pleading not guilty, going to court and having the judge tell the cops to go back and consider careless without loss of license, going to court to find out that the cops are sticking to dangerous and set a hearing date then going to court only to find lo and behold the Police have changed the charge to careless with no loss of license on the day of the case.

18 months delay without me stalling one minute - and hey, I'm only too happy for Patrick to verify that one.

They trump up the charge so as people think they get a bargain and take the guilty plea when they get the real charge. This practice is so wide spread that it was noted as a big time waster by lawyers in a review of court proceedings.

You wouldn't expect petty cat and mouse antics like this from a professional law enforcement agency serious about reducing the burden on the court system. The Police aren't serious about this, so don't even bother with trying to blame others until your house is in order.

You tell it from your side - I'll tell it from mine.

That way it's a fair balance of info.


And often-times the charge is suitable - but plea-bargaining goes on from both sides for various reasons.

[Patrick]

None of which means he was telling bullshit right Patrick?

Seriously, if you think it does, then he is right to be very wary. Simply because you are unable to prove him innocent (right) doesn't make him guilty (wrong) you realise? Or do you?

I'm sure you'll get over the red - eventually.

Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't.... When in doubt, leave it. But it was an easy confirmation. And to be wary of what? That I will transfer back to the Shore and join the Ginga just to hunt him out? LOL......

Did I get red? When???

I could have passed the relative information onto The Stranger and have him confirm the details, a compromise that would probably kept you happy.
However seeing your arrogance shine through for all to see ["its only real if a cop says so"], and watching you self implode with frustration has put a hold on ending the saga; however the details of the ticket will be shown to The Stranger next time I see him, not to prove a point, but to strengthen a friendship.

Twas a simple fix... anonymity assured.

Now you are quoting things I have never said.....

Frustrated? Self implode? Pfft. Get real.

From my user notes:

Observations on police and court conduct.

---

What a fucken shamble our court/police system is, I have never actually answered in court for my alleged minor traffic misdemeanours, however while waiting for the rude coppers to show; and over the course of the last two tickets I observed the following:

• Chaos reigns inside the court. Paperwork is invariably missing, as are both the copper and defendant. A worried dance is conducted between the JP's, prosecution, defendant and court officials as everyone tries to bring a case together. A surprising amount of time they do not succeed.
  
  This is true. Two way street and all....
  
• Information management is 18th century. Stacks of paper precede each case. As far as I could see electronic management of information is non existent, and I cannot remember seeing a computer.
  
  Pretty sure the North Shore District Court has computers. We even have em here in the Naki!!! But yeah, the paper work is huge. One charge generates 5 copies of nearly everything....
  
• The coppers do not always get their way in court. JP's express a fair deal of frustration at their collective stalling, absence and tardy preparation.
  
  Ay????????? A concession?????????????
  
• Ironically coppers are believed in the most tenuous of circumstances. If a cop points the finger you are pretty much fucked.
  
  Oops.... my bad.... as you were..... a slight contradiction to the point just above...???
  
• Coppers get away with not turning up. The case is re-scheduled endlessly so they can show.
  
  You're wrong. Cops or a witness doesn't turn up, without a GOOD excuse, bye bye case, there and then. Not so for the "Defendant..."
  
• Again ironically if you don't show its all over. Even when half blinded with a migraine I rang prosecutions explained my illness and requested re-scheduling. The case still went ahead that day and I had to beg for a re-hearing.
  
  Partly right... depends what the charge is. If monor, can be dealt with once a no show. If more serious, a warrant gets issued and the whole thing starts all over.... again... when the defendant is found. To be repeated as many times as necessary.... sometimes......
  
• A high level of confusion and incompetence is apparent within NZ police, and/or corruption. It took me a while to accept both as a certainty.
  
  You're entitled to your "opinion" and to the "way you feel..." Whether it is right or wrong is in the eye of the beholder....
  
• The court [or crown], coppers, lawyer and defendant all have vested interest within the law system. For the crown its gathering money while presenting the illusion of 'justice'. I suspect for the coppers its mainly ego, boasting 'I have never lost a case' together with an often twisted belief they are 'doing the right thing'. For the Lawyer its most definitely money, they will be more than happy to see you sink if it means more cash for them. And for the defendant money is also a motivating factor, i.e. the removal there of.
  
  I know anyone I deal with IS guilty, but hey, I'm not the judge. If in doubt, let it go, they will come again. I have lost a few cases. There would not be a single copper out there who has NEVER lost a case, but I can say I have NEVER locked up an innocent.... Ego? Nah.
  
• Case and law is constructed around vested interest, hence the crown always believing the police. The preceding paragraph touches on this erroneous belief. When immersed in the system an individual has some appreciation of law as a 'game'. Justice is a by product and often not present on minor cases.
  
  Ahhh... but as you said earlier, cases are lost.... Remember BAIN?
  
• Defending a case costs so much money [to be completed satisfactorily] that questions of true justice are blatantly obvious in absence. Doubt me?......if it costs $500 to defend a case and the fine is only $250 guess what the outcome will be [duty solicitors are fucken useless and do not count].
  
  Now this is right.
  
• The police used confusion around hearing dates to nail me and waste endless hours and lawyer dollars. It seems that official notification via a letter is an after thought-you may or may not recieve a letter. If you do not recieve a letter and the court date is changed, you are left with no effective document to refer to when seeking a re-hearing.
  
  You will find the courts change the date. Police can request a change, as can the defence, but both usually need to agree to the date for many a reason, for a start.....
  

Without question for me personally the removal of trust for the police has been the worse aspect. I am constantly amazed at the high level of incompetence, dishonesty and corruption I have personally experienced, so much so that from now on all association with police in my leisure time will now desist, its purely a matter of trust. Some superlative individuals exist within the force, but I fear they are islands of honesty mired within a filthy sea of mediocrity.

Your choice. Sad that your few matters out of many millions country wide seem to be your issue. It helps sometimes to seek out the bigger picture.

[SixPackBack]

Are other users able to view your users notes? I took a quick look in your profile, but couldn't spot where to see them................?

Click on the 'police issues' tag at the bottom of my posts.

[The Stranger:Me]

You tell it from your side - I'll tell it from mine.

That way it's a fair balance of info.


And often-times the charge is suitable - but plea-bargaining goes on from both sides for various reasons.

So for the other times (read most of the time), trumping up a charge is acceptable so there is something to bargain with?

And this is apparently acceptable - for various reasons, yet there can be no valid reason to change a plea?

So lets take a hypothetical case, say some numpty is pulling wheelies and the wrong guy gets blamed for it. He's indignant and pleads not guilty. After being jerked around for 12 - 18 months by the system, he's still pissed off but cost have mounted, the stress has increased as for 18 months he's not known whether he'll have a job or not and he's been saving for the lawyer and still has a lot more to pay. Now, he decides fuck it, it's not worth the stress and the cost so decides to accept guilty, take the reaming and get on with life. That's somehow unreasonable of him to change his plea?

I changed plea based on cost benefit. Ok the cops at the last minute reduced the charge (I guess because little old lady didn't show) but based on time off of work and lawyers fees meant it was prudent to get the fuck out of there, also incidentally saving court time which the Police were hell bent on wasting. So a plea change, which you oppose can in fact save court time and costs.

Why do you argue with sixpack?
You argue like fuck, then come out with arguments which makes his case for him. I don't get it, why do that?

[Patrick]

[QUOTE=The Stranger;1129440467]So for the other times (read most of the time), trumping up a charge is acceptable so there is something to bargain with?

Yer what? "Trump up charges?" LOL...

And this is apparently acceptable - for various reasons, yet there can be no valid reason to change a plea?

So lets take a hypothetical case, say some numpty is pulling wheelies and the wrong guy gets blamed for it. He's indignant and pleads not guilty. After being jerked around for 12 - 18 months by the system, he's still pissed off but cost have mounted, the stress has increased as for 18 months he's not known whether he'll have a job or not and he's been saving for the lawyer and still has a lot more to pay. Now, he decides fuck it, it's not worth the stress and the cost so decides to accept guilty, take the reaming and get on with life. That's somehow unreasonable of him to change his plea?

[B][I]No, not unreasonable. Stupid... but not unreasonable. If he is innocent, he would have fought to the death, or named the offender, perhaps. That is, if they had the wrong person in the first place.... Perhaps that was the "defence"... as in "there were so many of us, how could they know I actually did do that...????

I changed plea based on cost benefit. Ok the cops at the last minute reduced the charge (I guess because little old lady didn't show) but based on time off of work and lawyers fees meant it was prudent to get the fuck out of there, also incidentally saving court time which the Police were hell bent on wasting. So a plea change, which you oppose can in fact save court time and costs.

The little old lady not showing possibly meant the case was probably going to be tossed, so they reduced the charge, so it could be resolved there and then, and you accepted.

What you didn't say was, whether you were guilty of "something" in the first place?

[scumdog]

So for the other times (read most of the time), trumping up a charge is acceptable so there is something to bargain with?


Why do you argue with sixpack?
You argue like fuck, then come out with arguments which makes his case for him. I don't get it, why do that?

Bad sentence (ooh, pun!) the often times should have been just after 'but' and just prior to 'plea bargaining'.


And in answer to the last comment?
Why ruin a good thread with sensible unrebuttable statements and facts??

[Toot Toot]

Jesus is this still going. Off to your rooms the lot of you untill you can come out and play nicely.

[paddy]

Jesus is this still going. Off to your rooms the lot of you untill you can come out and play nicely.

Yup. It's like the energizer bunny. I thought that might happen - I just didn't quite anticipate how vitriolic it would become. Never mind, I got my question answered though - what can I expect the format of the hearing to be like. I'll probably update you all after the date, although at this stage I have written to the Registrar and requested an adjournment/continuance as I have yet to receive disclosure of the informants evidence.

P.

[SixPackBack]

Jesus is this still going. Off to your rooms the lot of you untill you can come out and play nicely.

As long as individuals are being butt shagged by the authorities [they used the 'black monster cock' on your arse if memory serves me right] this will never stop.

[Toot Toot]

[they used the 'black monster cock' on your arse if memory serves me right]

Yep, they did... and it had a wee umbrella on the end that opened up once inside me and they proceeded to tear it out.
Have had a run in with Hazard country sheriffs again a few months back. Will fill you in on a few lies he told to the JP next time I see you. I gotta be a good boy on here.

[SixPackBack]

Yep, they did... and it had a wee umbrella on the end that opened up once inside me and they proceeded to tear it out.
Have had a run in with Hazard country sheriffs again a few months back. Will fill you in on a few lies he told to the JP next time I see you. I gotta be a good boy on here.

I don't. ..........I can speak the truth and there is fuck all they can do about it.

[SixPackBack]

.........I've also had some bad experiences in court, and it has led me to understand court is not about justice. And now I advise people never aim for the "just" outcome, aim for the best in the circumstances and walk away. Trying to achieve the "just" outcome in court is soul destroying...............So what would you change to improve things?

Great piece of advice. Particularly in any case where the cost of defence out weighs the possible fine and/or consequence, and if there is one part of our justice system that needs change it is this part. Under this system justice is of secondary concern, and the defendant thinks of nothing else but the possible monetary consequence, should they take the services of a lawyer and win the case they still lose-out of pocket for 'doing the right thing'. The system is a complete farce.
An easy fix would be the crown reimbursing individuals who are found not guilty, this is likely to have a devastating effect on the cash grab we currently suffer under minor traffic offences, it would choke the courts, and ensure coppers actually grabbed the bad guys instead of acting like the gestapo [at least in Hazzard].

[peasea]

Why do you argue with sixpack?
You argue like fuck, then come out with arguments which makes his case for him. I don't get it, why do that?

Because he's a knob?

[jono035]

Couldn't a large amount of this be explained away as 'it depends on which JP you're up against'?

If the previous statements about JPs being given no real training is true, then surely you will get some sheltered do-gooders who think that someone should be thrown in jail for even contemplating taking a corner at more than the posted speed in the same way that you will get some that are as jaded towards the system as anyone here?

If that is the case then toss in a little own-perspective bias and we've got an argument over what again?