I need a lawyer, recommendations please.

**The Stranger:Me** · 20th February 2009, 11:52

Originally Posted by Patrick

Lying? Hmmmm... "lets just say..."

Not 100% sure what you are trying to say there Patrick, but if it is what I think it is then you really don't know Death and do your credibility no favours.

**Scouse** · 20th February 2009, 12:00

Try Barry Hart he got someone that I know off a DIC charge with a technicality even though this person both blew over the limit on the evidential breath test machine, and also provided a blood test that proved him to be over the limit. Hart is tactically very shrewd and he does do Traffic and if you have been set up or mis identified Hart will flesh this out and make the Cop look rather lame in court.

**Madness** · 20th February 2009, 12:09

Originally Posted by Scouse

Try Barry Hart

He wouldn't be considered affordable though, I'd have thought.

**Patrick** · 20th February 2009, 12:27

Originally Posted by The Stranger

Not 100% sure what you are trying to say there Patrick, but if it is what I think it is then you really don't know Death and do your credibility no favours.

It was a poor way of saying "being economical" with the information. My bad. I think you are wrong in what you think......

Originally Posted by Madness

He wouldn't be considered affordable though, I'd have thought.

See the PM....

**HenryDorsetCase** · 20th February 2009, 12:39

Originally Posted by Madness

He wouldn't be considered affordable though, I'd have thought.

ring him and ask! (Note he is a barrister sole, you will need an instructing solicitor). Being a silk, he is sure to be entirely reasonably priced.

I'd like a copy of that cartoon referred to above, for our reception area.

**Dave Lobster** · 20th February 2009, 13:04

Originally Posted by Patrick

99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 9999999999999 percent of those who appear in court are as guilty as sin to start with?

Yet still the judge gives them bail to reoffend..

**Patrick** · 20th February 2009, 13:07

Originally Posted by Dave Lobster

Yet still the judge gives them bail to reoffend..

Sigh.... So true.... What can ya do? Keeps us gainfully employed though... doing bail checks and chasing up on the crime spree he/she commits while on bail

**HenryDorsetCase** · 20th February 2009, 13:16

Originally Posted by Dave Lobster

Yet still the judge gives them bail to reoffend..

dont blame the judges for that, blame your politicians. Who makes the laws that REQUIRE a Judge, except in quite circumscribed circumstance, to issue bail. And who elects politicians? oh yeah, we do. Blaming Judges for having to play by the rules of the game (to adopt a sports analogy) is as retarded as blaming a rugby referee if your head gets stomped at the bottom of a ruck. or maul.

**HenryDorsetCase** · 20th February 2009, 13:17

Originally Posted by Patrick

Sigh.... So true.... What can ya do? Keeps us gainfully employed though... doing bail checks and chasing up on the crime spree he/she commits while on bail

hopefully only crimes against property and only so they can afford their lawyers.

**Scouse** · 20th February 2009, 13:20

He charged $5,000 for that case although that was about eight years ago.

**Patrick** · 20th February 2009, 13:27

Originally Posted by HenryDorsetCase

dont blame the judges for that, blame your politicians. Who makes the laws that REQUIRE a Judge, except in quite circumscribed circumstance, to issue bail. And who elects politicians? oh yeah, we do. Blaming Judges for having to play by the rules of the game (to adopt a sports analogy) is as retarded as blaming a rugby referee if your head gets stomped at the bottom of a ruck. or maul.

Originally Posted by HenryDorsetCase

hopefully only crimes against property and only so they can afford their lawyers.

Fair call... but why then are some judges "harder" than others...? Absolutely right about having to play the rules.....

Some of the 5 gang banger murderers here are seeking ebail. (Electronic monitoring). What a joke.

**Beemer** · 20th February 2009, 13:48

A mate's partner has just been done for dangerous driving - narrow windy wet road, oncoming truck around blind corner partially in his lane, he braked, skidded his 4WD into truck. Cop arrived, seemed to believe truck driver's claim he was entirely within his own lane and didn't really do much investigation. Friend was in vehicle when it happened, together with son and two large dogs, and got injured as their vehicle was quite badly damaged.

They felt strongly they were in the right so hired an independent accident investigator, who gathered all the evidence, spoke to cops, etc and discovered from the measurements that the truck could not have been in its own lane. He presented this evidence at court and by the sound of it even the cops agreed with him - but they still lost and are now looking at an appeal. Cost them about $4000 so far but he doesn't want a dangerous driving charge hanging over him. They live somewhere with no public transport so losing his licence would mean no job for him.

I never thought I'd be in court defending a traffic charge but I got done with going through a red light years ago - I admitted I'd gone through an orange light as it changed when I was about 20 feet away. I didn't think I had time to stop and as the guy behind me ended up 10 feet into the intersection after he saw the cop car in the side street and braked, I reckon I was right. At court the cops tried to remove the charge of going through a red light and replace it with going through an orange light and were told no, they had proved their case - but the JP hearing the case then halved my fine! I still wasn't happy and must confess I have hated traffic police ever since!