Author Topic: Prejudice  (Read 728 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Holly Goodhead

Prejudice
« on: August 24, 2017, 07:45:11 PM »
I have found Justice Callinan showing prejudice to various family members.  Eg He gives a glowing report of RB:

An excerpt from point 169:

"He was a deeply religious man and generally maintained a cheerful demeanour.  He was a man of impeccable character and altruistic intent".

1.  The fact he was said to be deeply religious is neither here nor there.  Having a religious affiliation does not preclude someone breaking the law or sexually abusing children.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_abuse_scandal_in_the_Congregation_of_Christian_Brothers

2.  Many witnesses, lay and professional, described RB as depressed and devoid of emotion. 

3.  Since RB was not interviewed or cross-examined over LB's claims no one knows whether his reputation: "impeccable character and altruistic intent" would withstand scrutiny.

However, when it comes to claims from AB and LB re sexual abuse witnesses are written off as not credible even the medi doctor who diagnosed LB suffering a STD:

An excerpt from point 39:

The first is hearsay evidence given by various people of statements claimed to have been made to them by Laniet of a long standing incestuous relationship with her father.  The original source of all this evidence is Laniet.  It is relied upon by the Applicant as proving a motive on the part of her father to slay Laniet, and all of the other members of the family, *except the Applicant.  Witnesses gave evidence that Laniet had told them that she was about to reveal to the family that her father had been carrying on the incestuous relationship with her for many years.  There was sought to be associated with that evidence other evidence given by a Ms Emma Blackwell of a statement alleged to have been made to her by Arawa when the latter was about 10 years old of a sexual practice introduced to her by her father.  Dr Marjolein Copeland's evidence depended, in part at least, upon statements made by Laniet, her opinion as to the meaning of them, and inferences that she was disposed to draw from them

*Yes because he went to bed at 8.50pm on the Sun eve in preparation for his alarm going off at 5.30am to carry out his paper round whilst other members of the family were still up and about and privy to LB's disclsoures.

Samson what have you got to say about all of this?   And will you be getting up early on Sun to watch the Red Roses thrash the Black Ferns  8(>((
Pele In A Skirt....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwbxluAF1mw

2018 Radio 1 Ibiza Prom with DJ Pete Tong, Jules Buckley and The Heritage Orchestra...enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs3BXVTF7mw

Offline Samson

Re: Prejudice
« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2017, 08:54:08 PM »
I have found Justice Callinan showing prejudice to various family members.  Eg He gives a glowing report of RB:

An excerpt from point 169:

"He was a deeply religious man and generally maintained a cheerful demeanour.  He was a man of impeccable character and altruistic intent".

1.  The fact he was said to be deeply religious is neither here nor there.  Having a religious affiliation does not preclude someone breaking the law or sexually abusing children.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_abuse_scandal_in_the_Congregation_of_Christian_Brothers

2.  Many witnesses, lay and professional, described RB as depressed and devoid of emotion. 

3.  Since RB was not interviewed or cross-examined over LB's claims no one knows whether his reputation: "impeccable character and altruistic intent" would withstand scrutiny.

However, when it comes to claims from AB and LB re sexual abuse witnesses are written off as not credible even the medi doctor who diagnosed LB suffering a STD:

An excerpt from point 39:

The first is hearsay evidence given by various people of statements claimed to have been made to them by Laniet of a long standing incestuous relationship with her father.  The original source of all this evidence is Laniet.  It is relied upon by the Applicant as proving a motive on the part of her father to slay Laniet, and all of the other members of the family, *except the Applicant.  Witnesses gave evidence that Laniet had told them that she was about to reveal to the family that her father had been carrying on the incestuous relationship with her for many years.  There was sought to be associated with that evidence other evidence given by a Ms Emma Blackwell of a statement alleged to have been made to her by Arawa when the latter was about 10 years old of a sexual practice introduced to her by her father.  Dr Marjolein Copeland's evidence depended, in part at least, upon statements made by Laniet, her opinion as to the meaning of them, and inferences that she was disposed to draw from them

*Yes because he went to bed at 8.50pm on the Sun eve in preparation for his alarm going off at 5.30am to carry out his paper round whilst other members of the family were still up and about and privy to LB's disclsoures.

Samson what have you got to say about all of this?   And will you be getting up early on Sun to watch the Red Roses thrash the Black Ferns  8(>((
The reality is Callinan was crooked as a dog's hind leg. He could see exactly what was wanted of a retired judge for 400k, with no doubt grand children and so on to help. His report is a travesty that our government wanted for polling purposes. Because so many New Zealanders are pig ignorant of the science in the case and have decided DB is guilty without any evidence, they could not be seen to compensate.
Joe Karam accuses John Key directly of this corruption. John Key made his money front running the New Zealand dollar from a trading desk in New York. This is essentially unlawful, but not understand by the mugs that let him do the same when selling New Zealand to China to inflate the property market for his voting base.
I lament for both New Zealand and Australia in this insufferable Bain debacle.
Is that plain?
I have the same view of Teresa May of course and her carefully avoiding Jeremy Bamber and his plight when in the box seat to do so herself.
I will complete posting the Binnie transcriptions soon in which you will see cast iron proof of Judith Collins' false statements in her handling of his report.
I really can't express too great a contempt for the venality of the politicians in the whole process.

ps I see the netball question. It always looks an awkward jerky sport to me. But good luck against our girls, you'll need it.  ?{)(**
Ok now I see it's rugby.Same applies....
« Last Edit: August 24, 2017, 09:13:18 PM by Samson »

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Prejudice
« Reply #2 on: August 25, 2017, 01:16:30 PM »
The reality is Callinan was crooked as a dog's hind leg. He could see exactly what was wanted of a retired judge for 400k, with no doubt grand children and so on to help. His report is a travesty that our government wanted for polling purposes. Because so many New Zealanders are pig ignorant of the science in the case and have decided DB is guilty without any evidence, they could not be seen to compensate.
Joe Karam accuses John Key directly of this corruption. John Key made his money front running the New Zealand dollar from a trading desk in New York. This is essentially unlawful, but not understand by the mugs that let him do the same when selling New Zealand to China to inflate the property market for his voting base.
I lament for both New Zealand and Australia in this insufferable Bain debacle.
Is that plain?
I have the same view of Teresa May of course and her carefully avoiding Jeremy Bamber and his plight when in the box seat to do so herself.
I will complete posting the Binnie transcriptions soon in which you will see cast iron proof of Judith Collins' false statements in her handling of his report.
I really can't express too great a contempt for the venality of the politicians in the whole process.

ps I see the netball question. It always looks an awkward jerky sport to me. But good luck against our girls, you'll need it.  ?{)(**
Ok now I see it's rugby.Same applies....

Imo he displays unacceptable levels of prejudice against certain groups based on nothing other than preconceived ideas.  Eg he writes off testimony from the sex workers and Dean Cottle who worked alongside LB by virtue of their lifestyle.  However testimony wasn't just restricted to those working in the sex industry but also the man (manager/proprietor?) of the convenience store, medi doctor and AB's friend.  Testimony from other middle class people who claim they saw RB and LB together and the relationship seemed normal father/daughter were taken at face value and believed over others.

He even said those who end up working as prostitutes have often suffered sexual abuse.  EXACTLY! 

He labels all family members as dysfunctional other than AB and SB.  And yet MVB claims SB was in trouble with the law.  In what way was DB dysfunctional? 

I must confess I found his description of the state of 65 ES amusing along with his account of MB.

Did JK (or anyone) visit PNG to check out the Bains particularly any evidence of improper behaviour by RB towards children in his role as missionary/teacher?  In the UK anyone working with children is checked out:

https://data.gov.uk/publisher/criminal-records-bureau

It seems to me PNG would be paradise for anyone with an unhealthy interest in children.

He pours scorn on the computer message and yet highlights in his report RB's passionate interest in computers. And fails to recognise what singled DB out from other family members was that he went to bed much earlier due to his early start for his paper round and may have been the only one not privy to any disclosures made by LB.

Maybe...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYUoK8dcR-E
Pele In A Skirt....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwbxluAF1mw

2018 Radio 1 Ibiza Prom with DJ Pete Tong, Jules Buckley and The Heritage Orchestra...enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs3BXVTF7mw

Offline Samson

Re: Prejudice
« Reply #3 on: August 25, 2017, 10:28:50 PM »
Imo he displays unacceptable levels of prejudice against certain groups based on nothing other than preconceived ideas.  Eg he writes off testimony from the sex workers and Dean Cottle who worked alongside LB by virtue of their lifestyle.  However testimony wasn't just restricted to those working in the sex industry but also the man (manager/proprietor?) of the convenience store, medi doctor and AB's friend.  Testimony from other middle class people who claim they saw RB and LB together and the relationship seemed normal father/daughter were taken at face value and believed over others.

He even said those who end up working as prostitutes have often suffered sexual abuse.  EXACTLY! 

He labels all family members as dysfunctional other than AB and SB.  And yet MVB claims SB was in trouble with the law.  In what way was DB dysfunctional? 

I must confess I found his description of the state of 65 ES amusing along with his account of MB.

Did JK (or anyone) visit PNG to check out the Bains particularly any evidence of improper behaviour by RB towards children in his role as missionary/teacher?  In the UK anyone working with children is checked out:

https://data.gov.uk/publisher/criminal-records-bureau

It seems to me PNG would be paradise for anyone with an unhealthy interest in children.

He pours scorn on the computer message and yet highlights in his report RB's passionate interest in computers. And fails to recognise what singled DB out from other family members was that he went to bed much earlier due to his early start for his paper round and may have been the only one not privy to any disclosures made by LB.

Maybe...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYUoK8dcR-E
Good to see a logical mind Holly. It does seem important for people to bracket the crimes and see them the same way. ?This should be a powerful reason to show your people what a travesty the Bain case is and that JB is getting the same treatment. Transcription complete, but here is the bit on pig with lipstick Judith Collins, she would strike Kermit a mighty blow.

KH:
When you look back on this… I dunno like how long did you spend doing the support like 9 months, 10 mths?

IB:
Ah, well I started in January and I finished at the end of August

KH:
Right.. and you wrote up your report, and you sent it off, what was the first inkling you got, that the government or the minister was unhappy with it.

IB:
I had some inkling beforehand that the minister was a sort of Law and Order character and she was not going to be pleased with my view, the first contact I had, I was summonsed - I was in Cairo at the time, to come to Auckland to meet with the Minister,

KH:
This is Judith Collins now..

IB:
Yes JC, and I had a 15 minute meeting, which meant I’d spent about an hr in an aeroplane for every minute I had with the Minister, I had the very clear impression she had not read my report.
She certainly knew what the bottom line was, and she had a briefing note, which I had been given beforehand, which set out 3 points, those are the only points that she touched on, and when I responded, one of them was this thing about Michael Guest, er, Michael Guest says he’s guilty

KH:
MG is a lawyer…

IB:
MG is the original defence lawyer, and defence lawyers aren’t very happy when a client spends 13yrs in jail, and is then acquitted by the Privy Council - why the minister would attach importance to what MG said, is beyond me, but the minister did not seem to realise,

KH:
But hang on, you’re saying MG is a defence lawyer right?

IB:
Yep.

KH:
So why would a defence lawyer feel obliged to say that DB is now guilty. Are you suggesting that because someone else has found him innocent, he’s aggrieved.

IB:
No no what Im suggesting is that theres a certain level of professional embarrassment if you have unsuccessfully defended uh, somebody… it makes you feel better in the end if they’re guilty anyway

KH:
Alright I understand… yep.

IB:
My point is this, that when I replied to the ministers point about MG has sent me an email that DB is guilty, I mean there was zero registration on the face of the minister, (long pause) that I had even dealt with this in my report. And in fact what she was telling me, I had already ACCEPTED in the report in black and white, I said on this point, I said I accept what MG said, the minister didn’t seem to realise that.

KH:
By which you deduce that she did not read the report.

IB:
Well there were a number of items er.. for example she has one or another of her points had to do with Sir Thomas Thorpe, who had interviewed DB, who really concluded that his application for clemency shouldn’t go anywhere because… er there was nothing to it - well of course a few years later the Privy Council said yes! theres a lot! Theres a lot here and theres a real problem with this case and we are quashing the convictions not as technical miscarriages of justice but the word they used was this has been an ACTUAL miscarriage of justice.
So how one can leap-frog back over the Privy Council to ’Tommy Thorpe’ she called him, years before and say well look what Tommy Thorpe says, suggests that she had no grip of anything that had gone on, ah in between, all of which was in my report.

KH:
It seems that JCollins told Dr Robert Fisher that she believed that there were significant problems with your report
I wonder, how she concluded that.. have you any ideas?

IB:
Yes I have no doubt at all that the prosecutors John Pike and er, his colleague, had been with the Bain case for years, they were very heavily committed to the prosecution they had gone to the Privy Council - lost at the Privy Council, had gone into this 12 week re-trial,  lost at the retrial. they didn’t want to give up! There is no way JC could have prepared that letter of instruction, I think it came straight from the prosecutors and she signed off, and away we went.

KH:
Yes, you’ve thought about this a lot since haven’t you.

IB:
Ive certainly thought about the process a lot, which I think was deeply unfair I think that the…

KH:
Unfair to who?

IB:
I think it was unfair to the NZ public. And one of the thing that I think surprised me, is that if you put my report, Fisher’s commentary on my report, and Callinan’s report side by side, you will see that Callinan has essentially disrespected all of the same rules that Fisher’s laid down, that I disrespected. And the reason is that its not that Callinan is wrong, and I was wrong, the reason is that Fisher is wrong.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2017, 10:33:39 PM by Samson »

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Prejudice
« Reply #4 on: August 29, 2017, 02:41:02 PM »
Samson thanks for the above interesting read!

I find Justice Callinan extremely prejudiced.  I will find the parts in his report and post them up.  Examples include a witness who provided an unfavourable character reference re MB.  Apparently when MB was teaching at a time before she had her children she would make inappropriate comments of a sexual nature in front of middle aged "spinster" teacher colleague.  The inference being virginal or sexually naive.  How would anyone know?  She may well have been a regular swinger or had a bit on the side. 

He refers to RB as a "strong Christian" and associates this with altruism and some othr virtue but I can't recall what it was now.  Since when does having a strong faith automatically preclude someone from evil acts?

He makes much of DB's "zoning out" and yet fails to appreciate DB first made reference to this not others.  Why would DB admit to this to incriminate himself.  It seems to me DB was burning the candles at both end and this was probably the reason for his "zoning out".  He rose early for his paper round but doesn't always appear to have gone to bed early.  He run competitively and entered triathlons and doesn't seem to have paid much attention to his diet, eating junk eg chips.  He was at uni, helped his mother in the garden, sang in a choir, participated in opera and plays.

Two judges with very different styles: Justice Binnie seems more wordly and liberal and Justic Callinan small minded and conservative/traditional.     
Pele In A Skirt....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwbxluAF1mw

2018 Radio 1 Ibiza Prom with DJ Pete Tong, Jules Buckley and The Heritage Orchestra...enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs3BXVTF7mw

Offline Samson

Re: Prejudice
« Reply #5 on: August 29, 2017, 08:29:30 PM »
Samson thanks for the above interesting read!

I find Justice Callinan extremely prejudiced.  I will find the parts in his report and post them up.  Examples include a witness who provided an unfavourable character reference re MB.  Apparently when MB was teaching at a time before she had her children she would make inappropriate comments of a sexual nature in front of middle aged "spinster" teacher colleague.  The inference being virginal or sexually naive.  How would anyone know?  She may well have been a regular swinger or had a bit on the side. 

He refers to RB as a "strong Christian" and associates this with altruism and some othr virtue but I can't recall what it was now.  Since when does having a strong faith automatically preclude someone from evil acts?

He makes much of DB's "zoning out" and yet fails to appreciate DB first made reference to this not others.  Why would DB admit to this to incriminate himself.  It seems to me DB was burning the candles at both end and this was probably the reason for his "zoning out".  He rose early for his paper round but doesn't always appear to have gone to bed early.  He run competitively and entered triathlons and doesn't seem to have paid much attention to his diet, eating junk eg chips.  He was at uni, helped his mother in the garden, sang in a choir, participated in opera and plays.

Two judges with very different styles: Justice Binnie seems more wordly and liberal and Justic Callinan small minded and conservative/traditional.     
Yes Holly, the pdf is complete now. It is remarkable Binnie's command of detail. I will post when I figure doing attachments for the full record, but here is what he says towards the end.

KH:
It sounds like you have been waiting for your day ’not in court’ for a while.
IB:
I don’t think there's been a case in my career when I feel that the process has been so deficient and operated so unfairly and I think, too, the extent that the case is known now outside New Zealand, now, it's given NZ a black eye.

A black eye alright.

I have spent the last two days in the high court watching a private prosecution of a secret witness for perjury and perverting the course of justice, whose testimony convicted David Wayne Tamihere of the murder of two young Swedes in 1989. David spent 20 years in jail for a crime he didn't do, and as usual, we know who did, a man called Huia George Foley.
Not a policeman in court to watch their force being disgraced.
A guilty verdict is assured, and New Zealand will be almost as shocked as they will be when Mark Lundy is exonerated in October. Nostalgia and I and professor Chris Halkides are helping write that appeal because there is no one else around. People imagine the case closed. Wrong again.






Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Prejudice
« Reply #6 on: August 31, 2017, 08:28:43 PM »
Yes Holly, the pdf is complete now. It is remarkable Binnie's command of detail. I will post when I figure doing attachments for the full record, but here is what he says towards the end.

KH:
It sounds like you have been waiting for your day ’not in court’ for a while.
IB:
I don’t think there's been a case in my career when I feel that the process has been so deficient and operated so unfairly and I think, too, the extent that the case is known now outside New Zealand, now, it's given NZ a black eye.

A black eye alright.

I have spent the last two days in the high court watching a private prosecution of a secret witness for perjury and perverting the course of justice, whose testimony convicted David Wayne Tamihere of the murder of two young Swedes in 1989. David spent 20 years in jail for a crime he didn't do, and as usual, we know who did, a man called Huia George Foley.
Not a policeman in court to watch their force being disgraced.
A guilty verdict is assured, and New Zealand will be almost as shocked as they will be when Mark Lundy is exonerated in October. Nostalgia and I and professor Chris Halkides are helping write that appeal because there is no one else around. People imagine the case closed. Wrong again.

There's no doubt in my mind JB's conviction will be quashed.  I'm pretty certain Kitty Heels (if still in office) will order a public inquiry hopefully led by a judge from overseas.  How cool if it was Justice Binnie.   8(>((  Lol if he thinks DB's case was deficient and unfair I've no idea what he would make of JB's.

I read up a little on the David Tamihere case.  He had a lot of previous which I appreciate doesn't mean he was guilty of what he was convicted of.  Good luck with ML. 

Pele In A Skirt....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwbxluAF1mw

2018 Radio 1 Ibiza Prom with DJ Pete Tong, Jules Buckley and The Heritage Orchestra...enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs3BXVTF7mw

Offline Myster

Re: Prejudice
« Reply #7 on: August 31, 2017, 09:06:52 PM »
There's no doubt in my mind JB's conviction will be quashed.  I'm pretty certain Kitty Heels (if still in office) will order a public inquiry hopefully led by a judge from overseas.  How cool if it was Justice Binnie.   8(>((  Lol if he thinks DB's case was deficient and unfair I've no idea what he would make of JB's.

I read up a little on the David Tamihere case.  He had a lot of previous which I appreciate doesn't mean he was guilty of what he was convicted of.  Good luck with ML. 

No matter how often you repeat that, trying to convince yourself it will happen, there's not a cat in hell's chance of it coming true... sorry, Holly!

Neither will Ian Binnie (or any overseas judge, ftm) ever get the chance of reviewing the Bamber case, after Bain led him astray with his feigned forgetfulness.  Rather than having one judge strike lucky with a $400,000 jackpot, it would have been far more sensible to split the money three ways for a better balanced result. Three law academics can't be wrong about Binnie's report, surely...

https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2012/12/three_law_professors_on_fisher_v_binnie.html/comment-page-17
A Hotty for Holly, playing Postman Pat... https://youtu.be/V3W-iLdwi20?t=169

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Prejudice
« Reply #8 on: September 01, 2017, 11:22:33 AM »
No matter how often you repeat that, trying to convince yourself it will happen, there's not a cat in hell's chance of it coming true... sorry, Holly!

Neither will Ian Binnie (or any overseas judge, ftm) ever get the chance of reviewing the Bamber case, after Bain led him astray with his feigned forgetfulness.  Rather than having one judge strike lucky with a $400,000 jackpot, it would have been far more sensible to split the money three ways for a better balanced result. Three law academics can't be wrong about Binnie's report, surely...

https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2012/12/three_law_professors_on_fisher_v_binnie.html/comment-page-17

Only time will tell, Myster, Myster!

Since when do lawyers, law academics or judges decide on a defendants fate at retrial?  They certainly have a major role in influencing the verdict but ultimately the final decision rests with jurors and they found DB 'NOT GUILTY' in a court of law at retrial. 

https://uk.video.search.yahoo.com/search/video;_ylt=A9mSs3Z8LalZ4yQA4wNLBQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTEydGs0ZTRxBGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDQjM0NzFfMQRzZWMDc2M-?p=DAVid+bain+found+not+guilty+youtube&fr=moz35#id=1&vid=9e3a364b7fc473afdb5cf52d0e0dd23a&action=view

The law academics you have quoted are all from NZ and I guess they felt somewhat put out by having a judge from another country, Candada, finding fault with their judicial processes and systems.  In any event it seems they are debating esoteric points of law rather than case specific evidence.  I also note they are all male too.  Perhaps a bit of wounded male pride.   

I wonder what a US judge would make of it.  As it involves a mass shooting I would be most interested to hear his/her views.  Samson do you know if Judge Michael Heavey has a view on DB's case?

Imo it comes down to this in both cases, DB's and JB's, NZ and UK did not have the homegrown expertise to deal with a criminal trial involving a mass shooting where the perp was 1 or 2 with only 1 of the 2 to take to the stand.  I suspect had more females been involved in terms of police and lawyers they would have done the sensible thing and sought expertise from overseas eg US.   

You can see from the following list of countries by firearms related deaths per 100,000 population per year:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

NZ = 1.07
UK = 0.23
US = 10.54
Pele In A Skirt....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwbxluAF1mw

2018 Radio 1 Ibiza Prom with DJ Pete Tong, Jules Buckley and The Heritage Orchestra...enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs3BXVTF7mw

Offline Samson

Re: Prejudice
« Reply #9 on: September 01, 2017, 12:22:12 PM »
There's no doubt in my mind JB's conviction will be quashed.  I'm pretty certain Kitty Heels (if still in office) will order a public inquiry hopefully led by a judge from overseas.  How cool if it was Justice Binnie.   8(>((  Lol if he thinks DB's case was deficient and unfair I've no idea what he would make of JB's.

I read up a little on the David Tamihere case.  He had a lot of previous which I appreciate doesn't mean he was guilty of what he was convicted of.  Good luck with ML.
Witness C was found guilty of  8 counts of perjury today. It was an interesting dynamic, the activists were doubting the prosecutor's pro bono methods, there was a certain amount of feather unruffling following the verdict.
The Lundy documents were filed at 5pm.
I suspect the crown will negotiate before October 14, because they have been served an avalanche of material which can't be countered. Lundy is innocent and every day in jail is a blot on the NZ copybook, but frankly we are an inbred crew of abject morons. Nostalgia and I battle on bravely.

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Prejudice
« Reply #10 on: September 01, 2017, 12:23:34 PM »
One of the law academics, Andrew Geddis, said the following:

"The idea of a panel is not a bad one.  Maybe two NZ Judges or QCs who have had nothing to do with the case, and one Australian"?

Why not put it out to other English speaking countries where there's a high incidence of gun related crime and mass shootings such as SA and US?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

AUS:  0.93
CAN:  1.97
NZ:    1.07
SA:    8.30
UK:    0.23
USA: 10.54

I guess commonwealth countries share most aspects of criminal law.  What takes precedence experience of the evidence or shared law that evaluates the evidence? 
Pele In A Skirt....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwbxluAF1mw

2018 Radio 1 Ibiza Prom with DJ Pete Tong, Jules Buckley and The Heritage Orchestra...enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs3BXVTF7mw

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Prejudice
« Reply #11 on: September 01, 2017, 12:44:55 PM »
Witness C was found guilty of  8 counts of perjury today. It was an interesting dynamic, the activists were doubting the prosecutor's pro bono methods, there was a certain amount of feather unruffling following the verdict.
The Lundy documents were filed at 5pm.
I suspect the crown will negotiate before October 14, because they have been served an avalanche of material which can't be countered. Lundy is innocent and every day in jail is a blot on the NZ copybook, but frankly we are an inbred crew of abject morons. Nostalgia and I battle on bravely.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/witness-in-trial-double-murderer-david-tamihere-found-guilty-perjury

I suspect similar happened with JM. 

That's the problem with remote sparsely populated islands with a signficant land mass 8(0(*

Pele In A Skirt....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwbxluAF1mw

2018 Radio 1 Ibiza Prom with DJ Pete Tong, Jules Buckley and The Heritage Orchestra...enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs3BXVTF7mw