.
When cases come before a magistrate it is assumed that there will be both fairness and justice albeit within the framework of the the Magistrates jurisdiction and the limited scope of cases brought before a Magistrate.
What has come to the attention of media recently is the case of an apprentice painter who came before Rodney Crisp on a matter and was then detained in custody on the draconian charge of contempt of court relating to blowing a bubble gum bubble during the case.
Mr Crisp, charged the man with contempt and jailed him for 30 days. The man has subsequently been released on appeal to the high court by his lawyers who are pursuing his rights and entitlements on his behalf.
The charge sheet alleges the man had "scandalised" the court and "challenged its authority" by looking in the magistrate's direction and deliberately blowing and popping a bubble.
This is a case, in my opinion of a magistrate drunk on power, where it seems he is so out of touch with reality that I would question his ability to be just and fair and to hold the position of magistrate at all.
In my opinion he would have served the court better to have asked an officer to remove the man to dispose of the gum, which would have made the man look like the fool he was attempting to be rather than make a mockery of the whole court by what I believe is a draconian abuse of power and a dummy spit by a flaccid and powerless individual outside of the court.
We have to rein in the costs of holding court procedures, not increase them by making more work for more lawyers and imposing costs of detainment upon the taxpayers because some pathetic magistrate looses it.
Further, the case will more than likely have to be continued which also adds to the court costs and increases the workload of magistrates and lawyers unnecessarily.
I firmly believe that the charge of contempt needs to go, there is little doubt that quite a large number of people in the community already have contempt for the legal system and this sort of rubbish from a magistrate who already has several controversial decisions to his name is not helping.
.
8 comments:
This happens too often. A couple of years ago two people were sent to the Watch house for contempt, even though one apologised 'if she had upset the Magistrate or those in attendance'. The Magistrate refused to accept her apology claiming that her 'attitude' showed she was not sincere.
It seems that some magistrates are experts in psychology as well as the law????
What is the saying - give them an inch............. [they think they are rulers]
I would like to know why magistrates are not regularly monitored or at least assessed on their performance?
There really is no excuse for a magistrate to jail someone for simply being impertinent, and I was ready to flame your blog I must admit, but you have put up what is a very valid course of action that could have been used to humble an arrogant participant in what should be a solemn affair rather than have a carnival atmosphere with bubbles that go pop.
Nice job, criticism is no good without alternative solutions and you've given both and made sense as well.
I really do think the young fella needed a lesson in respect but the Magistrate will have only lessened any respect for authority the young bloke might have had.
they say the law is an ass, and in this case that appears to be spot on.
Yes well our court system is about making lawyers rich, not really dispencing justice on behalf of the victims. That's why so many Lawyers are becoming politicians, so that the state won't take it over, even though that is what should happen
I recently went to court over a drink driving incident where I just blew 0.05 and rightly fronted the court. Rather than just punishing me, the police lied to the Holland Park Magistrate in an attempt to suspend my license. With no evidence, they accused me of "aggression", When that didn't work, they said I was a danger because I was depressed with the lies and was forced to front a psychologist. When that didn't work, they then changed their reasoning to "he is a road menace" and produced someone else's driving record! I was allowed to keep my license but only after wasting the court's time six times. The Magistrate did not question the police's version once, even after their case collapsed. I was however told by the Magistrate to change my story because I had said I was out collecting mangoes from a tree which I had been given permission to pick. The Magistrate said he would have to charge me with theft as the owner was not present! How was this relevant?
I am now an anarchist and hate the law.
I say good on Rodney Crisp!! The community needs to hear the message that crime and disrespect for the law and our courts will not be tolerated! Fair to say that many "tough" crims are now too scared to come before Mr Crisp.
I say your a Crispy bumchum
Rodney Crisp is an arsehole. He’s refused protective orders for people at risk of violence. He needs to be investigated.
Post a Comment