Public Address | Cafe | Legal Beagle: Urewerrors

Public Address

Thu, 31 May 2012 22:49:35 +1200

Discussion from blog post.

Graeme Edgeler

Thu, 31 May 2012 22:49:35 +1200

And open to comments.

Sacha

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 00:35:35 +1200

whether that view was open to him given the findings of the jury
Are there other NZ examples you can describe for us where the jury's verdict and the judge's sentencing were based on totally opposing core conclusions drawn from the same trial evidence and case law?

Keir Leslie

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 04:21:26 +1200

Of course Hansen would say that his sentencing was based on entirely compatible theories. (I say of course because it is a pretty fundamental principle that you can't sentence contrary to the jury's verdict.) He discusses this at para 43 of his sentencing notes.

(Depressingly, if you want to learn?

Graeme Edgeler

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 08:22:37 +1200

Are there other NZ examples you can describe for us where the jury's verdict and the judge's sentencing were based on totally opposing core conclusions drawn from the same trial evidence and case law?

They're not based on totally opposing core conclusions. It is not completely inconsistent with the non-conclusion?

Rich of Observationz

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 08:49:47 +1200

The allegations that the accused were setting up a private militia are not unproved

But is such an act illegal? I don't believe it is – the jury didn't believe that they'd gone the further step to a criminal organisation. While society might mostly disapprove of people starting such private?

Stewart

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 10:22:37 +1200

Any chance that the police will be called to face charges on their own illegal acts? They seem to be above the law...

Graeme Edgeler

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 10:42:12 +1200

Any chance that the police will be called to face charges on their own illegal acts? They seem to be above the law...

I should be clear that it isn't suggested that the police behaved criminally in conducting the video surveillance. Rather, they committed the tort of trespass.

There is?

Sacha

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 11:06:01 +1200

the non-conclusion on the criminal group charge

as a layperson, is this another instance of 'not guilty does not mean innocent' then?

Lucy

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 13:06:19 +1200

I have a couple of questions:

Firstly, what is the purpose of pre-sentencing reports carried out by Probations? What amount of consideration does the court give them? It is my understanding that in this case the pre-sentencing reports recommended community service for most accused and dismissal or discharge for Emily?

merc

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 14:14:47 +1200

Is it usual for a sentence to be so far from what was recommended and does it matter (on a legal, not ethical, basis)?
It matters a great deal and it's weight is as effective as it's recommendation's acceptance – should the State not be pursuing an obvious vendetta.

Graeme Edgeler

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 15:31:29 +1200

Is it usual for a sentence to be so far from what was recommended and does it matter (on a legal, not ethical, basis)?

Not usual, but not uncommon. And do we really want sentences decided by relatively low-level employees of the Department of Corrections?

Secondly, I second Rich?s question?

Angus Robertson

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 15:55:30 +1200

And if a private militia isn't illegal, why isn't training one a 'lawful purpose' under the Arms Act on the basis that anything not proscribed is allowed?

Training to kill people might be construed as potentially threatening.

Ian Dalziel

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 16:13:34 +1200

Just a militia?
I can?t think of a law that would prohibit it.
Team Tame may have just been a
nascent backwater Blackwater...

Andrew Geddis

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 17:17:32 +1200

"The two judges who dissented in the Supreme Court only did so on the question of whether the evidence should be admitted despite the illegality"

And then one would have thrown ALL the evidence out for EVERYONE (rather than allowed in the evidence for the four charged "seriously").

merc

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 17:50:42 +1200

Not usual, but not uncommon. And do we really want sentences decided by relatively low-level employees of the Department of Corrections?
No, and that is not currently, nor has ever been the case.

Lucy

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 18:16:21 +1200

I need some clarification on the private militia issue. I am unclear as to the intent aspect. Judge Hansen says that they had good intentions in his sentencing notes but says they commited criminal acts in furthering these intentions – as I recall, although I haven't time to check. If?

Just thinking

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 19:46:57 +1200

This was simply the madness of Howard Broad, & the ever growing ego of Tama Iti.

Howie had to use it (Terrorism Suppression Act) or lose it. That he's a fantasist (see Satanic Christchurch Creche) was an unfortunate coincident.

Looking back on the video that made it to light.
It was?

Graeme Edgeler

Sun, 03 Jun 2012 11:13:36 +1200

Howie had to use it (Terrorism Suppression Act) or lose it.

He didn't use it. There's nothing in it for police to use.

Just thinking

Tue, 05 Jun 2012 18:16:33 +1200

Nothing new whatsoever.
I respectfully disagree.
It would be correct in some circles to claim Vietnam was a Police Action not a War, because no formal declaration of war was issued and we were invited to that smoke show.
So too the absurdity of considering this 'Police' action within existing?

Steve Barnes

Fri, 22 Jun 2012 12:39:08 +1200

Urewera pair to serve time at home
Signer was found guilty of five firearms charges and not guilty of five. Bailey was found guilty of six firearms charges and not guilty of four.

The other members of the quartet, Tame Iti and Te Rangikaiwhiria Kemara, were each?

Joe Wylie

Fri, 22 Jun 2012 12:40:24 +1200

Brings a whole new meaning to "Whitey Go Home"
++++++!!!!!!!