“that would be interesting (but anathema to the criminal bar) would be a requirement for the defence to exchange briefs of evidence in advance, together with a restriction preventing them being used by the prosecution unless and until the evidence had been called… but I may well be alone in thinking that that might work.
Really ??? It seems Hayden you’ve spent more time prosecuting at the Bar than defending . What you propose here flys directly in the face of that premise …innocent until *proven* guilty .. . love the part particulalry about the Crown being able to cross examine on the Brief of evidence if the defence witness strays when testifying -awesome!! Golly gosh . Although Simon Power no doubt would be in complete agreement with you . I presume you were joking .
I practise regularly at the defence bar …. and i can tell you its becoming more and more of a chore for various reasons . Too many to go into here .
Not overly concerned with obligations to declare defences pretrial — I imagine myself and my colleagues particulalry in serious trial matters, will deny each element point by point if that’s what’s required – sigh. Generally the likely defence to be run is apparent anyway . Just another knock to the defence bar implying that it is we who ‘clog the system’
If the Prosecution/Crown did not so often over charge ….. that would speed things up considerably and invite more guilty pleas. If we were allowed to test veracity of key prosecution witness’s in pretrial hearings – that too would decrease jury trials and infact did decrease jury trials, when we had depositions hearings . Sometimes your client actually needs to hear the complainant testify – and in many cases a guilty plea follows and Trial is averted . Or the Prosecution realise their case is extremely flimsy – hey hey their witness’s aren’t quite the angels they thought they were – and charges are amended down adccordingly.
I think one of the more interesting things about the Bill in current form is that if a charge carrys more than 3 years prison but does not fall into the very serious mandatory Jury Trial cat 4 -= then it will be trialed summarily unless J Trial is elected . A judge alone Trial on say a rape charge would be very very strange indeed . From the defence perspective though I would anticipate Jury Trial would generally be elected .
Jurys are an amazing part of our system — amazing working infront/with them . Gawd thank Shamus Simon Power’s disappearing before he can erode them further.
Actually think the best thing about the immortals area is you can escape for a while and have a drink in s pleasant space -cause if you ain't on any other rec drug and you do feel like a few drinks, then the pen option in the stadium really is very very hideous. Why do all the Brit festivals do this so much better? I recall the first bdo where you could grab a drink and take it anywhere and it was fine . Wouldn't it be amazing if the promoters actually scouted around for a nicer venue full stop. I mean why not?
Read Sam Harris - The Moral Landscape, really good in that Richard Dawkins kind of way. La Nina is good for surf on aucklands west coast beaches and they have not disappointed, lots of clean slightly overhead surf days, water fairly warm too - though alas never as warm as Bali. Auckland sea temps get to 20c at best - 25c would be sooooo nice.
Russ - repeat - seeing the fall requires not just good familiarity with whatever their most recent 2 albums happen to be at the time , but further you kinda need to really be a big fan of the same. Anything less and you get left in the cold . Remember for example those bend sinister and frenz experiment tours in london - we loved them because we loved the albums . Mark E will prolly never compromise on that position which is why he is such a unique artist in todays greatest hits music world. Gary S really likes their last 2 albums - thus his enthusiasim for the gig.
Gary Sullivan - dimmer/ solid gold hell/ jpse ,on the fall at the power station the other night - "best gig I've seen in years, a very long time since I've felt that from a band"
ps - you missed best movie - exit through the gift shop - genius
The naked and famous - the sun , what a tune - I was thinking more Dimmer - I believe you are a star - period. Surf City's album too I think is going to be pretty sweet . Like Street Chant but the tune I keep hearing sounds like die die die - which tis no bad thing.
Pete - ha, yeah I used to find it weird seeing that radio live advert with the daily show too - gave me the hee bee jeebees. I blame that on 1. Laws, sssshhhuuder and 2. radio live ? never listen to it, too busy with the b. Where as the daily show was mostly a fine giggle. I'm bummed at this news . So little to watch on the box, yet so much time.
District 9 was a dull clunker of a movie, lacking in ideas and souless ....zzzzzzzz - prolly should have walked out . Give me, 2001, Blade Runner, Gattaca (sp?), hell even Iron Man, at least the later made me laugh. District 9 Over rated ? massively, - goodies badies ...goodies win, kinda ... and nothing in between .
Looked like SA in the 70's to me , perhaps it was meant to. Not so modern then ...sci fi pretence notwithstanding.
yup as graeme says -
land transport amendment act 2009 comes into force 1 december this year .
goes like this -
If an officer has 'good cause to suspect you are driving under the influence of a drug or durgs' ( eg he opens the door and the car reeks of pot, or you're weaving all over the place but pass a roadside screening test for alcohol) s/he will require you to undergo a roadside 'impairment test' .
If you fail that test you will then be required to accompany back to the station (mandatory) for a blood test .
If the result of that test turns positive for any controlled drug *no matter how little* you will be prosecuted as if you are a drunk driver - the penaltys on conviction are the same . It will be a defence to call medical evidence to show the drug which showed positive was administered on medical grounds .
The concerning thing most immediately obvious is if you used cannabis a few days back - it will presumably still be in your blood stream , but clearly not affecting your driving at the relevant time - (although for some reason you did fail the 'roadside impairment test)you go down .
gulp - I can see a heap of work here - want my card ??
Actually I thought the guy from Whittaker's on the tv was cool . Very old school in a Wily Wonker kind of way . The other guy was all PR briefed, friendly cheese smiles etc zzzzzz . We need more of those old fellas on the box. Cosed eyes is quite a good look . Sleepy even .