Posts by Graeme Edgeler
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
My son's almost the same age - his first vote will be on whether parents are allowed to beat their kids ... he's against it ...
Against it? Sounds like a "no" vote...
we've been talking about how the wording of referendum questions can be made purposely obtuse in an attempt to bamboozle the voters ....
hmmm
-
I don't recall Anderton or Peters doing anything significant that they and Labour had not first told the public about and even taken to an election explicitly.
Some would suggest the EFA (NZF had a specific policy of not making major changes to to electoral law without public support).
I would suggest the Foreshore and Seabed Act.
Others might raise this, said by Helen Clark before the election:
I do not support a ban on smacking. I am opposed to that because I think it defies human nature. ...
-
Our show was, as you might expect, a quieter affair, but I think we brought out some very interesting stuff on the Bain case...
Caught it last night, Russell - but wondering how you got from a not guilty verdict to the sweeping observation that the jury had decided that Robin was the killer?
Indeed, the jury may well have decided that David probably did it, and was far more likely to have done it that Robin, but that they weren't certain he did, so acquitted. You didn't seem to think so, and nor did most of your panel.
-
And the claim that your G & T goes twice as far, twice as fast at altitude turns out to be a wishful myth.
I suspect this myth arises from aeroplane travel. People do feel the effects of alcohol more on aeroplanes, but probably more because of the dual dehydrating effects of the alcohol combined with dry re-circulated air from the air conditioning, than the pressure or height.
-
I'd like to see a society where a Chinese candidate is electable in Tauranga or West Coast.
Or Gisborne?
Oh, wait.
-
Rodney, tell us do, what has Central Government been loading on Local Government for the past two decades? Social, environmental, cultural responsibilities the central gnomes would rather not deal with.
I'm pretty sure that's exactly what Rodney Hide and ACT would tell you. They've been complaining about it for years.
Give me a break!
Has he read the Local Government Act recently? There are these things called the four wellbeings: social, environmental, cultural and economic. They are part of the legislation - so unless he wants to buy a huge fight in redrafting the Act, he should probably zip his flappy lip.
And I'm pretty sure that's exactly what he wants here. He doesn't want the current law to be the law. He voted against it when it was introduced. ACT wants to re-draft local government legislation - which is a major reason why Rodney wanted to be minister of Local Government, and why he's started a process of review.
-
I hate to be a pedant but ... the plural of referendum is referendums.
@Rickai: if you're an Oxfordian, yes...
Myself, I agree ... but take it up with the Parliament of New Zealand. Here we have the Citizens Initiated Referenda Act 1993.
Let's also recognise that we don't do the whole Oxford spelling thing. An Oxonian would recognize it instead.
-
Oddly enough, I'm pretty sure I read someone from the prosecution team complaining that while they had to disclose everything to the defence, the defence could take months assemble its expert witnesses and only unveil them when they got to court ...
This changed with the Criminal Procedure Bill. One of the constituent components of that law was the Criminal Disclosure Act, which, in addition to re-stating the defence obligation to provide advance notice of an alibi, created an obligation for the defence to provide advance notice of evidence to be given by an expert witness.
Yes. It's not a game ... If the police haven't found the defense's story themselves, they haven't investigated properly.
One perhaps can't expect police to go to every expert to find out what all of them might say if called upon by the defence.
-
They didn't publish it, so they're alright?
No. By making it available to the public they probably are publishing the material. But it would depend on the prohibition in the particular suppressed judgment. Just don't automatically think that publication in this sense is as broad as it is in defamation law.
-
Would you then want to hug the accused? And go to a party with him?
That did occur to me.
I would posit that the members of the jury greatly differed in their assessments. Some likely think David probably guilty, others that Robin is the more likely killer. All they had to do was agree that that there was reasonable doubt. It seems that they did.
It appears that the Herald has now removed its own story, having become aware that the Court of Appeal placed a permanent suppression order on the evidence.
I've been out of the country, and haven't been following this closely, but... the Court of Appeal has itself released three Bain judgments whose publication was prohibited:
The ruling on suppression was that:
... we prohibit publication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings (including the result) in the news media or on the Internet or other publicly available database until final disposition of retrial save that publication in a Law Report or Law Digest is permitted.
This is the standard form. I don't know, of course, whether there are other judgments that were suppressed differently.