I do note that Judge Therrien's disclosure failure was not with respect to a case, but in his application to be a judge (the arguable bit being that the conviction he didn't disclose had been expunged/clean-slated).

Yes, but I think that makes it less serious because the Therrien non-disclosure did not cause justice to miscarry the way the Wilson non-disclosure did in Saxmere 1. Also, Therrien had a much stronger case than Wilson to say disclosure was not required because the clean slating provision is actually a statutory pardon and also because of the constitutional provision that says no person shall be denied employment by virtue of a conviction alone (the court holding that a judge was not 'employed' but 'appointed').

I think Wilson would be for the high jump in Canada (and will be here too), and some investigative body should be running the ruler over the cabal of QCs embroiled in this mess.

This gives the flavour of the type of non-criminal misbehaviour that might get a judge removed from office: conducts manifesting an unfitness to continue in judicial office.

I don't think it really does give the flavour as you have focussed on the more extreme examples (as has Wilson's counsel). The Canadian's have removed a judge (Judge Therrien) for misbehaviour for failing to make adequate disclosure, even though he had a strongly arguable legal basis for not making the disclosure.

The question for New Zealand is should we require our judges to behave to the standard Canadian judges are required to, or whether we should have a more relaxed standard.

I also think that the police should have been asked to investigate whether there was an attempt or a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice by deliberately withholding information that led to the SC delivering an erroneous judgment requiring recall.

This is particularly so, in light of Sir Ted's email trail showing that the decision to provide a percentage figure rather than a dollar figure was a deliberate choice and that that decision seems causative of the erroneous judgment.

Also concerning is TT's claim that the percentage figure that Wilson gave to the SC said the account imbalance was 6%, but TT's calculation reveals that figure to be 20%.

I note that in the Hesketh/Beattie case the police investigated the matter first. If we were in the US, the judge and lawyers would probably be before a Grand Jury.

I make no categorical allegation of criminal offending but the circumstances do warrant criminal investigation as they go to the heart of the administration of justice.

Oh, and that doesn't even touch on the most serious allegation by TT that Galbraith was 'tactically briefed' by the BNZ (to whom Rich Hill has a mortgage) once they knew Wilson would be sitting on the case. BNZ were in a position to know that Wilson and Galbraith were so close because they financed Wilson into the business.

If that allegation can be substantiated, removal from the bench would be the least of Wilson's troubles.