Killeen affair (updated)

December 13th, 2012

This debacle gets worse.

Behind the NBR paywall is a depressing report that the judge (Mary-Beth Sharpe) had tried to reserve rights to censor Radio New Zealand coverage of the trial.

The Herald has taken the story up, and we are reminded that earlier proceedings were made secret.

The overall impression from what is public, is of prosecution and defence as a privileged profession colluding with its even more privileged members in the judiciary to shield favoured members in ways that they would not for ordinary people.

Good judges often do, and should, approach lawyer defendants rigorously. We should know better, but more importantly on the Casear's wife principle, lawyers should accept that the courts will err if necessary to emphasise that there is no favouritism.

My initial post focussed wrongly on the gender and class issues. This is now a more serious case which appears to present favouritism from the prosecution, indifference to the victims, and the misuse of the power the Court should never have been given, to keep it all secret for as long as possible.

Filed under Criminal Justice, Free Speech

Comments

You have touched on an exceedingly serious matter here, that the main stream media want to ignore.
There is little chance of ever determining the wager, but I would bet good dough that if the miscreant was male, the hairy legged feminists of the MSM would be going crazy on this case.
And, if they do respond to my comment, it will be to label me misogynistic. It is much easier to call out epithets than it is to rationally discuss this most serious matter.

The Killeen case is not unique . Also this year , a ( female ) Crown prosecutor used a brief Court adjournment as an opportunity to visit the local supermarket & take about $200 worth of goods. She claimed she was embarrased to present the goods at checkout , so it was easier to hide them . I forget the exact outcome , but I believe she effectively “got off lightly”.
What about Mr Feeley himself , helping himself to 4 bottles of expensive wine belonging to Bridgecorp ?
Call me cynical , but it seems sometimes whenever we see prosecutors or police up on charges , they are dealt with VERY lightly . Defence counsel are a different story.

Emma Garnett was an Auckland lawyer who in 2009 was convicted of stealing $194,000 from clients.

For over a year after being charged she managed to get her name and even that she was a lawyer, suppressed for all sorts of reasons, including that her mother was a Taupo City Councillor, and that she was worried about the health of her baby – conceived whilst before the Court.

Her case took a long time to reach Court. She was sentenced to 3 years prison but the Court of Appeal reduced it to 11 months Home Detention….

http://www.verify.co.nz/news-theftnz.php#theftnz-emma-garnett-20100507

From one who was there at the sentencing:Now Ive been in a lot of courtrooms over the years both as a Police Officer in the UK and latterly as the General and Inspectorate Manager of Auckland SPCA. The result was so obviously biased in Killeens favour and the Judges summing up painted her as the victim it made one feel physically nauseous. One can only hope that the Police do appeal and justice is done. On a minor point I note that much has been made of the pro bono panel that Killeen established. Look at the facts which can be found in the annual reports on spca.org.nz. When I was there prosecution rates increased by 400%. The rates of prosecution where in the late 40s and early 50s per year. Since I have left and the new panel has taken over 9 last year which is the LOWEST figure in record.

Think the pro bono panel is less of a success than expounded?

Combine this with the recent IRD investigation into SPCA Auckland et al for GST and tax fraud, the charity commission investigation and perhaps an admitted forger is well suited to this charity and its Board?