I have both good and bad news for my loyal reader. Sometime soon, a District Court judge will strongly rule against an appeal case I presented on Monday and that’s the good news! I won’t have to spend any more with my creative people who have presented me with the draft cover of my upcoming book (above and below)

The bad news is that I won’t need to spend money I don’t have to redesign the cover to boast about my amazing legal victory as a self-proclaimed bush lawyer who broke probably the most basic of judicial rules; in court rooms, only a fool has himself as a client. That’s right! I told his honour I was basically a broke aged pensioner who would be conducting my own appeal, drawing on the expert input of all matters law by a relatively new friend of mine – AI or as he is formally known, Artificial Intelligence.

There were two main strands to my presentation: that we could have mounted a far different case at last May’s Magistrates’ Court hearing if a camera operator’s certificate had been in the police brief as expected. Oh, for you to have been there in Roma Street on Monday to hear the judge and me to-and-fro-ing on whether this certificate would have been significant if it had been in play, while all the time trying to remind ourselves that the Police Commissioner’s legal people in their summary of argument for the appeal claimed the certificate didn’t exist in the first place and had basically claimed it was a figment of my imagination. It was speculation on my part; the opposite of a fact! Which is a lie. I know, my wonderful reader, I know! You couldn’t make this shit up, right?

So, all those months over several years when I wrote to the QPD remote camera office seeking the name of the camera operator who signed the certificate and other details of when he or she decided just before the start of operations that day that all speed restriction signs within a school zone were visible and adequate, not once did I receive a reply along the lines of “what you talkin’ about, Willis!”

In my clumsy and awkward presentation, I told Hir Honour that my legal advice before the MC hearing in late May last year was that it was not permissible to question in any way, shape or form the veracity of that certification or to impugn the camera operator’s diligence or professionalism in seeing what she or he saw on the day.

I’m paraphrasing here but the basic message from the bench was “you desperately wanted a certificate included in the police brief that you wouldn’t have questioned anyway!”

One again, while it was becoming increasingly obvious that I had a fool for a client, I did finally explain to His Honour that apart from showing the police prosecutions branch had always thought the certificate was important, we would have argued that signs declared to be visible before the start of operations that day – probably many hours before just after midday when I travelled down Water Street – did not in any way show the situation at the time of the alleged offence. It took me a while to mount those arguments but I really do believe His Honour would have taken them on board as is his duty.

Now for the second plank of my appeal pitch: that the SM had abrogated her duty to be fair to both sides by crossing well over any red line and in so doing greatly favoured the prosecution and weakened our side’s chance of a win.

I suggested a jurist in a higher jurisdiction (hint: his honour) had every right to rule against Magistrate Shepherd’s decision to go looking for supporting evidence once her ultimatum to the police prosecution that her case was flawed and she would not like the decision the SM was leaning towards making if that flaw wasn’t fixed and fixed quickly. The lower-court prosecutor, clearly thrown into the deep end at almost the last moment to conduct what she thought would be a fairly simple paper hand-up prosecution came back after a short adjournment and said she had nothing further to offer.

Now things get very interesting when His Honour asked for the exact page and portion of the lower court transcript that included these exchanges between Shepherd SM and the prosecutor.

“Now that’s a very good question, your honour”, I said, or words to that effect. I explained that I couldn’t find it during a thorough read-through the night before and again on that Monday morning with the almost two-hour delay for the hearing and in the 10-minute adjournment his Honour graciously allowed me to change my ways and behave myself.

But, my dear friends, missing it was, either by accident or design. It was quite a lengthy exchange and recess notification and I while I’m totally prepared to believe a glitch in the court recording system – some audio problem, perhaps – has caused its absence but it is with the one proviso; it is the 21st Century and you’d think a transcription service that times these court proceedings would be duty bound to alert parties to any section not able to be accurately recorded. You all know it makes sense. I will now have to liaise with my barrister over what went down that day. Can I get the police prosecutor on side? Ask Magistrate Shepherd? How do I prove a big and vital slice of the transcript was missing. Where’s a real investigate journalist such as Hedley Thomas when you need one!

So very soon, we’ll be hearing that the little annoying and squeaky cog has been shattered into pieces… for now at least and if my solicitor mate is right, for ever. But maybe the fat lady hasn’t quite sung yet? Is Bud Tingwell still alive?

It’s just what I think of how the rule of law works and who it favours. Nothing on this judicial journey has dissuaded my of that view even if I’m here to declare that I firmly believe the District Court judge is doing a very professional and fair job as he reviews the lower-court hearing and assesses the arguments put before him from both ends of the bar table.

Don Gordon-Brown

Want to be alerted immediately a new blog hits Australia’s longest running and most offensive satire site? Simply click on the Follow sign to be emailed new yarns the moment they are uploaded! The very second we go far too far – and trust us we will – you can then quickly unfollow via the three dots!

Follow The Bug Online on WordPress.com