Well! Well! Well!

The date for my execution has now been set with the associate for the District Court judge who heard my appeal against a Magistrates’ Court speeding conviction advising just yesterday that His Honour’s decision will be handed down at 9.30am this Friday.

It finally brings to an end Waiting for the Axe to Fall, the by-far longest chapter in my upcoming and latest loss-leading book (at top and below)

Last Friday marked the 14th week since His Honour first indicated he would have his decision ready.

So without further ado, here is the final sub-chapter in that lengthy section of the book. Well, the early draft anyway. It will be tidied up by experts who can write well just before publication.

CHAPTER XXX: Waiting for the axe to fall.
Sub-section: I’ll beheading into the city then.

The waiting is finally over. After last Friday, July 24, went by with still no word from the District Court registry as to when the District Court judge would rule on my appeal against a Magistrates’ Court conviction for speeding in a school zone. I really thought somewhere just before Christmas would be the date for justice delayed to be finally undenied.

But now, out of the blue and totally unexpected, the associate for His Honour Acting Judge Haddrick emailed just yesterday (July 28) advising that the time and date of execution (my paraphrasing there) will be this Friday August 31 at 9.30am.

Will I go? I’m not sure because the associate said the matter to be dealt with at week’s end involved some other stupid bugger …

… but I’ll probably go along to see what he’s dressed like. I could be wrong but I think Justice Haddrick likes people with business in his court to dress smartly and deferentially.

So, anyone who has stayed the distance is probably still wondering why I expect my appeal to be denied. As my solicitor has enjoyed saying on several occasions: “You do know you’re going to be hosed out of the District Court, don’t you?” His theory is that courts at any level hate drivers who put darling Queensland school kiddies at risk, and especially darling Catholics at a prestigious school such as Terrace.

At the lower-court hearing, the magistrate took great advantage of a police prosecution decision not to include a certificate that, under existing legislation as far as I can make out, would have required her to consider the state of speed signs at the time of my alleged infringement. Freed of that need, the SM found the information she needed to make a very black-letter reading of the case and find me guilty.

My guess is that my learned appeal judge will have taken much the same strictly legal interpretive route, citing case studies of mistakes of law versus mistakes of fact and other highbrow legal mumbo-jumbo to override any concerns he might have entertained about a camera operator’s certificate that the Police Commissioner’s counsel has argued never existed; and a lower-court transcript that may or may not be missing a crucial exchange between the magistrate and the police prosecutor.

On that second point, it’s been two months since I wrote to QTranscripts requesting the audio and typed transcripts be examined to see if I was right about a crucial section being missing. My best guess is that you, my reader, will not be surprised that I have never received a reply, not even the courtesy of an acknowledgement of it being received. Why should QTranscript’s behaviour be any different to how various agencies have treated me during this folly of a judicial journey of mine? So many roadblocks in my way to information; so many rabbit holes I’ve been sent down.

Maybe the appeal judge has been advised my transcript claims were unfounded. Maybe that’s not the case but he’s taken the view that regardless of what exchanges might have taken place in the lower court, the magistrate had not exceeded her powers and therefore had not become an advocate for the prosecution that would have seen her abrogating her duty to be fair and balanced to both sides.

So regardless of what happens on Friday, I safely make some predictions. No government agency – not Queensland Revenue, not the Remote Camera Office, not anyone else – will ever again send letters to motorists who have received an infringement notice, claiming that a remote camera operator has certified all signs in a restricted speed zone were clearly visible and adequate on the day. Never, ever, again.

Police briefs will never, ever, again contain anything that might suggest that the police service itself thinks that the state of signs might be something magistrates need to consider. If police don’t know the rules, who the fuck does!

Freed of such restrictions, magistrates will only have to satisfy themselves that a vehicle was in a restricted speed zone. No silly excuses. No defence. And if Justice Haddrick rules as expected on Friday that the SM did nothing wrong, it will be almost impossible for a magistrate to be found guilty of overstepping a clear boundary line and becoming an advocate for one side or the other.

And, lastly, lawmakers will eventually have to rewrite the rules to accommodate the rulings magistrates will be making as a matter of course from now on anyway.

And I will go to my grave knowing that if I couldn’t win this appeal on this issue, no one ever will.

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!