T
… not quite but please stay with me on this one.
Distorting Humphrey’s words from that 1942 classic seems as good a way as any to focus on the subject at hand as I present yet another draft chapter from my upcoming book on just how mind-numbingly stupid and mentally unbalanced I must have been to take on the Queensland judicial system.
Chapter ### – Praise for SM just a tad over the top!
A recent chapter centred on the one thing that stood out, as the Latin expression In oculis canine testiculous clara luce goes, in Acting District Court judge Haddrick’s dismissal on 31 July of my notice of appeal. And that was his clearly stated and obviously long-standing admiration of Magistrate Shepherd, my lower-court dispatcher.
As stated in his findings, His Honour said the SM had analysed the case “in her characteristically thorough way”, and “carefully, in a business-like way” and had conducted herself “in an exemplary fashion”.
That glowing assessment of Magistrate Shepherd’s skills as a jurist with an apparently untarnished record of professionalism, decency and fair dealing gave me some hope that His Honour in the interest of such professionalism, decency and fair dealing would have spent considerable time before April 13 to check what sort of person I am as well.
I can only hope that not a great deal of research would have been needed to reveal my years as a volunteer Meals on Wheels driver, making good use of those spare hours between rain-or-shine, pre-and-after-school, duties as a lollypop lady, and the nights spent as a volunteer at several local hospitals. Plus the fact that the Red Cross blood bank suspended me on a number of occasions over the decades for trying to donate multiple times in a month! It’s just the sort of guy I was…. and hopefully still is, just without the dizzy spells.
Oh, the more I think about it, maybe it’s best if Judge Haddrick did none of that research as I’ve never done any of those things but I am considering doing them… one day. I’ve been a bit more of a self-centred prick than someone with any real community-minded spirit.
So what else in the learned jurist’s long-awaited findings tickled my fancy? At the bottom of page 6 of his judgement, his learned honour took time out from cutting and pasting large wads of text from the respondent’s summary of argument to castigate me for the “contention” that the magistrate had gone searching for proof of the commission of an offence. The appeal judge thundered in his findings that “the magistrate did not go searching for proof, but rather, adjourned the court effectively to conduct a voir dire about a legal issue that arose during the trial..” Voir dire means to speak the truth, which most commonly refers to a “trial within a trial” used to decide preliminary questions of law or evidence. Another bit of Latin lingo the teachers at Aspley State and High Schools let me down over.
My argument that the magistrate went searching for the evidence she needed to have the matter concluded by day’s end was not contention, Sorry, judge, but searching for evidence is exactly what she did. The magistrate repeatedly criticised the prosecution for not presenting any evidence that my car when captured on camera was in a 40km/hr school zone. Now, it is true that in preparation for standing down, the magistrate said: “I don’t really see it as my job to start wading through this…” But after telling both parties to look into the deficiency in the police case that she had alerted them to, our learned appeal judge must have missed this bit just before the adjournment: “And I’ll have a look at myself..”
But in the hour’s break, a good look is what she had. Outside the court, the police prosecutor told us the magistrate had found what she needed and we were not likely to be happy with her decision. I don’t believe the SM shared that with my barrister and I was in his company throughout the break.
And on resumption, here’s the SM again: “So, I must say, I went through it myself, I think I’ve worked it out, but I’m happy to hear what you’ve both got to say” before making it clear she would indeed be happy if both sides could just let her explain “how I interpret it all and if you both agree” and get this thing done and dusted that afternoon. Let’s just repeat that “I think I’ve worked it out” bit. The police prosecutor had
In journalism. we are taught that the essence of any story should be conveyed in an intro that covers the how, what, where and why of the matter – some of them at least – and one technique the tyro in me was taught was to frame a short, sharp, mental telegram to myself that does that. Example: A really big shark bit a swimmer in half down near Redcliffe jetty at 2.40pm this afternoon.
For me to declare the magistrate went looking for the information she needed to find me guilty IS AN ACCURATE SUMMARY OF WHAT TOOK PLACE.
I’ve seen some people pick some pretty silly hills to die on – myself on quite a few issues – but for Judge Haddrick to take grave exception to, and try to score points on, my fair and reasonable assessment of what went down at the lower-court trial that day beggars belief. Did we read different transcripts?
It is my firmly and honestly held view that the judge’s interpretation of the lower-court transcript is sciocchezze assolute,
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!
