20

Now there's a surprise, Not!

by Whaleoil on March 25, 2010

It must be cool being a judge or an ex-judge with mates all over the place so that when you get in trouble you can just make the case disappear just like that [snaps fingers].

The funny thing about this case is that the repeaters don’t actually tell us why in the middle of the case it just gets dismissed. There were two witnesses, the ex-judges explanation had more holes than a colander and it is dismissed? Why was it dismissed? What did the presiding judge say? Was it a case of “Sorry old bean. had to make it look like a real trial you know, bit of a bother, but case dismissed, oh and you can slip out through my chambers”.

Here is the really offensive part about this ex-judge;

“He said, ‘I didn’t do that.’ He said, ‘I’m a judge. I wouldn’t do that and my integrity would outdo that man’s.”

What a stuck up c*nt. He doesn’t even know the person who witnessed his alleged vandalism, but says to the policeman investigating that his integrity is better than the witness! Why? Because you are an ex-judge. F*ck off! I know hookers that will attest to the lack of integrity of some judges, and I just bet this ex-judge is one of them.

There is a lot more ‘splaining to do on this case for sure.

Tagged: •

Related posts

  • garry

    I think that before they were judges … judges were lawyers … hmmm – i think there is a connection.

    They are appointed by who??? (i dont know-honestly i dont) and therefore because they are appointed to sit in judgement on the unwashed (us) – of course they can quite legitimately claim to be above reproach?

    Try sitting in the family court and listening to some pratt telling you who gets what and determining your future and that of your children – even though they said they want to live with you…

    To quote the prince of verona … “a plague on all your houses” and to quote me under my breath … “fuck you sideways with a sharp pineapple you pompous overfucking paid prick”

    G

  • granny

    A bit of lazy blogging would not go amiss, Whale.

    http://www.kiwisfirst.co.nznews.asp?PageID=2145848073&RefID=2141732570

    To quote:

    This is not the first time the Judge has been the subject of a criminal investigation. At least one other identical defacement has occurred to a parked car in front of the Judge’s residence. While that – or those – investigations went nowhere, NZ Police seem this time determined to at least prevent further occurrences, although they have yet to formally interview the Judge. The Judge’s power to evade justice is a real concern. In 2007, Judge Lance was appointed Deputy Police Complaints Authority Judge – a situation which would give reasonable pause to any Police officer looking to earnestly investigate the Judge.

  • toby

    Okay, here’s what we do: mount a sting operation. Someone park their car in front of the judge’s driveway and set up a camera or two. Wait for the judge (sorry, former judge, now cranky old man) to come along and scratch it. BEWM! Evidence on tape!

    How’s that for integrity, your judgliness?

  • mary

    These esteemed legal personages seem to be tarred with the same brush.

    The link in granny’s post should, I think, read:

    http://www.kiwisfirst.co.nz/index.asp?PageID=2145848586#judge-lance-may-walk-free

    and the followon link from that about Judge Phillips (scroll down):
    http://www.kiwisfirst.co.nz/index.asp?PageID=2145845339#driven-to-despair

    How did he get appointed? It’s mind-boggling.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1201173949 petal

    This doesn’t pass the sniff test, does it. He should be told that this is the last time or he’ll go down publicly, and to pay the victim a fair old lump sum to stay quiet.

  • glenn

    The question that the prosecution didn’t ask : “If you were ‘just checking out the pre-existing damage’ by running your hand along the pre-existing scratches, WHY DID YOU FEEL THE NEED TO CHECK EVERY DAMN PANEL ON THE CAR??? Surely checking out the side that you were on would have satisfied whatever morbid curiopsity you might mave had about damage that someone else had inflicted. Nah. More evidence of JUDICIAL CORRUPTION. The C**t may be retired, but still part of the old boys network. They look after their own. The prosecution wasn’t going to ask the obvious question (which any other defendant would have to answer) because DOING SO WOULD BE A SEVERELY CAREEL LIMITING MOVE. For the prosecution lawyer. (S)He’s looking for a judicial appointment in the near future also. So (S)He can key cars with impunity also.

  • leelee

    Come on people this is why the charge was dismissed, quoted from nz herald

    “Today Judge Phillips said the evidence of the police’s main witness was inconsistent and changed considerably during the two-day hearing.

    Judge Phillips found David Burns was not sitting where he claimed to have been sitting and would have to have looked over his shoulder to see Mr Lance at the car instead of having a clear view.

    “It was not the type of evidence that I could find Mr Lance guilty of this charge on.”

    However, he also said “an honestly mistaken witness can give convincing evidence”.

    Not to mention when you read the article, it sounds like the police were onsite talking to the tow truck driver when the ex Judge supposedly keyed the car. REALLY is he gonna be so dumb to key a car when the cops onsite???????

    What gets me is your assumptions that the other guy MUST be right and the Judge must of done it. Sounds like Judge bashing to me. The cop didn’t even take the friggin key away to examine DUH

  • scanner

    Inevitable, the feltchers that make up the legal profession were always going to protect this worthless old turd.
    The fitting punishment for this prick would be the publication of a description and rego for the old wankers own vehicle so anyone passing could turn his car into a work of art with their keys.

  • glenn

    Still, Why wasn’t the obvious question asked?? I mean, Come on leelee, Justice is supposed to be transparent. Why wasn’t the Judge(ret) subjected to the same level of investigation and invigoration that any other reasonable suspect would have received?

  • jimmie

    Well – with the judge admitting touching the car – I would suggest that he is guilty at the very least of Unlawful Interference. I’m no lawyer but I’m sure he has no claim of right for ‘touching’ the car. It wasn’t his and is no different to a car thief pushing his nose against a car window to see if it was unlocked. It’s pretty dodgy – two witnesses versus 1 judge………hmm judge wins every time.
    Probably bet the same 10 witnesses versus judge.

  • michaels

    Disagree Whale….
    Not everybody is guilty just because they are dragged before the court. On this case, at least he didn’t get name supression.
    However….
    Lets just use, as an example, an ex president of the National party. And of course there are many so I am not accussing any… But, lets just one of them …
    I don’t know, lets say ex president of the National party keyed a car that was parked in front of that ex presidents house and blocked the ex president of the National party drive. The next day someone said I saw that ex president key that car, but infact, that ex president only looked in the car and the “witness” was wrong.
    Should the ex president of the National party be sent to jail? Be convicted?
    I think not.

  • michaels

    Your “integrity” bit however. I do agree with.

  • marybelle

    It is not what you know in this world but who you know. These days it seems that it is not whether you are guilty – it is whether you have a lawyer who knows the tricks of how to get you off a charge. There are far too many offenders who are getting their cases dismissed because of a technicality and Judges are allowing this to happen. Of course some Judges are just “glorified lawyers” or in this case “lawyers glorified”.

  • mttinman

    The report reads to me more like a slime beat-up than a fair and honest summation.

    I make no other comment except to note I hope that Mr Lance uses a forklift, forks through the doors, next time instead of risking bending a key.

  • mcarrgomm

    It just goes to show that if your a member of the old boys network, you’ll get away with whatever you like!

    Aside from the obvious lack of “integrity”, New Zealand seems completely devoid of an actual justice system!

  • mediatart

    Judge Lances driveway is for a carpark for a apartment block!
    What about the dickhead who was parked there, the TV show it stands out a mile its the access for a building.
    Id have the towies on speed dial, at least they can drive off after being keyed

  • michaels

    The cafe/bar next door is my local and there are ALWAYS people parking for a few minutes in that drive. I know it pisses off many of the residents.

  • peterwn

    I suspect the case was not going to fly in court, evidence did not go far enough. Having said that, if he were still on the bench he would have been under serious peer pressure to resign.

    Judges are appointed by the Attorney General following a formal process, with AFAIK no political influence. It was said that those who worked the High Court knew who was next in line for appointment as a judge (except the annointed one) and when the Chief Justice phoned up the candidate as a point of duty never turned it down despite taking a big cut in take home pay. Things are different now.

    High Court and District Court Judges have to be lawyers of at least seven years standing (or for District Judges an equivalent period as registrars, deputy registrars etc).

    District Court work was carried out by JP’s then stipendary magistrates were appointed and I suspect initially little in the way of qualidications were needed and these evolved into the present District Court Judges, and the overall quality of these judges is such that the scope and responsibilities of the District Court has significantly increased in recent times especially the inclusion of jury trials and all ‘family law’ work.

    One Stipendary Magistrate (the late Stewart-Hardy) was apparently politically appointed – to stop him standing for Parliament. He however was a top notch magistrate who had very few successful appeals against his decisions, the only criticism being that he was a bit heavy handed with fines. He sat in the South Auckland courts and later in the Waikato courts.

  • robf

    It would appear that you can be found guilty of murder without a body or any evidence of wrong doing, other than someone missing. But to be found guilty of scratching a car you have to have nothing short of video evidence and more than 2 eye witnesses to get a conviction. If it was one of the great unwashed (us) then a conviction would have been a no brainer. Would the Police have prosecuted if he was not one of their watchers? If all else failed the defence of ignorance of the law would have worked or maybe a defence of the greater good. One thing is sure and that is the case would have gone all the way to our highest courts until a not guilty verdict was returned, at what cost to us the great unwashed Tax Payer who have to pay for it.

  • Agent BallSack

    Apart from the fact this guy was a judge, who hasnt wanted to key some fucktards car for inconsiderate parking? Did the keyee get a ticket for parking over the CLEAR no parking lines painted on the ground in front of the building? Also I believe the (ex)judge surely would be a prime candidate for diversion? Named but in this case not Shamed…..