Amy Adams

Not one cent Amy, and Karam is losing the plot, getting close to a lawsuit I suspect

Amy Adams has announced she will commission yet another review into the ongoing claim for compensation by David Bain or is it Joe Karam…hard to work out who is claiming as Bain never says anything.

The Government will launch a fresh inquiry into David Bain’s compensation claim after agreeing to set aside all previous advice on the matter, Justice Minister Amy Adams has announced.

David Bain’s long fight for compensation will start afresh with all previous advice put aside, Government has confirmed.

Justice Minister Amy Adams said this afternoon Cabinet did not have enough information to reach a decision on a potential payout for Mr Bain, who spent 13 years in prison before being found not guilty of murder in a retrial.

Mr Bain was imprisoned in 1995 after being convicted for killing five family members in Dunedin, but was freed after being found not guilty in a second trial in 2009.

Judith Collins has said she would do it all again as well. As well she should, Binnie’s report was dreadfully and hopelessly flawed.

Former Justice Minister Judith Collins says she “stands by everything I said and did” in relation to David Bain’s compensation case after his supporters accused her of derailing the process at a huge cost to the taxpayer.

[…]

Mr Bain’s advocate Joe Karam said the blame for the new delay and its associated costs could be placed squarely on Mrs Collins, who “secretly” asked for a peer review of an initial inquiry by former Canadian Supreme Court judge Ian Binnie.

“It’s a great shame for David, for me, for the New Zealand public in general,” he said. “It’s extremely disappointing that this should happen from a number of points of view, not least of which is the taxpayers who now have to cough up between half a million and a million dollars.”

Mr Karam said he was more confident of a positive outcome from the new review because he believed Ms Adams would be more principled than her predecessor and would not “bulldoze” any findings.

Mrs Collins shot back at Mr Karam yesterday, saying she could never have awarded compensation based on a faulty inquiry.

“I stand by everything I said and did,” she told the Herald. “I did exactly what I had to do.”

Justice Binnie found that Mr Bain was innocent “on the balance of probabilities”, but the peer review by QC Robert Fisher found numerous errors in his findings.

Mrs Collins said the main reason for a delay in the five-year process was the decision by Mr Bain’s side to seek a judicial review of the Government’s handling of the case.

Read more »

If she was really taking aim at censorship laws she would abolish them

NBR reports that Amy Adams is taking aim at out-dated censorship laws.

If she was deadly serious she’d move to abolish them altogether.

Archaic classification laws for new media are in the Minister of Broadcasting’s crosshairs.

Following news of the chief censor taking a closer look at the growing video game and online streaming industries, Amy Adams tells NBR ONLINE she has officials from the Ministry of Justice advising her on “possible ways forward to address any issues in this area that may start to arise.”

“It is far from clear how the act applies to online content,” says Ms Adams, who also holds the portfolios of communications, courts and justice.

“Current classification and standards legislation came into effect over 20 years ago so it was inevitable there would come a time when the current regime would need updating.”

Read more »

Should David Bain and his mate Joe Karam pay back their legal aid?

Jock Anderson seems to think so:

Following CaseLoad’s controversial and commonsense analysis of the David Cullen Bain Compo Affair last time, numerous callers at the Ladies & Escorts Lounge have raised some interesting questions.

Some ask if Mr Bain or his supporter Joe Karam have repaid any of the $3.33 million in taxpayer-funded legal aid coughed up for Mr Bain’s 2009 “Not Guilty” retrial – the highest amount in New Zealand legal history. (If they have, good on them.)

And whether or not, in the event Mr Bain gets millions of dollars in taxpayer-funded compensation from the Government, should his legal aid be deducted first???

It was earlier reported that of the $3.33 million, $2.33 million went towards the retrial costs and almost $1 million was paid for expenses in the retrial such as research, investigators and forensics.

$426,000 was paid for Mr Karam’s efforts.

Lawyers’ fees throughout the High Court, Court of Appeal and retrial process amounted to $1.77 million of the total bill.

Most of the costs of the retrial were to pay for overseas experts, according to Mr Bain’s lawyer Michael Privet Reed QC.

Mr Bain did not receive legal aid in his compo bid.

Read more »

Concrete Cancer Cover-up, Ctd – What’s all the fuss about?

unnamed-1

When you start investigating a story the interesting thing is how people respond to questions.

Some are helpful, provide information and are keen to see an issue resolved. Others are less than helpful and are keen on seeing the story shut down.

Sadly, Rob Gaimster, CEO of the Cement and Concrete Association of New Zealand (CCANZ) falls into the later category.  More on Gaimster later.

A recap is needed on why this Concrete Cancer Story needs to be told.

The basics are this;

  1. In January, February and March 2014, a cement importing company Drymix imported tens of thousands of tonnes of cement from Vietnam into New Zealand which, according to their own test results, failed to meet recognised industry standards.
  2. Drymix failed to make its test results available for public scrutiny which raised questions within New Zealand’s $400 million-a-year cement market.
  3. This cement had higher than accepted alkali content.
  4. Concrete cancer is caused by high alkali levels in cement combined with moisture in the concrete and a reactive form of silica in the aggregate. When this happens it can end up causing expansion and cracking in concrete resulting in major structural problems.   Read more »

Why does Joe Karam mislead so much?

Joe Karam went on Radio NZ yesterday and basically showed what a nasty, vicious little man he is.

Her refers to Amy Adams by title and her full name, same with Simon Power, but in all his comments about Judith Collins he just calls her “Collins” or worse.

In a report released in late 2012, a former Canadian Supreme Court judge, Ian Binnie, concluded that Mr Bain was innocent and suggested he should receive compensation.

However, Ms Collins then sought a review of that report, which criticised the findings as legally flawed.

Mr Bain’s legal team sought a judicial review, arguing that Ms Collins had pre-determined the claim and could not distinguish between her role as Justice Minister and her previous role as Police Minister.

Ms Collins resigned as a minister during the election campaign last year, after an email surfaced suggesting she had been part of efforts to undermine the head of the Serious Fraud Office in 2011. An inquiry later found no evidence to support that.

Mr Bain’s chief supporter Joe Karam told Checkpoint it was now up to Ms Adams to have the claim considered by Cabinet ministers.

“We have no reason to believe that she won’t do a proper just job, as Simon Power did. The only thing that’s gone wrong is the pugnacious minister that we had in between times.”

Read more »

Not one cent Amy, not one cent

David Bain is continuing on with his spurious claim for compensation…aided of course by his pal Joe Karam.

David Bain’s bid for compensation has moved a step forward with the Justice Minister confirming Cabinet will resume consideration of his claim.

Mr Bain’s legal team last month held confidential discussions with Justice Minister Amy Adams over his compensation bid.

Ms Adams today confirmed judicial review proceedings had been discontinued following an agreement between the two parties.

“With the matter resolved, Cabinet can now resume its consideration of Mr Bain’s claim for compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment,” Ms Adams said.

Cabinet agreed in February 2013, at Mr Bain’s request, that consideration of his application for compensation would be put on hold, pending determination of the judicial review proceedings he filed.

Those judicial review proceedings have been discontinued by Mr Bain, Ms Adams said.

“This discontinuance does not resolve Mr Bain’s underlying compensation claim, just the separate judicial review process. I plan to discuss next steps with my Cabinet colleagues over the coming weeks,” she said.

“While the details of the agreement are confidential, I can confirm that there was no contribution made towards Mr Bain’s compensation claim as part of this discontinuance.”

Ms Adams said there would be a further announcement regarding the consideration of the application in due course.

Read more »

David Bain should get nothing

David Bain is pushing hard for compensation.

He should get nothing.

David Bain’s legal team has been in confidential discussions with the Minister of Justice over his bid for compensation.

A judicial settlement conference was held at the High Court at Auckland today in relation to the redress Mr Bain is seeking after spending 13 years behind bars for the murder of his family in 1995. Mr Bain was later acquitted at a retrial.

The meeting between Mr Bain’s legal team, including Michael Reed QC and former All Black Joe Karam, and lawyers representing Justice Minister Amy Adams, was held ‘in chambers’, meaning media could not report on proceedings.

Media were also barred from sitting in on the conference, held before Justice John Faire.    Read more »

Is it time for recall legislation?

John Key thinks recall legislation is too hard. Frankly that is a cop out.

Recall legislation exists in many jurisdictions and it gives the people a decent chance to rid themselves of dud politicians.

If we had recall legislation, at the very least at a local body level then the power hungry despots like Len Brown and the ratbags at the Hawkes Bay Regional Council could be tipped out.

Recall has been successfully used in the US, especially by the NRA in order to remove ratbags who support impinging on constitutional second amendment rights.

Though John Key thinks it is all too hard perhaps he should have a chat to his besty in the UK, David Cameron, who is bringing in recall legislation as we speak.

Voters look set to get the right to sack “bad apple” MPs after Labour and the Liberal Democrats and said they would seek to strengthen current plans before Parliament.

The news is a boost for campaigners who are concerned that the current proposed legislation puts the right to call a “Recall by-election” in the hands of MPs, not voters.    Read more »

NZ Media just can’t let the government have a good story

I’ve taken a screenshot of this, to make the point

ssssssss

Great news story for the government, right?   Now, let’s see how Mediaworks puts the boot in.   Read more »

New Zealand’s Silliest Local Government Spending Winner

Shane wins the latest iPad for this exceptionally silly prosecution of oldies in Kapiti.

This is a second nomination for Kapiti, after they got nominated for their exceptionally silly electric green rubbish truck. As we pointed out then the former mayor Jenny Rowan got the arse at the last election so maybe things are on the improve.

I would like to nominate the Kapiti Coast District Council for New Zealand’s Silliest Local Body Spending Competition.

The council laid charges against Peter and Diana Standen, 77 and 74,  Keith and Lorraine McLeavey, 72 and 68, and a local business last year for modifying naturally occurring native trees on their properties.

From memory, Peter and Diana were relatively new to the area last year when they contracted Monkeyman Tree Services to trim or remove 6 diseased and rotted trees at the bottom of their property.  They were concerned the trees posed a hazard so called in an expert to take care of the problem.

Shortly after, the council turned up at 9am with uniformed police to investigate the matter.  The police left (somewhat embarrassed, I think) after establishing the septuagenarians were not going to pose a threat.

The council pursued prosecutions against the couple until an Environment Court judge dismissed the charges against the Mcleaveys as “trivial offending”.   Read more »