Thankfully, leftist NZ Prime Minister Jacinta Ardern has announced her resignation after years of woke policy failures and heavy-handed Covid lockdowns.
Hopefully this is the first of many totalitarian leftist Covid tyrants falling on their swords.
Don’t let the door hit you on the way out, Jacinta.
Bruce Lehrmann, the former parliamentary political staffer who was accused of raping a colleague named Brittany Higgins at Parliament House has had all charges dropped again him.
This occurred after the trial had to be postponed because Lisa Wilkinson gave a speech at The Logie Awards, and when the trial finally took place, the jury had to be discharged because of juror misconduct.
It has since been revealed that the most senior police officer on the Brittany Higgins case, ACT Police Manager of Criminal Investigations, Detective Superintendent Scott Moller believed there was insufficient evidence to prosecute Bruce Lehrmann but could not stop the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions from proceeding because “there is too much political interference”.
Sydney defamation specialist Mark O’Brien is working with Lehrmann in consideration of legal action. Furthermore, a letter to the trial judge from Channel 10 boss Beverley McGarvey, obtained by The Australian, reveals Wilkinson disputes claims by DPP Director Shane Drumgold SC that he had warned her that her planned Logies speech could cause a substantial delay in the trial.
In October this year, we were the first to report on the demise of the career of Graeme Page KC, who was caught appearing in Court representing clients without a practicing certificate on numerous occasions.
Our investigations unit has uncovered that Page went bankrupt on 21 February 2019, after committing an act of bankruptcy on 3 April 2018 due to his unpaid tax debts.
No practicing certificate
Due to his personal solvency issues, Page was required to disclose his income tax returns and his quarterly BAS statements, but subsequently failed to do so, resulting in his practicing certificate not being renewed. Page blamed the pandemic, workload and his health issues for these failures, but the Bar Association resolved that he was not a fit and proper person, with its President Tom Sullivan concluding that Page had shown “blatant disregard for the ethical responsibilities that come with holding a practising certificate”.
A source at the QLD Bar has informed us that aware of his issues with the Bar Association, other learned Counsel offered to assist Page with his tax affairs, but Page failed to accept such offers.
Subsequently, Page engaged in legal practice without a practicing certificate, resulting in the Chief Justice ordering him to cease doing so.
We are also informed that soon after the injunction was made, Page was found again appearing in the Federal Circuit and Family Court, and that then-Bar Association President Tom Sullivan had to come in and drag Page out of Court.
Since the Supreme Court Ordered Page to cease practicing, we are aware that at least one further complaint has been made to the Legal Services Commissioner about Page.
Today, after a marathon trial that ran a total of 6 days spanning over 6 months, including two dates that fell over due to a lack of interpreters and a delivery of judgment, we triumphed at our local Courthouse, the Richlands Magistrates Court.
Our client had been charged with two counts of contravention of Protection Order. It was alleged that he had driven past his ex-wife’s home on two separate dates stopping on the way to drop of the kids (count 1) and to stare (count 2).
It was noncontroversial that our client had had a temporary protection order that prohibited him from approaching within 100m of his ex-wife’s home and that he was in Court when that Order was made. The central issue for each count was whether he contravened the Protection Order as alleged.
For Count 1, the only material witness was the complainant, the ex-wife. For Count 2, the ex-wife and the new husband both gave evidence that our client was outside their home, and the new husband had taken a photograph of our client’s vehicle parked two doors down from her home.
We called two witnesses that were intended to provide our client with an alibi for count 2. The first said that our client was at his home on the date in question, but unexpectantly then told the Court that he was counselling our client about his grievances towards the ex-wife that day and our client had left his home at around half an hour before the count 2 was said to have occurred. Things were by that stage looking very grim for the defence. Magistrate Aaron Simpson was incredulous, and asked us whether our next witness would be similarly disastrous for our client’s case.
The second defence witness gave evidence that he was driving our client’s car that day, as his own car had broken down, and that he had driven in front of the ex-wife’s home to visit his friend two doors down. Despite being challenged, his evidence was unshaken in cross-examination.
Last month, Constable Daniel Keneally, son of former NSW Premier Kristina Keneally was charged with fabricating evidence. This charge arose from Keneally jnr submitting a report of a man named Luke Moore threatening to kill a police officer, which resulted in Moore being refused bail and spending time in jail for three weeks.
A Sydney court has been informed Constable Daniel Keneally will contest the charge.
Full story: https://sterlinglawqld.com/kristina-keneallys-son-pleads-not-guilty-to-fabricating-evidence/
A decision-maker being impartial is one of the core requirements of natural justice.
In the 19th century, Lord Campbell in Dimes  EngR 789 said that “no man is to be a judge in his own cause”.
As a majority of the High Court noted in Ebner v The Official Trustee in Bankruptcy  HCA 63:
“Fundamental to the common law system of adversarial trial is that it is conducted by an independent and impartial tribunal. Perhaps the deepest historical roots of this principle can be traced to Magna Carta (with its declaration that right and justice shall not be sold)”.
Legal meaning of biased
Bias in the law is a decision-maker making a decision because of factors other than the merits of the case, rather than different treatment of the parties.
Therefore, the fact that a decision-maker disbelieves, or is critical of, a party or a witness does not, of itself, indicate bias: Ramadan v New South Wales Insurance Ministerial Corporation, unreported, New South Wales Court of Appeal, 7 April 1995 (“Ramadan“) at 3 per Kirby P, at 11 per Rolfe AJA. Furthermore, it is permissible for decision-makers to make known their preliminary views for the purpose of ventilating issues. Even where preliminary views are strongly held, there will be actual bias only if they are incapable of being altered. Also, it is not always sufficient to show that a decision-maker has displayed irritation or impatience or has even expressed sarcasm, and that whether such matters show actual bias remains a question of fact: see Galea v Galea (1990) 19 NSWLR 263 at 279 per Kirby ACJ.
“requirements of natural justice are not infringed by a mere lack of nicety but only when it is firmly established that a suspicion may reasonably be engendered in the minds of those who come before the tribunal or in the minds of the public that the tribunal or a member or members of it may not bring to the resolution of the questions arising before the tribunal fair and unprejudiced minds. Such a mind is not necessarily a mind which has not given thought to the subject matter or one which, having thought about it, has not formed any views or inclination of mind upon or with respect to it.”
The jury of Bruce Lehrmann’s trial for the alleged rape of former Liberal staffer Brittany Higgins has been discharged after a juror was found to have conducted their own research and brought a research paper on sexual assaults into the jury room.
The juror had brought in a research paper on sexual assault, which attempted to quantify the number of false complaints and interrogate the reasons for making false complaints. The use of the research paper was contrary to at least 17 directions given by the trial judge for the jurors not to conduct their own research or enquiries.
Jurors when sworn in promise to base their verdicts on the evidence in the trial, not extraneous material that may be controversial and which in any event has not been tested.
Former barrister Graeme Page’s career may have ended today after the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Queensland ordered an injunction restraining him from engaging in legal practice. The Legal Services Commission had brought an application in the Supreme Court just last Friday. A person from the Legal Services Commission this afternoon confirmed to…Chief Justice prohibits Graeme Page KC from practicing as a barrister — Sterling Law QLD