Cutting access to jury trials
Simon Power has tried to cultivate an image of being an active Minister of Justice.
He is in stark contrast to previous Ministers of Justice, such as Phil-(Peter Ellis)-Goff (who was inconsequential and seemed to follow official’s advice and contribute no initiatives himself) and The-Right-Honourable-Douglas-Graham [legal-worker] (who introduced the Domestic Violence Act — which has contributed $100s of millions to legal-worker’s incomes, driven so many men’s suicides and probably saved under 10 women’s and children’s lives).
Simon Power’s knee jerk reactions might look good to voters who don’t stop to think about the long term consequences, in terms of reducing the quality of “justice: in NZ.
Certainly, I perceive the caught system in general as being more closely related to public blood sport entertainment, than delivery of good quality justice, first time round.
Similarly, I suggest that Simon Power’s contributions are more cosmetic than substantial.
Simply cutting out the right to access a jury trial will save — in the short term — considerable cost. In the longer term, I suspect that it will significantly increase costs to Government, in terms of payouts for wrongful imprisonment, for example David Dougherty and Arthur Allan Thomas.
On top of these financial costs to Government, are the larger costs imposed onto innocent citizens, by slandering of their name and years lost to wrongful imprisonment, after defective investigations and trials.
While these costs are imposed without consent onto individual citizens, they are difficult to quantify, as the true situation often becomes clear only decades after the event. Oftentimes, the private costs are not publicly accessible even a century after the event. Nonetheless, these as yet unidentified costs of defective justice are very real and traumatize citizens just as much as the direct actions of those we identify as criminals.
I suggest that the damage done by defective “judges” and other legal-workers, is as much or more, than the consequences caused by “criminals”. It would be very nice if we could dispose of both, in one foul swoop!
The costs of jury trials could be more productively reduced by filtering out cases which should never get to full trial, through depositions hearings — which have recently been whittled down!!!!
Identifying the issues at dispute and those not under dispute is already well provided for in the HighCaught and DistrictCaught Rules and has been for many decades. So, why is it not already happening day in and day out? If Simon Power cannot understand this issue, then his proposed reforms are unlikely to offer any long term cost saving for tax payers, just additional costs!
Hint — look at the unmanaged conflicts of interest in the management of the caughts!!!!!!
The intense conflict of interest between legal-workers and their legal-workers-aided clients primarily results in additional costs onto Government. Thus taxpayers would be best protected, by cutting back on legal-worker’s-aid funding of worthless litigation. Incidentally, this would also offer great savings for the individual taxpayers who are on the receiving end of this huge amount of valueless, worthless litigation.
If NZ really needs to cut costs within the judicial and justice departments, then we do need to “shop smarter”, not just throw more taxpayer funds at the actors and comedians and cut down on public access to justice.
These initiatives will never come from a legal-worker who knows their future income would be reduced by improving the quality of “justice” spending.