Complaint about Judge going to first hearing
Complaints about NZ court Judges are not rare. Complaints proceeding to a hearing are extremely uncommon.
Last season there were 162 complaints. This year, 363 complaints.
Statistics show that complaints about the Family Court have doubled.
The Judge is entitled to have name suppression.
Judicial Conduct Commissioner’s Alan Richie on his said “On my assessment, the conduct, if established, would fall well short of accepted judicial standards.”
Nice spotting LukeNZ. Would love to know the breakdown of the complaints with respect to women vs men. I’m looking at the complaint options for both judge and LFC and its a grim process and as the article highlights, often complaints are not upheld. Somedays you feel like posting all your court documents/transcripts and secret recordings online to shine a spotlight on the bias that goes on in the family court.
Women’s groups are on a crusade to get him.
Media has joined in.
He broke the rules.
He found a female lying, to his assessment.
Asked her to be held to account.
They hate him for it.
He dare not cause a trend to start.
He also acted against racism.
Rejecting a child of one race must be given to family of that race.
The racists hate him as well.
To feminists that’s the worst thing possible.
Lies not allowed in the family court.
Other judges must learn.
By this one being persecuted.
@2 I think you are right. Its a bit of a puzzle. Bits of media all over the net. This is more than just a stern warning to other Judges. Don’t cross the feminist line, or we will get ya.
I would have thought altering a document wasn’t so much perjury, more perverting the course of justice.
Never heard of the group called CEDAW before. https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/
Very few women come out the wrong end of the Family Court.
If you are in there fighting they will find a way to fight back, legally or illegally.
If you beat them they take the fight outside the court, once again legally or illegally.
The quality of their court is seldom a consideration when it’s not producing its political product.
It’s always been a political court, a den of liers and thieves.
A Judge is not a prosecutor.
Pertaining to the female, he thought a crime was committed.
And there ended up being a prosecution, that failed.
At some point any case must pass, prosecution guidelines.
It was the prosecutor who decided that.
The evidence gathered, examined.
Is this persons actions a crime?
Are all the requirements met.
Is there beyond reasonable doubt.
For a case to fail.
The prosecutor got it wrong.
Maybe the judge did get it wrong.
Deciding on information before him.
New information exposing a mistake.
But that is the prosecutions job.
To listen to the accused.
Of innocence, and guilt.
It, the gatekeeper to prosecution.
The judge, as powerless.
As any accuser.
Yet they want it to be his fault.
More details here.
From your Cedaw link.
The Convention defines discrimination against women as “…any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field.”
Pity they ignore the equality bit.
Nullifying the recognition bit.
The fundamental freedoms bit.
Exclusions, and restrictions bit.
The irrespective of marital status bit.
On the basis of sex bit.
Even in politics, the Minister for men’s issues, missing.
All of those things, happen to men in NZ.
Why then just this judge, persecuted.
Are they not all involved.
In the wrong things done to men.
Condoning discriminatory things in there court.
Are the complaints by men, about Judges.
Also of the innocent wronged.
In the complaint to the HRC, about the HRC.
And endless complaints, about men’s experience, to them.
Hundreds about Judges.
Hundreds more, about discriminatory policing.
Effectively none addressed.
So culture, as well.
Looks like its Judge the Judges week.
There were a number of things I picked up on.
1. John spent half a million on legal fees, six months in jail and will not be compensated.
2. Johns mental health.
3. Reihanna at aged 18 was convicted of eight sex offences he said he did not do.
4. Reihanna with no conviction said relationships with friends and family were difficult. People don’t know what to believe.
5. Reihanna, has no job now, due to ill-health, and no home. He is currently living out of his car, in limbo.
Name suppression from the beginning could go a long way towards reducing the harm. But why do that when you can cause mental health on an 18 year old male and sit back and see what happens to him.
Remember when I said Complaints proceeding to a hearing are extremely uncommon.
Just 2 reach panel Recommendation.
Judge Pete says 60 colleagues have contacted him to offer support.
Mid – 2020 – Judge Callinicos complains to NZ Law Society about actions of two senior Oranga Tamariki lawyers. Complaints upheld in 2021.
Human rights lawyer Tony Ellis has lauded Judge Callinicos’ actions.