Search
This area does not yet contain any content.
Justinian News

Bennett birched by WA Bureau de Spank ... Perth big shot ... Professional misconduct ... Disclosure of privileged information ... Guardianship proceedings ... Breach of orders ... Conscious disregard of the law ... Consideration of recklessness ... Breach of Harman obligation ... Anthony Kanaan reports ... Read more ...

Politics Media Law Society


Incensed ... Special laws for true believers up in smoke … Extreme unction … Cash splash for prejudice … The two-faced world of Janus Albrechtsen … Stokes, the new Murdoch … Tucker Down Under in relevance rescue mission ... Read on ... 

Free Newsletter
Justinian Columnists

Other Voices, Other Rooms ... Hack attack on barrister ... Heavy-handed Jewish lobby calling the shots ... No support from chambers ... Eerie silence from professional bodies about Gaza atrocities ... Latest cancellations ... Free speech in a spin ... From our Editorial Board ... Read more ... 

Blow the whistle

 

News snips ...


 

Maintaining legal actions ... Remembering maintenance and champerty ... The Lehrmann mess ... From Geoffrey Gibson, Melbourne barrister (retired) ... More >> 

Justinian's Bloggers

Letter from London ... Floyd Alexander-Hunt's letter from Blighty ... Hugh Grant takes the money and leaves the box ... Last minutism ... And suprise round-up for Rwanda-bound refugees ... Read more ... 

"It was a commercial decision ... To suggest anything else would be inaccurate and disingenuous." 

Spokesman for Kerry Stokes explaining the reason for doubling the price of printing the Financial Review on Seven West presses in Perth ... Read more flatulence ... 


Justinian Featurettes

Algorithmic injustices ... Criminal justice in the data age ... The lurking dangers when algorithms are used to dispense justice ... Predicting the pattern of potential offenders ... Anthony Kanaan interviews Dr Tatiana Dancy, author of Artificial Justice ... Read more ... 


Justinian's archive

Justice Jeff Shaw's bingle ... Supreme Court judge's drink-drive experience ... Cars damaged in narrow Sydney street ... Touch driving ... Missing blood sample ... Equality before the law may not apply to judges ... Judges behind the wheel ... From Justinian's Archive ... November 4, 2004 ... Read more ... 


 

 

« Vintage Lionel Murphy | Main | The man who replaced Barwick »
Saturday
Jan012000

Melbourne barristers off the hook

It's 1981 and the NSW bar's ethics committee has dismissed suggestions from Athol Moffitt that two Melbourne barristers weren't plying their trade in accordance with the high standards of the Sydney bar ... Suggestions that the trial was protracted by irrelevancies and the use of extreme language - thrown out by the ethics inspectors ... Crushing blow for Court of Criminal Appeal ... From Justinian's Déjà Vu department 

Robert Richter: no irrelevancies

Two Melbourne barristers, Robert Richter and R. van de Weil, who in early 1979 appeared in the NSW District Court for two accused in a drug case, have been cleared by the ethics committee of the NSW Bar Association.

The investigation by the committee followed remarks by Moffitt P when delivering the judgment of the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal in Reg v Niblett and Reg v Lockman.

The remarks from the bench raised a number of issues concerning defence counsel Richter and van de Weil, who are both admitted at the Sydney bar, including protracting the trial by irrelevancies, making serious allegations against the police without any evidentiary support or corroboration from the statements of the accused, and pursuing these allegations with the use of extreme language.

It was also suggested that the accused had received a degree of lawyer coaching or instruction.

The ethics committee studied transcripts, reports of the trial judge (Ward DCJ), obtained the comments on the matters raised by the Court of Criminal Appeal from the two counsel, and questioned the instructing solicitor.

In a recent letter to the Registrar of the Court of Criminal Appeal, the Registrar of the NSW Bar Association, Captain W. F. Cook, wrote:

"The association cannot find that the trial was protracted by irrelevancies or that the allegations raised were couched in extravagant terms or were made irresponsibly by either of the unsworn statements. Nor in the association's view does the evidence support a finding that counsel sought to obtain a restrospective carte blanche justification from the unsworn statements for their cross-examination of the Crown witnesses ... 

"Accordingly, the association has decided to take no further action in relation to the matters raised by the Court of Criminal Appeal." 

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.
Editor Permission Required
You must have editing permission for this entry in order to post comments.