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

Unread emails ... Family law barrister in Adelaide neglects to attend to emails ... Reminders to renew her ticket studiously ignored ... Unravelling chaos ... Trials invalidated ... Liability of Law Society and Conduct Commissioner ... Breach of statutory requirement ... Damages ... From our Team on the Torrens ... Read more >> 

Politics Media Law Society


An Australian Abroad ... An essay with pictures … Egypt and the Grand Museum … No end to the antiquities … Down the Nile on a dahabiya … Tombs and temples … Paris and industrial-scale tourism … The Yarts & Kulture ... Read on >> 

Free Newsletter
Justinian Columnists

Annihilation of the now ...Trump's campaign of destruction ... Fake emergencies ... Pointless and farcical executive orders ... Gangsterism ... Looting ... Corruption ... Shakedowns ... White rage ... Christian nationalism ... Roger Fitch unloads ... Read more >> 

Blow the whistle

 

News snips ...


2 Wentworth Chambers issues a press release ... More >>

Justinian's Bloggers

Letter from London ... Weather report ... Starmer sinking ... Farage rising ... Fake law firm ... Fake cases ...  NHS employee cleans up with woke case for hurt feelings ... Floyd Alexander-Hunt files from Blighty ... Read more >> 

"Habeas Corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country."

Kristi Noem, Secretary Department of Homeland Security, giving the US Senate her understanding of the meaning of Habeas Corpus ... May 21, 2025 ... Read more flatulence ... 


Justinian Featurettes

Zeilgeist litigation ... Matt Collins KC on live-streaming of high-profile trials ... Social media nightmare ... Abuse of barristers ... Chilling emails ... Trials as a form of public entertainment ... Courts sleepwalking into a dangerous zone ... Framework needed to balance competing interests ... Paper delivered to Australian Lawyers Alliance Conference ... 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.