Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Justice Department "fixes" trial of court employee

Collapse
X
Collapse
  •  

  • Justice Department "fixes" trial of court employee

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Tompkins.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	5.9 KB
ID:	24977
    Last week, on a quiet Monday afternoon in the Porirua District Court, Judge Arthur Tompkins dealt with a case that up until recently would have been put to a jury to decide whether or not the Crown had proven its case. Now days, an offence has to attract a penalty of 2 or more years imprisonment before an accused is entitled to request a jury trial.

    Judge Tompkins was called in from Hamilton to preside over the trial because of the difficulty in finding a Wellington judge who did not know the complainant, the registrar of the Court of Appeal, Clare O'Brien.

    Ms O'Brien made a complaint to police last September that she had been assaulted by a process server outside the Court of Appeal in Wellington. Although the incident occurred in Wellington and the complaint laid with the Wellington Police, the case was dealt with in Porirua to avoid any media scrutiny. The court subsequently heard that the decision to prosecute the case had been taken before witnesses had been interviewed, with the Constable charge of the case, Gareth Kearney saying he; "didn't need to speak to other witnesses first because his orders to pursue the matter had come from above."

    In the lead up to the trial several applications were made by the defendant for disclosure of CCTV footage of the encounter outside the Aitken Street entrance of the Court. It was here the defendant alleged that Clare O'Brien had first committed an assault by "swatting" a cellphone being used to take a picture of her to confirm service.

    Several documents were filed by the police confirming that the Justice Department/Court of Appeal claimed to have held no footage of the incident. However a few weeks before the trial, the defendant struck up a chance conversation with a Court Security Officer who admitted reviewing the footage three days after O'Brien first made her complaint of assault. It was put to the officer in Court that; "had this footage shown O'Brien being assaulted rather than the other way around, that it would have been key evidence against the defendant and preserved."

    Despite the facts before the court that the Justice Department had obviously misled the police and the court about this critical evidence, further inquiry was not possible after security staff admitted that the footage had most likely been expired from the system, despite the fact that it was critical evidence in the proceeding.

    The Court heard evidence from all the witnesses, including the complainant which confirmed that Clare O'Brien had pushed the defendant first, thereby committing an assault. However in a bizarre twist of perverse reasoning which confirmed the depraved and corrupt nature of the proceedings, Judge Tompkins ruled that despite all the evidence to the contrary,Clare O'Brien had in fact been assaulted first before pushing the defendant.

    A sentencing hearing will take place in the Porirua District Court on 20 March 2014 and an appeal will be filed by with the High Court thereafter.

    • golfa
      #3
      golfa commented
      Editing a comment
      Corruption and incompetence in spades from Judge Tompkins. I bet he's proud because he knows he's untouchable.

    • John "Brockovich"
      #4
      John "Brockovich" commented
      Editing a comment
      Originally posted by golfa
      Corruption and incompetence in spades from Judge Tompkins. I bet he's proud because he knows he's untouchable.
      Agreed, Judge Tompkins would be proud, but his grandfather (Arthur Lance Tompkins Q. C. and a Supreme Court Judge in 1963 to ...) who was neither corrupt nor incompetent would be ashamed if he knew and turn over in his grave.

    • flimflam
      #5
      flimflam commented
      Editing a comment
      We are writing and people are reading. The public know that the family court is gender biased. Mothers have watched their sons go through it and themselves have not seen their grandchildren. People know, people talk.

      Fathers walk and continue to. Well done Clare O Brien and her judicial support. The Family court is a gender biased laughing stock. Look at the fatherless children, thousands of them. Well done family court.

      Now to the other courts, would you start or bring a business to new Zealand after reading comments on this site? You would think twice and investigate further. The other courts will soon enjoy the reputation the family court has. The subjects will be different as will the reasons for the reputation. The reputation will come.

      Lawyers enjoy that reputation now, yet I can remember when the legal profession was held in high regard - not now. People are aware of the vagaries of their self assessing little society. In the end people will avoid them and doing business in new Zealand in the same way that many fathers have avoided the family court. They may have gone there, obtained parenting directions only to find mummy dosn't need to follow them - because she is mummy and that's ok. Dad leaves, gives up.

      Businesses are doing the same and other business leaders are apprehensive about judicial corruption, process corruption and getting stiffed so the dole que grows.

      One day it will be Clare Obrien's children who can't find work here and leave too. At that time Clare, think about your handy little contribution and realise that you and your cronies have not only shot us in the foot, but yourselves too.

      There will be yet another round of trumpeting about Family Court Reforms (soon) yet you can only put so much lipstick on the same old pig. They can dress it up with nice new trotter shaped shoes, give it a new nose ring, a go faster stripe but you still have the likes of judge Ulrich making directions which dont deliver benefits to the children but to mummy. We may still have directions from judge Johnson without the father able to put in any evidence - making directions without having heard the evidence.

      From a credability standpoint they might try matching shoes, lipstick and perhaps a clutch purse.
      Last edited by flimflam; 15-03-2014, 01:15 AM.
    Posting comments is disabled.

Latest Articles

Collapse

  • Financial Markets Authority Duped by Ponzi Scammer
    by admin
    New Zealand has a horrible history of ponzi schemers. In five of the last nine years, ponzi schemers have been banged up in jail as a result of their scams. Now a Financial Markets Authority analyst has been charged with forging a glowing academic record to get his job and then stealing nearly $210,000 in a Ponzi-type scheme. Benjamin Anthony Kiro is alleged to have convinced women he met on online dating sites such as Tinder, or businessmen introduced to him by associates, to invest in companies ...
    19-09-2015, 01:04 PM
  • Judge rules Banks to stand trial
    by admin




    A judge at the High Court in Auckland has rejected an application from ACT Party MP John Banks to review a decision to charge him with making a false electoral return.


    The Associate Education Minister is to be tried on a charge of making a false return following his failed campaign for the Auckland mayoralty in 2010. The charges against Mr Banks were initially brought by retired accountant Graham McCready after the police refused to file charges
    ...
    07-04-2014, 08:45 PM
  • Justice Department "fixes" trial of court employee
    by admin

    Last week, on a quiet Monday afternoon in the Porirua District Court, Judge Arthur Tompkins dealt with a case that up until recently would have been put to a jury to decide whether or not the Crown had proven its case. Now days, an offence has to attract a penalty of 2 or more years imprisonment before an accused is entitled to request a jury trial. Judge Tompkins was called in from Hamilton to preside over the trial because of the difficulty in finding a Wellington judge who did not know ...
    05-03-2014, 01:38 PM
  • Wellington foodbank investigated for fraud
    by admin
    A Wellington foodbank is being investigated for fraud, after it was deemed to be involved in "serious wrongdoing".
    The Wellington Foodbank Service - not associated with the one run by the Wellington City Mission - has also now been stripped of its charitable status, with the Department of Internal Affairs advising major donors not to hand over more money.

    The bulk of existing donations appear to be have disappeared, as liquidators find the charity's bank accounts emptied and almost...
    28-02-2014, 11:27 PM
  • Judge's decision causes outrage
    by admin

    A prominent Tauranga professional has avoided a criminal conviction and had his identity kept secret after admitting he assaulted his young son during a dispute over a cellphone and iPod.The middle-aged man was discharged without conviction despite pleading guilty to a common assault charge when he appeared in Tauranga District Court yesterday. Judge Josephine Bouchier also granted the man permanent name suppression. The man's former partner last night told the Bay of Plenty Times she...
    31-05-2013, 01:31 PM
  • John Banks faces court over mayoral donations
    by admin
    Act Party leader John Banks will be summonsed to court to face a private prosecution over his failure to record donations to his mayoralty campaign.Judge Ian Mill, in a decision released today, said there was sufficient evidence to call Mr Banks before the court. "Access to the courts for the purposes of private prosecutions is an important safeguard against the abuses of the executive's prosecutorial discretion ..." Judge Mill said.The private prosecution has been brought by retired Wel...
    19-04-2013, 10:28 AM
Working...
X