Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 102454	2009-08-19 13:30:00	Judges do not make law.	Sweep (90)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
802620	2009-08-19 23:54:00	Who the hell appointed Judges to assess and recommend the changes in society? They live in a closed sheltered society This argument is often put forward about judges. In fact, judges - particularly Family Court and criminal judges - spend their professional lives listening to the effect of crime and poverty on people. On a daily basis they deal with people who are often at the most extreme moments in their lives and hear more victim impact statements than almost anybody else. They are not at some remove from society - they are actually at its coal face. They need get the idea that they are civil servants, paid to do a job as laid down by parliament They are not civil servants nor are they employees in the normal sense of the word. They are the Queen's Judges. They judge according to their oath - not according to what is laid down by parliament. - many are failed lawyers who have taken the easy 9-5 job over striving to run a successful business. Your ignorance is showing the most with this statement. Judicial salaries are nowhere near what a judge of similar seniority would be earning in private practice. In most cases, they would be earning twice to three times a judicial salary if they were in private practice. As far as 9-5 goes - well, you really have no idea what goes on do you? Find somebody who has clerked for a judge - particularly a High Court judge - and ask them how much reading and research accompanies all but the simplest of cases. Reflect changes in society - crap. If you read the statement properly you will comprehend that it is the law that should reflect changes in society. Do you think it shouldn't??	Deane F (8204)
802621	2009-08-19 23:57:00	Re: So you expect MPs who also live in a closed sheltered society to get the law right every time? If they could do that why are they always changing it? We - that is you and me - appoint MP's to do just that - make laws. We do have the regular opportunity to remove MP's. The so called judiciary are there for life. Arrogant prats.	Scouse (83)
802622	2009-08-20 00:53:00	Re: So you expect MPs who also live in a closed sheltered society to get the law right every time? If they could do that why are they always changing it? We - that is you and me - appoint MP's to do just that - make laws. We do have the regular opportunity to remove MP's. The so called judiciary are there for life. Arrogant prats. Look up the doctrine of "The Separation of Powers". I doubt you will, of course...	Deane F (8204)
802623	2009-08-20 01:14:00	Actually Sweep, judges do make new law. A classic example is the right to sue your local council for negligently approving a shoddy house. The principles were established by the House of Lords in 1976 - it was new law. Dutton v Bognor Regis Urban District Council. In fact there is a famous NZ case against the Invercargill City Council where the Privy Council held the Council liable for a house which started to fall to pieces. While I mostly agree that Judges influence the laws by interpreting the same they do not have the position of drafting the law as such in my opinion. Some laws are just staight out unenforcable because of the way they are drafted. Very many laws are not contested in any Court in New Zealand and therefore I question the intelligence of those who actually draft the laws. Bognor Regis is not a town in New Zealand to my knowledge and therefore not subject to the laws we live with. In my opinion the word Justice implies being fair to all parties concerned in any event. However I may add that the word "fair" may as well be removed from a dictionary apart from the like of "Fair go" I do realise that I may come across as being pedantic but if some people can't say what they mean or mean what they say then I may have a problem with that. Lawyers get paid a rather large hourly rate to convince one or more persons to convict or not convict so it is really a debate in a Court is it not? The Crown may take a person to a court assuming the Crown thinks it has enough evidence but then we find that Police have lied in the past and various witnesses later have retracted statements made under oath in Court. I guess it boils down to what the very selected Jury believes. BTW I have not noticed any recent charges for perjury. There are 14 rules of Golf but St Andrews has a book of precedents which is a rather larger book.	Sweep (90)
802624	2009-08-20 01:23:00	The whole idea of punishment for crime is a mystery to me. I am thinking of the larikins that drive around our streets tearing up the roads etc, seemingly free of any meaningful punishment. Then there are the Maori people who are asking for payment to ok R/C procedures,isn't that blackmail? There should be a penalty imposed by the relevant authority for actions or even for inaction in my view. If you are a caregiver you can be charged with failing to provide the neccesarries of life.	Sweep (90)
802625	2009-08-20 01:39:00	The whole idea of punishment for crime is a mystery to me. I am thinking of the larikins that drive around our streets tearing up the roads etc, seemingly free of any meaningful punishment. Then there are the Maori people who are asking for payment to ok R/C procedures,isn't that blackmail? The problem is caused by the people who make the laws and the courts are insulated from the real New Zealand. They have big salaries, flash houses and cars and dont give a stuff about the trials and tribulations of real New Zealanders. If above larrikin gets caught doing sustained loss of traction/ noisy exhaust outside your working class house waking you up the judge doesn't give a stuff. He will go back to his mansion in the port hills or remers. Payment for consent from maoris is called koha. You cant touch them or say much otherwise you will be called racist.	prefect (6291)
802626	2009-08-20 01:53:00	Bognor Regis is not a town in New Zealand to my knowledge and therefore not subject to the laws we live with. Perhaps you didn't read the whole post. The Bognor Regis duty of care decision was applied against the Invercargill City Council - which is certainly in New Zealand.	Winston001 (3612)
802627	2009-08-20 02:00:00	This argument is often put forward about judges. In fact, judges - particularly Family Court and criminal judges - spend their professional lives listening to the effect of crime and poverty on people. On a daily basis they deal with people who are often at the most extreme moments in their lives and hear more victim impact statements than almost anybody else. They are not at some remove from society - they are actually at its coal face. Agreed. Judges, police, probation officers, and court lawyers are probably the only people who really know about the dark and desperate side of NZ society. Most average citizens never enter a courtroom - you should, its an eyeopener. Here is an example of what judges deal with: there is a case report which details a pedophile feeding semen to a young child to get them used to the taste, so they would be available for abuse when a bit older. That report is read by other judges and lawyers. Don't ever think judges are protected from real life.	Winston001 (3612)
802628	2009-08-20 03:34:00	Perhaps you didn't read the whole post. The Bognor Regis duty of care decision was applied against the Invercargill City Council - which is certainly in New Zealand. Incorrect. I did read the whole post but what I have not read was how the House of Lords came to the decision they did and how this applies in New Zealand especially as the Privy Council is no longer the last Court of Appeal in New Zealand so I hear. I also note that your citation comes from 1976 long before leaky homes became an issue and there are lawyers employed today to go into that issue. Still not solved some years later. Separation of Power means that the Judiciary or Court is separate from the Government or State or Crown and so it should be. But it is the Crown or Government which with the help of the Taxpayer has to make prisons in which to incarcerate various people who have offended or may have offended. And of course we do not have a House of Lords in New Zealand at this time.	Sweep (90)
802629	2009-08-20 03:59:00	I serously worry for you at times sweep. Leaky homes? Winston said shoddy house. 10 seconds of Google will reveal the case occured when there was a Privy Council, this is the first that came up, I didn't go any further..... (www.justice.govt.nz) ...........and what the relevance of the amazing revelation that we do not have a House of Lords (at this time) is beyond all comprehension. Really you are as bad as Cic, :clap	Terry Porritt (14)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7