| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 55961 | 2005-03-23 20:22:00 | Favouritism from the Court AGAIN. | JJJJJ (528) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 337320 | 2005-03-25 01:37:00 | . Granted the victims in this case need to be protected, but at what price? And why do the assailants seem to get more rights and protection than the victims? Interesting fact for you (overheard on the news, may not be 100% correct) it costs more to house one prisoner, than the average person earns in the year...... Go figure Firstly this is interim suppression only. His name may be published in due course, if convicted. This happens in historical sexual abuse cases where the victim cannot be easily identified if the offender is named. Plenty of these criminals are named - Deborah Coddington even published a book of their names. I agree that victims seem to be overlooked but that is more perception than fact. Victim Support has existed for about 15 years to help them. The law requires a Victim Impact Report to be written for the Judge, so the victim has an influence on sentencing. The ultimate answer is no more victims - people stop committing crimes. That Utopia is some way off. Why it costs so much to imprison criminals is a mystery. The whole subject of punishment is huge and full of disagreement. |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 337321 | 2005-03-25 01:49:00 | I'm just wondering. If the lawyer charges say $200 an hour to write a letter (pulled that one outta the air no offence winston), I wounder what he charges for bodyguard duty? Good one Sam. Lets examine the question, using costing rules: 1. Is the rate reasonable? $200/hour is an average and fair rate. 2. Was the work done? Yep, no doubt about that. :D 3. Was it necessary? Absolutely! 4. Was it urgent? Damned right. 5. Was it valuable to the client? Oh yes. On a time basis, the protective act used one unit (6 minutes) of time = $20. But Police and media interviews, plus possible court hearing time if called as a witness mean that the lawyer estimates about 5.1 hours on this job. Say 6 hours. So the bill is 6 x $200/hour = $1200 + GST = $1350. :thumbs: |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 337322 | 2005-03-25 03:07:00 | man who fixes brakes on car: $15 per hour (3 year apprenticeship) lawyer helping man in legal issue $200 per hour (3 year degree) result of brake mans poor workmanship: possible death result of lawyers poor workmanship: lose legal case now......in my opinion the brake man should be paid a lot more than the lawyer |
drcspy (146) | ||
| 337323 | 2005-03-25 07:41:00 | Absolutely. So next time you are at the garage, tell your mechanic you expect to pay $200/hour. Even better, pay him at Judy Bailey's rate. ;) After all, surely a mechanic is more useful than a teleprompt reader? |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 337324 | 2005-03-25 07:51:00 | lol nah I was thinkin more of payin the lawyer $15 p/h :p | drcspy (146) | ||
| 337325 | 2005-03-25 09:00:00 | Even better, pay him at Judy Bailey's rate. ;) After all, surely a mechanic is more useful than a teleprompt reader? Pretty sure Dragon's Naturally Speaking will do a better job too than Judy, and at a whopping big saving in cost... :rolleyes: |
BoboTheClown (5652) | ||
| 337326 | 2005-03-25 11:59:00 | Good one Sam. Lets examine the question, using costing rules: 1. Is the rate reasonable? $200/hour is an average and fair rate. 2. Was the work done? Yep, no doubt about that. :D 3. Was it necessary? Absolutely! 4. Was it urgent? Damned right. 5. Was it valuable to the client? Oh yes. On a time basis, the protective act used one unit (6 minutes) of time = $20. But Police and media interviews, plus possible court hearing time if called as a witness mean that the lawyer estimates about 5. 1 hours on this job. Say 6 hours. So the bill is 6 x $200/hour = $1200 + GST = $1350. :thumbs: :thumbs: |
Sam I Am (1679) | ||
| 337327 | 2005-03-25 12:50:00 | Nah, as a journalist, gotta stick up for Judy. Yes, she does do more than just turn up & read an autocue. (Believe me, I've been there) Judy Bailey was a journalist in ChCh TV's newsroom when she was put on to fronting their "The South Tonight" yonks ago. Later the powers-that-be offered her network news presenting because she was so good. She's still a journalist at heart, though, so you can believe the ads where she talks about the content of the programme. As one who left on ordinary journalist pay rates (before SOEs & independent contracts turned presenters into highly-paid celebrities) I've learned not to envy such salaries. TVNZ was a monopoly in my day. We took what was offered - no choice. A journalist who was a presenter as well got no extra payment, merely a time adjustment in the hours you worked. . Now competition's made it a different world. Judy Bailey's worth a lot of money to the network. People trust her, as she comes over as a nice person ( which she truly is) and she's very good at what she does. You've got to remember - this is showbiz now. The staid old BBC style presenters of original television would have today's audience turning off in droves. Their attention span is brief & they change channels fast.... I'm happier that we have some NZers earning big bikkies for something we can at least see than pumping the money overseas to multimillionaires whose staff do the work for them. And I don't have to mention names, do I? (No, please don't start slagging Bill G off - again) So next time I rob a bank, I'll be happy to hire Winston001 - even if one of us to travel to organise my defence.. (Hope he doesn't do civil cases only) |
Laura (43) | ||
| 337328 | 2005-03-25 21:39:00 | I remember Judy as a presenter of The South Tonight <showing his age>. I used to live in Southland in those days :D |
Myth (110) | ||
| 337329 | 2005-03-25 22:48:00 | You've got to remember - this is showbiz now. That is why programmes are no longer called programmes, even current affairs programmes, but shows. |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 | |||||