In New Zealand we have been entertained for several years by a particular gaggle of buffoons. It has been an outstanding comedy. At the centre has been Kim Dotcom, a merry crim with lots of money, who has made an art form out of teasing, flirting, enticing, and seducing politicians of the ideological left, right, and centre.
Caught up amidst the brouhaha has been one John Banks, ACT parliamentarian who was convicted of a conspiracy to conceal a donation from Dotcom which should have been declared. The Court of Appeal has overturned that conviction and Banks is awaiting a new trial. New evidence has come to light which appears to corroborate Mr Banks's testimony.
The original conviction was courtesy of High Court Justice, Edwin Wylie who declared in the original trial that he found "Dotcom was a good witness". (The trial was by judge, and not by jury).
It seems as though the Justice Edwin Wylie deserves to share the butt of ribaldry, being well joined in with the gaggle of buffoons which have intersected with Dotcom.
The following is from a site which rates NZ judges and according to its ranking of justices in the 2014 Judge Survey Score (1-10), Justice Wylie scored a 6.7 out of 10, which ranked him at 59th out of 62. The narrative reads:
Justice Wylie is less than an imposing presence on the bench. He generally comes across as feeble and indecisive, commonly asking appearing counsel whether they agree with his conclusions and then changing his conclusions radically if one side – particularly the Crown – suggest (sic) he missed the point. As with most judges in New Zealand, Wylie J can be fair if there is no personal reason not to be. He is an average lawyer who has successfully fought above his weight but, because he commonly is riddled with self-doubt and is cursed with an overwhelming compulsion to please his audience, he is the butt of many jokes by the lawyers who appear before him.Ouch.
No comments:
Post a Comment