Straight from court today...............

My office is 'almost' next to the Christchurch Court, so on a day when not much is happening I take a wonder down to the court house.
Last night I emailed the court a suggestion that they offer free wifi- hey it's worth a try, everyone has free wifi for their customers no reason why a court can't be any different- I am still awaiting a reply.

So court doesn't start till 10.00am;

Court room one we had Judge Tony Couch. Boring, boring, boring.....he has one foot in the grave, looks and acts like death warmed up or something. So moved on from there rather quickly.

Court room two, Judge Murfitt (also a family court judge) who went running of too Wellington to get his lawyers back in the family court. He had a bit more life to him. His gown doesn't fit him right and slips off one shoulder, because it's black he kinda has this bogan look going on.

He caught one defence lawyer out. The defence lawyer tried to say his client was only a 'social' user of methamphetamine and not addicted to it (trust me, she looked very much addicted to it from the dock) in which Murfitt responded with a little laugh and  'I think you'll find it is a highly addictive drug and you can't be a social user'. He's right.

Another guy from the dock put up his hand to talk and then said to Murfitt 'your highness' . Murfitt laughed and said 'well no, not yet'. It was funny- guess you had to be there.

I had a run in with one of the registrars in court room two. I had a sudden feeling I left my phone turned on so started to look in my bag. I picked up a pen and pad to hold in my right hand while I looked at my phone with my left (serious multi tasking going on). The registrar walked past me and said, no taking notes. I said I'm not. Duh. From that point on we gave each other the 'evils' in court.

Court room three, Judge Kellar? Think it was him. Anyway he is interesting, he spent most of the time with his nose in a calendar trying to fit in trial dates with the clients lawyers. One case that came up was for a women on charges of assaulting a child under the age of 14 years. She pleaded guilty and sentencing was being set down for a date. This Judge then told her lawyer that a recent decision from the Appeals court on the 24th of June was a case for her lawyer to use as it would help in this other women's sentencing. The lawyer thanked the Judge for this information. I thought that was interesting a Judge was basically tell a lawyer which case law to use to get a lighter??? sentence??? (I haven't read this appeal court judgement yet so can't comment on what this Judge was trying to do).

Court room four, Judge MacDonald, wow I just about feel asleep! true I almost did. My little evil friend from court room two (above) came in at one point so I gave him a wave....and a grin....he looked glumly at me....lol...he's going to get a shock when he see's me again on Monday.

I learned later that Judge Farish was also sitting. http://www.courtnews.co.nz/story.php?id=5110
I missed gracing her presence. Going by this story it was good news.....she did not cry while sentencing this guy! (my past post on her crying in court when sentencing a pre-meditated rapist).
A very confusing case however, going by Judge Ryan who supports 14 year olds having sexual encounters with adult men and now this case. So confusing! and no consistency.

UP DATE ON JUDGE EMMA SMITH

She had a protest outside her home and pamphlets were delivered to her neighbours.
My insider contact from the Ministry of Justice has informed me that she is sulking.
BUT, she has very much learned her lesson. There will be no more pen throwing, and tantrums in the court room from her. She has had a stern warning from her boss and the public attention has really
and I mean REALLY put her in her place.
Lets also hope it is a lesson to other Judges. That the public are not going to tolerate their behaviour.

Court security

Because I work in the security industry I have to comment. Ok, let me re-phrase that. I am having a rant.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/8558793/Christchurch-lawyer-took-gun-to-court
This made me laugh and laugh and laugh...
Now read this and you will see why I laugh
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/3432540/Beefed-up-court-security-checks-invasive-lawyers-say

Many years ago, when you walked into the Christchurch Court there was a line to the left for lawyers (who could skip security) and one for the public on the right (to go through security). Then it got changed to include lawyers in the security line. Lawyers think they are above people and that's why they moaned about suddenly being treated as 'commoners' and having to go through security.
I think the above lawyer proved why lawyers need security checks.

More ranting............
The security at Christchurch is still really poor quality. One of the security guys looks like he's only 16 years old! seriously??? he's half the size of me. AND every time I go through the metal detector I always 'beep'. All females 'beep' because we wear metal. But I then have to have a wave wand by the guy who looks like a teenager. Today I let out a really loud sigh and rolled my eyes, making sure all five security guys (oh and girl) saw this.

Ok, so I know everyone reading this is thinking, 'but its security for a court'. Yip, I work in the security industry, my business is in security. Courts should have security and need it. But when I walk in there I can immediately pick out their weak areas and to me it's just pointless having 'security' unless your going to have all areas secure. Security is a billion dollar industry and government departments have a very small budget for security which I think is wrong.

Wellington is another court I regularly go to and theirs is just as bad. The Ministry Technical and Judicial Security really need to have a complete over hall of their staff and advisors.