COMMENTARY: "Gordon Campbell on Cunliffe's speech, and the Lundy decision," published by NZ News on October 10, 2013.
GIST: "In the wake of the Privy Council decision on Mark Lundy, even Justice Minister Judith Collins has reportedly rejected the need for an independent body empowered to investigate contentious cases. This is all too typical pig-headedness on her part. Arthur Allen Thomas, David Bain, Rex Haig, David Dougherty and now Lundy…almost every major criminal case in New Zealand seems to have left large numbers of people with the feeling that our justice system regularly gets it wrong, and can’t be relied on to either (a) convict the right person or (b) manage the proceedings of justice in a way that instills confidence that the ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ standard has been properly met. Unlike Collins, Britain has been willing to do something about it. It took several notorious cases where a miscarriage of justice – or, as some have dubbed it, ‘a carriage of misjustice’ – occurred, before it did so. (Namely, the Birmingham Six and Guildford Four cases.) In the mid 1990s, an independent body called the Criminal Cases Review Committee (CCRC) was set up by the British government to investigate applications from the public for the review of possibly wrongful convictions, after the appeal process has been exhausted.........The dodgy reliability of expert witnesses – and the reliance that juries place on them – is a worldwide problem. Also, carrying out investigations into wrongful convictions is never likely to be a widely popular process. Politicians prefer to be seen to be supporting the victims of crime, rather than the victims of the justice system. Judges, while they may privately concede they are fallible and would welcome any competent body that created more confidence in the justice system, are likely to have misgivings about a process that some judges would regard as second-guessing their work. The mere existence of a permanent body like the CCRC indicates that the Police and the courts routinely get the process of justice badly wrong. Some people would prefer to perpetuate the fiction that this doesn’t happen."
The entire commentary - including an interview with Professor Graham Zellick, who headed the CCRC between 2003 and 2008, can be found at:
http://www.nznewsuk.co.uk/news/?id=44979&story=Gordon-Campbell-on-Cunliffe-s-speech--and-the-Lundy-decision
See TVNZ: "David Bain's lawyer issues challenge to John Key": Mr Key backed up similar comments by Justice Minister Judith Collins who said she was confident New Zealand's system was efficient. But David Bain's lawyer, Michael Reed QC, says his client's case shows the current system does not work. "If you're going to suggest that someone's son or father is going to be in prison for say 20 years, surely that's worth and independent commission to resolve those things," Mr Reed told ONE News. "The police are not independent. They're defending their patch." He says an independent review panel must be established with representatives from outside New Zealand. "The Prime Minister has said that there's an adequate system for dealing with new evidence such as in the Bain case. I challenge him or Judith Collins to come and tell us what that adequate system is, because there is no court that David Bain can go to for the new evidence," Mr Reed said. "This is nothing to do with the judicial review, this is the new evidence. There's no independent body he can go to. Will either Collins or John Key please tell us where we go to now. Where is this adequate system because there is no system." Mr Reed said: "With this new evidence, our experts say it means one thing. The police are trying to fudge it by a rather waffly report. And now we're left with where do we go from now, who's going to resolve that now? Where is this court that we can go to? There isn't."
http://tvnz.co.nz/politics-news/david-bain-s-lawyer-issues-challenge-john-key-5647016?ref=rss
PUBLISHER'S NOTE:
Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following this case.
I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.
The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/
Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.
I look foward to hearing from readers at:
hlevy15@gmail.com;
Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.
Sent from my iPad
