About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

April 18, 2016 1:00pm by David Farrar

Never call a Judge a c*** on the Internet!

This transcript was found by Tim Murphy at The Spinoff. Hilarious. Good on the Judge.

Share this:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
More

Reddit
Pinterest
Print
Tumblr

Like this:

Like Loading...

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment49

Humour
New Zealand
Judge Roberts

Related Stories

The Press on Judging the Judges
28 days for contempt of court
Serious judicial misconduct

Comments (49)

Login to comment or vote

Boris Piscina

Priceless. That will probably go globally viral, and deservedly so 🙂
15 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 1:45pm
hmmokrightitis

Ive had the pleasure of being in Mr Roberts court once, on a jury. He is brilliant, compassionate and downright hilarious.
12 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 1:46pm
David Garrett

Excellent…but note the morons on the moronic “twitter” whining about this supposedly influencing how the Judge dealt with it…he could hardly have been more lenient…One wonders how much in fines would need to be “remitted” every year if there were still debtors’ prisons…
19 1
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 1:47pm
Doc

Only problem with that Judgement is that the defendant has effectively been awarded an hourly rate of > $20/hr net!

That’s an effective salary of more than $55k pa. for what will, no doubt, be highly unproductive work…
13 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 1:58pm
David Garrett

Doc: quite so…but that is our justice system today…other than my baby 3S, more and more lenient…
14 1
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 1:59pm
The Virgin

While I applaud the Judge for making an example of La Rue, why is it on a weekly basis we have judges around NZ dishing out weak sentences to the scum who come before them? It appears the common phrase nowadays for a judge to learn is “manifestly unjust” as our 3 strikes legislation is rarely used.
9 2
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 2:00pm
UglyTruth

Strange they weren’t so proactive about a District Court judge getting called out for fraud.
6 11
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 2:01pm
Nigel Kearney

That’s what I was thinking Doc. It’s a very generous hourly rate for someone who can’t get a job. Converting the $6244 in fines into community service at a rate of $5 an hour seems closer to the mark. On a good day you might even get the fines paid earlier.
9 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 2:01pm
cmm

@Doc

Plus he’s still getting the dole on top of that, so more like an effective salary of about $85k per year….

Assuming he actually works the full 300 hours. More likely he’ll do less than 100 before they stop hassling him every day, so triple that to $250k per year….

Not bad for a bloke who can’t even spell swear words properly.
12 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 2:04pm
fernglas

This is a pretty standard amount of community service for that level of fines. Roberts would have enjoyed it all hugely and might have even given the guy a bit of a discount for bad behaviour.
6 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 2:15pm
fernglas

U Truth

A DCJ “called out” for fraud? Do tell !!
5 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 2:16pm
alex Masterley

I know Judge Roberts.
He had a well deserved reputation in the Taranaki for his forthright comments in sentencings and a degree of compassion which came as a bit of a surprise.
The Judge is also a good bloke to have a beer with.
11 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 2:18pm
mikenmild

I have an inkling that 300 hours is the maximum for community work anyway.
3 1
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 2:23pm
UglyTruth

A DCJ “called out” for fraud? Do tell !!

Back in September 2011 Richard Russell admitted to committing fraud during a preliminary hearing.
The fraud related to him making a false representation in relation to pleading.
1 8
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 2:39pm
fernglas

Making a false representation in relation to pleading? Accusing a sitting Judge of fraud is a big call Ugly; I require further and better particulars. Or is this something that has been dealt with on this blog before and am I merely asking you to reiterate a previous series of posts. If it is the latter, I will go back and find out for myself.
5 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 2:53pm
UglyTruth

Making a false representation in relation to pleading?

Yes. No plea was entered, and yet he entered into the record that a plea had been entered.

When pressed on this point he initially obfuscated but then said “it’s the rules”, which is true. It’s standard procedure when the Crown doesn’t have jurisdiction, since the act of pleading implies that jurisdiction has been obtained voluntarily, and the Crown won’t admit that it doesn’t have universal jurisdiction in District Courts (for obvious reasons).

Accusing a sitting Judge of fraud is a big call Ugly; I require further and better particulars.

What’s your basis of requirement?
1 8
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 3:09pm
Nostradamus

Fernglas:

This matter has indeed been dealt with – at length – on Kiwiblog.

Start here and read through to the end of the thread.

Interested in your thoughts.
5 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 3:12pm
UglyTruth

This matter has indeed been dealt with..

LOL

You pontificating about rules of evidence doesn’t amount to dealing with anything, Nosty.
1 7
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 3:17pm
Nostradamus

UglyTruth:

Do you have a practising certificate that entitles you to proide legal services?

If not, then on what basis do you think you know more than lawyers (such as Alex Masterley, FE Smith and Nookin) who comment here?
12 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 3:21pm
UglyTruth

…on what basis do you think you know more than lawyers (such as Alex Masterley, FE Smith and Nookin) who comment here?

The fact that I was there at the time and heard the admission along with everyone else present, while they were not.
1 7
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 3:25pm
mikenmild

Nostradamus
I believe that a practising certificate is just another fictitious device invented by Crown servants to further the pretence that they can exercise jurisdiction over persons (or people, I forget which).
7 1
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 3:30pm
Nostradamus

UglyTruth:

You use the language of “admission” but have never substantiated it.

Youi haven’t explained how you get from “It’s the rules” to “I admit fraud”. That’s a quantum leap in logic. I very much doubt any judge – let alone Judge Russell – would make any such admission.
8 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 3:36pm
dad4justice

Nostra is that Nutkin called Nookin really a family court lawyer?

No wonder I talk too bush lawyers.
1 4
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 3:55pm
UglyTruth

You use the language of “admission” but have never substantiated it.

Says the liar who denied that Russell made the admission when he wasn’t even there.

Youi haven’t explained how you get from “It’s the rules” to “I admit fraud”

You’ve reversed the order that the events actually happened. First he admitted to the fraud, and when pressed on the point said “it’s the rules”. I made that clear in my 3:09.
1 5
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 4:01pm
Nostradamus

G’day D4J.

I don’t know Nookin personally but, from what I’ve seen, he doesn’t practise as a fanily lawyer.

Have you read the story about the Lebanon incident? This article provides some context. And this article provides more information regarding the “murky world” of child recovery agents.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 4:09pm
alex Masterley

Nostradamus,
I’ve been watching this thread as time has permitted.
Its interesting the way threads develop a life of their own and the foibles of posters become visible.
7 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 4:15pm
dad4justice

Hi Nostra is a very sad world when child recovery agents are deployed to scare the crap out of innocent and vulnerable children.

I wonder what judicial process is allowing the children to enter this “murky world” ?
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 4:34pm
fernglas

Nostradamus

Thanks for the link to the thread, but life is too short to read all of it. I have dealt with many people over the years who deny the Court’s jurisdiction. The arguments invariably rely on selective misinterpretation of historical information and are propounded by individuals who are unable to see their own logical flaws. Generally, they can be shown to be wrong repeatedly but refuse to accept the fact. To be ignored at all costs.
7 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 4:36pm
Nostradamus

I completely agree D4J.

The second article states:

Parents often turn to child recovery agents if their children are taken to countries – like Lebanon – which are not signatories to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, which established procedures to ensure their legal return.

So the supposed justification for a child recovery operation is “I have no legal options”.

The lawyers (at least publically) want nothing to do with it:

Melbourne-based family lawyer Paul Staindl has dissuaded clients wanting to do recoveries. He describes the recovery brokers industry asmercenaries and “guns for hire”. He says his law firm, Clancy Triado, which specialises in in family law, “actively discourages” such practices. “If a client wants to go and do that, we say we are not sure we are the people for you,” says Staindl. You are operating outside the law and there is no reason why the lawyers wouldn’t become [implicated] in some sort of conspiracy to abduct.”

It’s hard to think of a more traumatic experience for a child than being forcibly pushed into a car by a stranger and taken away.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 4:51pm
UglyTruth

The arguments invariably rely on selective misinterpretation of historical information and are propounded by individuals who are unable to see their own logical flaws. Generally, they can be shown to be wrong repeatedly but refuse to accept the fact. To be ignored at all costs.

And yet you haven’t contested my position about what happened, fernglas.

If the District Courts actually had universal jurisdiction then all that would be required would be an entry of “no plea” in the record when no plea was made.
1 5
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 4:51pm
Michael

Hilarious !!!!
6 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 5:14pm
UglyTruth

The really funny part is that the Windsor’s original declaration of sovereignty was unlawful, meaning that Crown’s so-called legislation relating to New Zealand has always been fraudulent.
1 8
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 5:22pm
mikenmild

Really funny, Ugly. So why are people laughing at you?
5 2
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 5:33pm
UglyTruth

So why are people laughing at you?

I don’t know. Maybe they can’t cope with the idea that I’m right.

“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
2 4
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 5:39pm
stephieboy

Ugly Truth.

Could you tell us about the shape and structure of NZ’s constitutional and legal system if you were in charge ? I know it could be a serious struggle but do try and make it as intelligible as possible .
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 5:51pm
mikenmild

I certainly appreciate that variation of the Galileo Gambit, Ugly.
3 1
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 6:16pm
UglyTruth

Could you tell us about the shape and structure of NZ’s constitutional and legal system if you were in charge ?

A constitutional system is a set of principles which forms the basis of a system of law. In NZ’s case those principles can be found within English common law, which developed from aspects of Judaic law and Christian ethics, and from English customs at the time of King Alfred the Great.

These principles can be described as transience, reason, and ethos. Transience means that things have a beginning and an end, and that something happened to bring these things into being (i.e. a creative agency of some kind was involved). Reason implies that mankind has the ability to understand the world and to communicate this understanding, and ethos implies that mankind has the ability to tell right from wrong in an objective sense, either by conscience or by emotive response.

Law developed from these principles considers traditions as being of value, but like anything that exists within time these traditions are transient and should be discarded if changing circumstances show them to be of no value. Facts and reason are essential to both science and law and as such neither of these realms are subject to majority rule. Law and politics are fundamentally different areas of endeavour.
0 5
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 6:43pm
mikenmild

traditions are transient and should be discarded if changing circumstances show them to be of no value

Luckily we have a parliamentary democracy to adapt the law to changing circumstances. That allows all sort of useful things – laws to licence road users, for example.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 7:00pm
Aliog

Fuck off Ugly – thread-jacking again.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 7:04pm
Aliog

And well done the judge – entertaining, compassionate and deserves a huge uptick for making a point so brilliantly.
5 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 7:06pm
UglyTruth

Luckily we have a parliamentary democracy ..

All you’ve got is limited parliamentary representative mob rule. I bet you can’t find a single “official” document that describes the differences between democracy (i.e. English democracy) and mob rule.
0 4
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 7:11pm
mikenmild

Maybe Black’s dictionary could help, or Blackstone’s commentaries, or the Chronicles of Narnia.
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 7:16pm
UglyTruth

Fuck off Ugly – thread-jacking again.

It’s not my fault that none of you Nanny State muppets have got it together enough to realize that you’re being slowly fucked to death by the Crown.
1 5
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 7:16pm
stephieboy

Ugly Truth , sorry to see you feel so very disenfranchised and I would guess subject to mob rule . You missed the vitally important contribution to the development of the common law namely the Normans and components of French law . This culminated in Henry II creating a uniform and unifying set of legal codes and administration of justice throughout his kingdom that came to be known as the common Law ,

http://universitypublishingonline.org/boydell/chapter.jsf?bid=CBO9781846155536&cid=CBO9781846155536A017
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 7:20pm
UglyTruth

Sorry stephieboy, but that’s bullshit.

“That ancient collection of unwritten maxims and customs, which is called the common law, however compounded or from whatever fountains derived, had subsisted immemorially in this kingdom; and, though somewhat altered and impaired by the violence of the times, had in great measure weathered the rude shock of the Norman conquest.” Blackstone, Commentaries intro section 1.
1 4
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 7:37pm
stephieboy

Ugly Truth,

“…In 1154, Henry II became the first Plantagenet king. Among many achievements, Henry institutionalized common law by creating a unified system of law “common” to the country through incorporating and elevating local custom to the national, ending local control and peculiarities, eliminating arbitrary remedies and reinstating a jury system—citizens sworn on oath to investigate reliable criminal accusations and civil claims. The jury reached its verdict through evaluating common local knowledge, not necessarily through the presentation of evidence, a distinguishing factor from today’s civil and criminal court systems.

Henry II developed the practice of sending judges from his own central court to hear the various disputes throughout the country. His judges would resolve disputes on an ad hoc basis according to what they interpreted the customs to be. The king’s judges would then return to London and often discuss their cases and the decisions they made with the other judges. These decisions would be recorded and filed. In time, a rule, known as stare decisis (also commonly known as precedent) developed, whereby a judge would be bound to follow the decision of an earlier judge; he was required to adopt the earlier judge’s interpretation of the law and apply the same principles promulgated by that earlier judge if the two cases had similar facts to one another. Once judges began to regard each other’s decisions to be binding precedent, the pre-Norman system of local customs and law varying in each locality was replaced by a system that was (at least in theory, though not always in practice) common throughout the whole country, hence the name “common law.…

…..Judge-made common law operated as the primary source of law for several hundred years, before Parliament acquired legislative powers to create statutory law. It is important to understand that common law is the older and more traditional source of law, and legislative power is simply a layer applied on top of the older common law foundation. Since the 12th century, courts have had parallel and co-equal authority to make law[52]—”legislating from the bench” is a traditional and essential function of courts, which was carried over into the U.S. system as an essential component of the “judicial power” specified by Article III of the U.S. constitution.[53] Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. observed in 1917 that “judges do and must legislate.”[54] There are legitimate debates on how the powers of courts and legislatures should be balanced. However, a view that courts lack law-making power is historically inaccurate and constitutionally unsupportable…”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law#Medieval_English_common_law
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 7:58pm
Nookin

“and ethos implies that mankind has the ability to tell right from wrong in an objective sense, either by conscience or by emotive response.”

Surely that is a contradiction in terms. You want an objective approach to right and wrong but choose subjective methods of identification. In fact, how much more subjective and less objective can you get than emotion?
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 8:23pm
UglyTruth

http://www.examiner.com/article/jimmy-wales-contradicts-the-rest-of-the-internet

Guess which company is marked as the registrant organization of all of the following domain names?

WikiLeaks.com
WikiLeaks.net
WikiLeaks.us
WikiLeaks.mobi
WikiLeaks.biz

That’s right — Wikia! Thanks to Wikia, Inc.’s chief operating officer, Michael Davis, all five of those WikiLeaks domains are registered to Wikia, Inc., which is ultimately presided over by its co-founder Jimmy Wales — the guy who says he has “absolutely nothing to do with WikiLeaks”. Also, Michael Davis used to sit on the board of trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation, alongside Jimbo Wales.

http://uncensored.co.nz/2011/01/24/wikileaks-is-the-%E2%80%9Ccognitive-infiltration%E2%80%9D-operation-demanded-by-cass-sunstein/
0 4
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 8:26pm
UglyTruth

“and ethos implies that mankind has the ability to tell right from wrong in an objective sense, either by conscience or by emotive response.”

Surely that is a contradiction in terms. You want an objective approach to right and wrong but choose subjective methods of identification. In fact, how much more subjective and less objective can you get than emotion?

I mean objective in the sense that people normally have similar emotive responses to events that are meaningful in social terms. For example anger at betrayal, sorrow at suffering, happiness at justice. Of course reason also has a role to play here, but I wanted to emphasize emotion as an ethical compass because rationality can be applied in an predatory or psychopathic way.
0 2
Log in to Reply
Report
April 18, 2016 8:55pm

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Len has the lowest Council attendance

Inflation now at 0.4% »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Highlights

Under control?
Islamic terror attacks in the West are far less common since 2017
Houston we have a problem
We’re still last!

Top Stories

General Debate 15 October 2021
Contact tracing may crumble at 20% of promised capacity
Unbalanced journalism
Another disgustingly light sentence
Guest Post: We Have Been Robbed
Mulgan on health reforms
Guest Post: TERFs, Transphobes, and “Haters”: How Labour and Green MPs are attacking democracy
Start boosters now before Covid-19 spreads wide
General Debate 16 October 2021
General Debate 14 October 2021

Recent Posts

General Debate 16 October 2021 16 October 2021
Guest Post: TERFs, Transphobes, and “Haters”: How Labour and Green MPs are attacking democracy 16 October 2021
Unbalanced journalism 15 October 2021
Mulgan on health reforms 15 October 2021
Another disgustingly light sentence 15 October 2021
General Debate 15 October 2021 15 October 2021
Contact tracing may crumble at 20% of promised capacity 15 October 2021
Start boosters now before Covid-19 spreads wide 14 October 2021
Guest Post: We Have Been Robbed 14 October 2021
$3 million for 3 students! 14 October 2021
General Debate 14 October 2021 14 October 2021
Under control? 14 October 2021

Never miss a post

Email Address

Recent Comments

Guest Post: TERFs, Transphobes, and “Haters”: How Labour and Green MPs are attacking democracy
KevO'Brien
Guest Post: TERFs, Transphobes, and “Haters”: How Labour and Green MPs are attacking democracy
Berend de Boer
General Debate 16 October 2021
Maggy Wassilieff
General Debate 16 October 2021
Maggy Wassilieff
Guest Post: TERFs, Transphobes, and “Haters”: How Labour and Green MPs are attacking democracy
Tony Stuart
General Debate 16 October 2021
CJames
General Debate 16 October 2021
Tony Stuart
General Debate 16 October 2021
Benedict Yu
General Debate 16 October 2021
ecco
Guest Post: TERFs, Transphobes, and “Haters”: How Labour and Green MPs are attacking democracy
mikenmildagain
General Debate 16 October 2021
Yvette
General Debate 16 October 2021
Biscuit
General Debate 16 October 2021
Ra Henare
Guest Post: TERFs, Transphobes, and “Haters”: How Labour and Green MPs are attacking democracy
Lee C
Guest Post: TERFs, Transphobes, and “Haters”: How Labour and Green MPs are attacking democracy
artemisia

Links

Vaccination wisdom from three brilliant whaea
The Spinoff
Saturday soapbox
Hompaddock
Climate Change: Another legal victory
No Right Turn
David Seymour and Judith Collins meet Daniel Hannan
Point of Order
Get Vaccinated Tomorrow Or Shut Your Pie Hole
Cactus Kate
‘OUR’ CHIPPY ADDS ANOTHER STRING TO HIS BOW
No Minister
Labour & Green MPs are misrepresenting the ‘conversion therapy’ bill
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
United Rugby Championship Predictions for Week 4
Stats Chat
Rest of New Zealand won’t move to Level 1 until threat of Christmas in the Park has passed
The Civilian
Breaking Views Update: Week of 20.12.20
Breaking Views
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Grant Robertson’s U-turn on debt
Dan Moskovitz
Ministry of Social Development spy on beneficiaries using Facebook
The Daily Blog
HYOTHESIS AND CONSPIRACIES AT THE TPP HEARINGS
Politik
Undermining the Kiwi Way
NZCPR
Daily Review 07/10/2015
The Standard
The decline of NZ civilisation, part 34.
Kiwipolitico

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

© 2003-2021 David Farrar

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d

%d bloggers like this: