Another long term prisoner released - will we see the same dodging re compensation?

Forums › Off topic › Another long term prisoner released - will we see the same dodging re compensation?

1 | 2

gzt

17149 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1251020 4-Mar-2015 14:06

"Mr Bain’s claim for compensation falls outside existing Cabinet guidelines because when his conviction was quashed, a retrial was ordered. However, Cabinet has also reserved a residual discretion to consider claims outside the guidelines in “extraordinary circumstances … where this is in the interests of justice”. To satisfy the test for the payment of compensation that applies in his case, Mr Bain will need to prove his innocence on the balance of probabilities and be able to satisfy Cabinet that the circumstances are sufficiently extraordinary that it would be in the interests of justice for compensation to be paid."

NZ Government

gzt

17149 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1251038 4-Mar-2015 14:11

Geektastic: Another long term prisoner released - will we see the same dodging re compensation?

No, we will not. Because this case easily meets the defined cabinet criteria for compensation.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29769 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1251040 4-Mar-2015 14:12

Mr Bain is unlikely to be innocent however you look at it

floydbloke

3523 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1251044 4-Mar-2015 14:16

gzt:
Geektastic: Another long term prisoner released - will we see the same dodging re compensation?

No, we will not. Because this case easily meets the defined cabinet criteria for compensation.

My understanding is that there is still some consideration whether there should be another re-trial, which, I would think, suggests he is certainly not eligible yet.

Did Eric Clapton really think she looked wonderful...or was it after the 15th outfit she tried on and he just wanted to get to the party and get a drink?

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1251068 4-Mar-2015 14:38

Primary difference between the cases (IMHO) is that there is DNA evidence that definitively proves that someone else committed the rape of SusanB, and it's reasonable to argue that the person who did rape her was the person most likely to have killed her.

Whereas in the Bain case, there has been no proof (or even any conjecture that passed initial scrutiny) that identifies anyone else as the killer.

Thus, David will need to establish a case that shows somehow it is more likely that someone (E.g. Robin) else did it, than him in order for this to meet the threshold of a "grave miscarriage of justice"

SheriffNZ

671 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1251077 4-Mar-2015 14:53

I think compensation is an interesting debate. My position is as follows. If the trial is fair and there are no material mistakes by the police/judiciary, then the government shouldn't be liable for compensation. The occasional incorrect verdict is a unfortunate by-product of our judicial system but if the police prove their case to beyond reasonable doubt and your lawyer can't beat their arguments at the time, you've unfortunately rolled the dice and lost.

I appreciate that if I was wrongly convicted, I may have a different opinion.

DravidDavid

1907 posts

Uber Geek

#1251091 4-Mar-2015 15:29

mattbush: We are fortunate to live in a country where our justice system is not corrupt or biased. You may like to compare with the journalists held in Egypt for so long and whether or not they will seek compensation!

I agree we have one of the least corrupt justice systems in the world, but I believe it is heavily biased, especially in family cases regarding asset splitting and children. Having been intimately involved in a very recent case involving a friend of mine (and previous cases involving family on business matters), and am quite confident based on what I've seen that small yet significant injustices happen every day that just shouldn't happen at all. In all cases, it was pretty clear to see that the legal system is over-worked and under staffed, which may be a significant contributor to the aforementioned injustice that occurs.

KiwiNZ: there is a big difference between corruption and making mistakes

In Pora's case, the police made mistakes and also demonstrated corruption by paying witnesses to say all the right things to keep him in prison.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

gzt

17149 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1251094 4-Mar-2015 15:36

floydbloke:
gzt:
Geektastic: Another long term prisoner released - will we see the same dodging re compensation?

No, we will not. Because this case easily meets the defined cabinet criteria for compensation.

My understanding is that there is still some consideration whether there should be another re-trial, which, I would think, suggests he is certainly not eligible yet.

Gosh. That's true:

"[]Lord Brian Kerr on Tuesday asked the parties to instead make written submissions within four weeks "as to whether the appellant should be ordered to stand trial again".

http://www.3news.co.nz/nznews/retrial-decision-delay-surprised-poras-legal-team-2015030410

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1251096 4-Mar-2015 15:37

DravidDavid:
mattbush: We are fortunate to live in a country where our justice system is not corrupt or biased. You may like to compare with the journalists held in Egypt for so long and whether or not they will seek compensation!

I agree we have one of the least corrupt justice systems in the world, but I believe it is heavily biased, especially in family cases regarding asset splitting and children. Having been intimately involved in a very recent case involving a friend of mine (and previous cases involving family on business matters), and am quite confident based on what I've seen that small yet significant injustices happen every day that just shouldn't happen at all. In all cases, it was pretty clear to see that the legal system is over-worked and under staffed, which may be a significant contributor to the aforementioned injustice that occurs.

KiwiNZ: there is a big difference between corruption and making mistakes

In Pora's case, the police made mistakes and also demonstrated corruption by paying witnesses to say all the right things to keep him in prison.

If the later is correct then there is an element of corruption and it is quite likely that there would be a call for an enquiry.

gzt

17149 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1251102 4-Mar-2015 15:42

SheriffNZ: I think compensation is an interesting debate. My position is as follows. If the trial is fair and there are no material mistakes by the police/judiciary, then the government shouldn't be liable for compensation.

Any particular case aside. As I understand it, this is not the legal position provided by the cabinet guidelines. It is not actually a liability at this level, it is an issue of providing justice where justice did not occur (even though all due process may have been followed).

scuwp

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#1251127 4-Mar-2015 16:23

Speculation that he could be up for $2m !!!

I hope someone helps him manage that. A fool and his money are soon parted... i hope he uses it to get his life sorted.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

alacritynz

3 posts

Wannabe Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1251457 5-Mar-2015 02:14

Hmmm. One main issue, as I see it. Like most professions, both the judiciary and the police dislike having to admit they made a mistake, and mistakes always happen.

The difficulty in NZ (since the abolition of the Privy Council access) is that the judiciary have to review other judicial decisions and the police generally have to review police actions.

As we are also a very small country population wise, the members of both the police and especially the judiciary are small and there is always a bias (even if only subconciously) to not making your colleagues and/or friends look bad.

Thus we seem to struggle to effectively correct internal mistakes using internal review channels.

I'm amazed that no-one has yet brought up the Peter Ellis case - another instance where it seems likely an injustice was done, but he served his time, lost most of his life and no-one in government seems to care enough to reopen the issue.

Just my thoughts anyway

1 | 2