Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14
1888 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 316


  Reply # 1077674 1-Jul-2014 11:06
Send private message

KiwiNZ: ...or would you prefer Government staff to act outside the law?

That would certainly seem more convenient in this case...

Does the government give a reason for denial and make their thought process known in your particular case?





Sometimes what you don't get is a blessing in disguise!

11875 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5511

Trusted

  Reply # 1077696 1-Jul-2014 11:11
Send private message

DravidDavid:
KiwiNZ: ...or would you prefer Government staff to act outside the law?

That would certainly seem more convenient in this case...

Does the government give a reason for denial and make their thought process known in your particular case?


I cannot answer that as I have only ever been granted dispensation. I can however say that with the Ministry I worked for we quoted the appropriate policy and authorising section of the Act.




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


 
 
 
 


Try Wrike: fast, easy, and efficient project collaboration software


3456 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1059


  Reply # 1077697 1-Jul-2014 11:12
One person supports this post
Send private message

KiwiNZ: 
1. The job is/was by no means secure.
2. It was a real job with real stress and pressures.
3. I would have loved to have only worked 40 hours per week.

The decisions they make MUST be supportable by the empowering Act of Parliament, if the reason being put forward is not supported by evidence or is not authorised under the act they cannot grant it, or would you prefer Government staff to act outside the law?


I completely disagree with you.  I've known people with the opposite opinion of yours (in local govt too, wastage is huge).  

Incidentally, the letter I sent to them was legally acceptable in law as were the last 5 times. They just chose to ignore my explanation this time. This lack of consistency shows disrespect towards people who take the time to return their forms. Basically they are saying they think I am lying. 

Anyway, thats all i have to say, my opinion is not altered by you.  




2349 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 253


  Reply # 1077704 1-Jul-2014 11:23
Send private message

Maybe the original excuses were denied simply because there wasn't the supporting letter from employer/client. If so it would have been helpful if they had pointed that out.

Peter Williams the barrister was interviewed on radio recently and he was emphatic that the jury system should continue. He acknowledged that the low pay was a problem that needed attention.

Any chance that the extra money to pay jurors will come from within the Court system looks unlikely as their latest money saver "Paperless Courts" seems to have collapsed.

1114 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 814

Subscriber

  Reply # 1077811 1-Jul-2014 13:05
2 people support this post
Send private message

surfisup1000:
I completely disagree with you.  I've known people with the opposite opinion of yours (in local govt too, wastage is huge).  

Incidentally, the letter I sent to them was legally acceptable in law as were the last 5 times. They just chose to ignore my explanation this time. This lack of consistency shows disrespect towards people who take the time to return their forms. Basically they are saying they think I am lying. 

Anyway, thats all i have to say, my opinion is not altered by you.  





Given your rather aggressive attitude and in view of the fact that whether sufficient evidence has been supplied can be open to interpretation, personally it's hard to take your outrage very seriously. Look, if they want more information, just supply it. It's really not that much work and a normal, understanding client should be happy to supply the letter you requested and got. So quit with all the drama and accusations that people are just out to ruin you.


And this is coming from a real life lawyer with trial experience who despises jury trials....




13743 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2388

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1077813 1-Jul-2014 13:05
One person supports this post
Send private message

KiwiNZ: I worked for the Government...

1. The job is/was by no means secure.
2. It was a real job with real stress and pressures.
3. I would have loved to have only worked 40 hours per week.

The decisions they make MUST be supportable by the empowering Act of Parliament, if the reason being put forward is not supported by evidence or is not authorised under the act they cannot grant it, or would you prefer Government staff to act outside the law?


I've worked in government. Some people work like demons, some people do virtually nothing. Politics and stupid games are rampant, and productivity is awful because of it.




AWS Certified Solution Architect Professional, Sysop Administrator Associate, and Developer Associate
TOGAF certified enterprise architect
Professional photographer




3456 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1059


  Reply # 1077851 1-Jul-2014 13:29
Send private message

dejadeadnz:

Given your rather aggressive attitude and in view of the fact that whether sufficient evidence has been supplied can be open to interpretation, personally it's hard to take your outrage very seriously. Look, if they want more information, just supply it. It's really not that much work and a normal, understanding client should be happy to supply the letter you requested and got. So quit with all the drama and accusations that people are just out to ruin you.


And this is coming from a real life lawyer with trial experience who despises jury trials....



Aggressive? Not sure about that. Just trying to make a living and these people are interfering in my life at a time when I really don't need this.  

I did supply more information, I just hope it will be enough for them.

Hopefully you will get called to be on a jury one day when it is most inopportune. Then you may have some empathy. 

1888 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 316


  Reply # 1077865 1-Jul-2014 13:39
2 people support this post
Send private message

surfisup1000:Hopefully you will get called to be on a jury one day when it is most inopportune. Then you may have some empathy. 


He wont.  He's a lawyer. :D





Sometimes what you don't get is a blessing in disguise!

1114 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 814

Subscriber

  Reply # 1077876 1-Jul-2014 13:48
2 people support this post
Send private message

surfisup1000:
dejadeadnz:

Given your rather aggressive attitude and in view of the fact that whether sufficient evidence has been supplied can be open to interpretation, personally it's hard to take your outrage very seriously. Look, if they want more information, just supply it. It's really not that much work and a normal, understanding client should be happy to supply the letter you requested and got. So quit with all the drama and accusations that people are just out to ruin you.


And this is coming from a real life lawyer with trial experience who despises jury trials....



Aggressive? Not sure about that. Just trying to make a living and these people are interfering in my life at a time when I really don't need this.  

I did supply more information, I just hope it will be enough for them.

Hopefully you will get called to be on a jury one day when it is most inopportune. Then you may have some empathy. 


"Aggressive" is frankly the best and nicest way I had of describing your attitude. But since you prefer the more precise version, I'd describe your attitude towards the MoJ staff who, on the face of it are just doing their jobs, to be one dripped with pomposity ("....some pencil pusher in a 40 hour week government job")  and self-importance ("These people sit there ruining other peoples lives while in a secure 9-5 government job. They have no idea of the pressures of those with real jobs"). There are lazy, inefficient people everywhere. For every supposedly really important, hard-working self-employed guy, there's probably another self-important sole-trader who doesn't reply to client inquiries promptly and works for himself only because he's unemployable etc. How would you like to be stereotyped?

And you don't appear to read very well either. I've already indicated more than a couple of times on here that I actually have experience conducting trials as a lawyer, so I'm quite aware of the realities of being on a jury, thank you very much. What's more I actually spent 3 years lawyering for judges whose duties included presiding over jury trials and provided opinions and advice on jury trial issues. So please quit with your self-important assumptions about others.

                    

305 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 69


  Reply # 1077879 1-Jul-2014 13:52
Send private message

Bung: Maybe the original excuses were denied simply because there wasn't the supporting letter from employer/client.


also maybe the fact that you he had already used that reason 5 time in a row might have a factor in it - after 5 year of "i am to busy to do jury service" was 1 to many.

3951 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1540


  Reply # 1077891 1-Jul-2014 14:12
One person supports this post
Send private message

I've done jury service once.  By hook or by crook never again!  

I found the process to be disproportionate to the alleged offence, very frustrating, very efficient and actually a poor quality process.  They guy was guilty as sin - caught red handed, multiple witnesses. But he had legal aid and exercised his right to a jury trial.  We used 5 days of court time  spanning three calendar week on the trial.  I would estimate that close to half of the pre-deliberation time was spent doing nothing but waiting due to some sort of delay or other.  Deliberation spanned 4 days and nearly entered a second week. Only conspiracy by a frustrated subset of the jurors forced the blindingly obvious correct outcome on the Friday. 

What ticked me off overall is that the court staff placed little value/respect on the service of the jurors - they treated/fed/communicated with us very poorly. We didn't even have comfortable seating during the trial - the judge and court staff did of course.

I was lucky to be paid by my employer, but worked the evenings and weekends to keep up so my family were the ones who lost out, and actually I did my jury service tired to the point of nodding off after lunch most days.

I gained a new appreciation for the movie 12 angry men (great movie esp. the original).  Being a juror wasn't hard or intellectually challenging work by any measure (country club hours, dumbed down and slow process).  It was physically uncomfortable, frustrating and tedious.  I've never been irritable so many days in a row.  I was like a bear with a sore head. 

My experience turned me from pro-jury to anti-jury.  I would hate to have to rely on a jury if I was charged.  I'd have more faith in a group of  judges.

If I was I in charge :) ..... 

I would replace the current jury system with an inquiry, verdict and sentencing process conducted by a panel of 3 judges and 2 professional community jurors who serve one calendar year as paid officers of the court, answerable only to the judge.  Make this kind of jury service compulsory and very, very difficult to get out of.  Include training and on-going support, make it very well paid (e.g. 90th percentile of NZ salaries) and require employers to hold jobs for people (as per parental leave).




Mike

16502 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4598

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1077913 1-Jul-2014 14:20
One person supports this post
Send private message

dejadeadnz:
surfisup1000:
dejadeadnz:

Given your rather aggressive attitude and in view of the fact that whether sufficient evidence has been supplied can be open to interpretation, personally it's hard to take your outrage very seriously. Look, if they want more information, just supply it. It's really not that much work and a normal, understanding client should be happy to supply the letter you requested and got. So quit with all the drama and accusations that people are just out to ruin you.


And this is coming from a real life lawyer with trial experience who despises jury trials....



Aggressive? Not sure about that. Just trying to make a living and these people are interfering in my life at a time when I really don't need this.  

I did supply more information, I just hope it will be enough for them.

Hopefully you will get called to be on a jury one day when it is most inopportune. Then you may have some empathy. 


"Aggressive" is frankly the best and nicest way I had of describing your attitude. But since you prefer the more precise version, I'd describe your attitude towards the MoJ staff who, on the face of it are just doing their jobs, to be one dripped with pomposity ("....some pencil pusher in a 40 hour week government job")  and self-importance ("These people sit there ruining other peoples lives while in a secure 9-5 government job. They have no idea of the pressures of those with real jobs"). There are lazy, inefficient people everywhere. For every supposedly really important, hard-working self-employed guy, there's probably another self-important sole-trader who doesn't reply to client inquiries promptly and works for himself only because he's unemployable etc. How would you like to be stereotyped?

And you don't appear to read very well either. I've already indicated more than a couple of times on here that I actually have experience conducting trials as a lawyer, so I'm quite aware of the realities of being on a jury, thank you very much. What's more I actually spent 3 years lawyering for judges whose duties included presiding over jury trials and provided opinions and advice on jury trial issues. So please quit with your self-important assumptions about others.

                    


My advice is stop wasting your breath. He won't let logic or fact get in the way of the outrage he feels. Unfortunately not much you can do about it. Ultimately he needs to meet his obligations under law or find a lawful and acceptable way to be excused. The fact he doesn't want to do either takes away significantly from sympathy that might have been originally garnered. 



1627 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 579

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1077959 1-Jul-2014 15:01
One person supports this post
Send private message

I wonder if having been a prosecution witness plays a role as I have never been called on a jury?

I was called as a witness the day before my final university exams after the defendant had successfully deferred the case three times..

Was an interesting hour or two, took my mind off the exam the next day.

His defence was he wasnt liable for property damage because he was under the influence of drugs....



A.



3456 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1059


  Reply # 1077971 1-Jul-2014 15:22
Send private message

dejadeadnz: 
"Aggressive" is frankly the best and nicest way I had of describing your attitude. But since you prefer the more precise version, I'd describe your attitude towards the MoJ staff who, on the face of it are just doing their jobs, to be one dripped with pomposity ("....some pencil pusher in a 40 hour week government job")  and self-importance ("These people sit there ruining other peoples lives while in a secure 9-5 government job. They have no idea of the pressures of those with real jobs"). There are lazy, inefficient people everywhere. For every supposedly really important, hard-working self-employed guy, there's probably another self-important sole-trader who doesn't reply to client inquiries promptly and works for himself only because he's unemployable etc. How would you like to be stereotyped?

And you don't appear to read very well either. I've already indicated more than a couple of times on here that I actually have experience conducting trials as a lawyer, so I'm quite aware of the realities of being on a jury, thank you very much. What's more I actually spent 3 years lawyering for judges whose duties included presiding over jury trials and provided opinions and advice on jury trial issues. So please quit with your self-important assumptions about others.

 


Self-employed people don't stay that way very long if they behave how you describe. 

Honestly, I have not gone through and read all of the pages of posts but on reading your vitriol I will not bother. 

You're getting nasty & personal. People make generalisations all of the time. Get over it and stop seeking personal offence.  

11875 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5511

Trusted

  Reply # 1078010 1-Jul-2014 15:40
Send private message

I am not sure if there is already, but if not there should be greater flexibility for those that are self employed. In many cases their income cannot continue if they take time out to serve unlike wage and salary earners. The Justice department can only apply flexibility afforded them by legislation or approved policy.
Changes would probably have to be made in Parliament.




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


1 | ... | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Amazon launches the International Shopping Experience in the Amazon Shopping App
Posted 19-Apr-2018 08:38


Spark New Zealand and TVNZ to bring coverage of Rugby World Cup 2019
Posted 16-Apr-2018 06:55


How Google can seize Microsoft Office crown
Posted 14-Apr-2018 11:08


How back office transformation drives IRD efficiency
Posted 12-Apr-2018 21:15


iPod laws in a smartphone world: will we ever get copyright right?
Posted 12-Apr-2018 21:13


Lightbox service using big data and analytics to learn more about customers
Posted 9-Apr-2018 12:11


111 mobile caller location extended to iOS
Posted 6-Apr-2018 13:50


Huawei announces the HUAWEI P20 series
Posted 29-Mar-2018 11:41


Symantec Internet Security Threat Report shows increased endpoint technology risks
Posted 26-Mar-2018 18:29


Spark switches on long-range IoT network across New Zealand
Posted 26-Mar-2018 18:22


Stuff Pix enters streaming video market
Posted 21-Mar-2018 09:18


Windows no longer Microsoft’s main focus
Posted 13-Mar-2018 07:47


Why phone makers are obsessed with cameras
Posted 11-Mar-2018 12:25


New Zealand Adopts International Open Data Charter
Posted 3-Mar-2018 12:48


Shipments tumble as NZ phone upgrades slow
Posted 2-Mar-2018 11:48



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.