Dec 11 2007
Australia’s Worst Liar?
Did you hear the one about the judge who tried to dodge a speeding ticket? He ended up facing six counts of perverting the course of justice.
Kind of sounds like a joke.
In January 2006, the Lexus of former Federal Court judge Marcus Einfeld was reportedly snapped by a speed camera doing 60 kmh in a 50 kmh, incurring would have been a $77 fine and a few demerit points.
Rather cop the penalty, Einfeld is alleged to have lied – saying he wasn’t in Sydney at the time and that he lent the car to a friend. Seems if he admitted guilt he would only have been left with one point. Obviously there are worse things.
A police investigation ensued, and in March this year Einfeld was charged with 13 offences, including perjury, perverting the course of justice and making false statutory declarations (although not all relate to this particular speeding offence). Apparently each offence carries between 10 and 14 year maximum sentences.
It is claimed the investigation revealed mobile records and credit card receipts showing he was in fact in Sydney and that the friend he claimed to have lent his car to had died nearly three years earlier. Another friend, Vivian Schenker, maintains Einfeld was driving his mother’s car – the problem is CCTV evidence reportedly showed his mother’s car had not moved all day.
If this is true, then Einfeld has been a naughty boy – and I’m not suggesting that he shouldn’t be punished, but I’d dearly love to know what this investigation and ensuing trial has cost tax payers? Is this the best use of public resources?
What do you think – if this is true, is Enfeld Australia’s worst liar?
8 Responses to “Australia’s Worst Liar?”
Oh you’re raising the legal student within me again! But here goes.
This is a man charged by the government with dispensing justice. And he has acted in a way that does not support that aim. Our “justice” system is more concerned with truth than justice, and that is again reflected here. How can you expect someone whose job it is to pursue the truth, to act impartially when they act in a deliberate way to hide the truth from the court?
Guess who’s just done a unit on Legal Ethics?
Kin’s last blog post..Blogging Update
Oh dear! Why am I not surprised.. *sigh*
kim’s last blog post..Weekly winners #2
Reminds of another news report i read some months ago about a judge in the USA who is trying to claim several million dollars in damages from a Dry Cleaners who lost a pair of his trousers.
Must be something about judges who think they have different laws to the rest of them …
I think that it’s pretty serious when a judge does something like this but when I look at that sentence and compare it to sentences given for acts that are truly heinous, it makes me think our system of “justice” is pretty screwy.
cerebralmum’s last blog post..And now back to miserable… or not…
Since the Einfeld case is (as far as I know) still before the courts, no-one has been found guilty of anything yet, and any “actions” by the judge are still “alleged”.
I don’t know of any case yet where a blogger has been found to be in contempt of court, but it’s worth remembering that under Australian law you may not comment upon the merits of a case in progress. You may only report factually what was said by the parties. Hence the frequent use of “alleged” or “claimed” by journalists covering court cases.
That said, anything which has been given in evidence in court and agree to by both sides can be considered as “fact”, and stated as such. Individual items change from “alleged” to “fact” during the course of the trial.
And you’re able to consider hypotheticals. For example, you can say “If X is true, then Y’s actions are reprehensible.” But tread carefully.
US law is different from Australian in this area. Often the kind of commentary on court cases you see in American TV programs would be illegal in Australia (and some other countries).
Stilgherrian’s last blog post..Rooftop song at Gallery 26
It all seems silly and trivial…..but there is a principle that all are equal before the law AND have the right to due process. The cost of this exercise is justified if it upholds the law and your rights. Anything lesser would raise questions of cronyism, corruption and unethical practice.
The world (law) is not perfect. But that does not mean we just give in and accept injustice and lawlessness. Einfeld has a right to due process and this case should be ‘sobering’ warning to those in public positions.
It’s always disapointing to see a person in this kind of position “allegedly” use and abuse the system for their own gain. Would be far better to admit a mistake and come clean than try to worm their way out because they ALWAYS make a bigger hole before they finish and just end up looking idiotic.
Bettina’s last blog post..I have moved my blog!!
Meg my darl. I have tagged you for a meme….. Is that okay???? Do big important blogging people do memes too????? Or are they totally sick of them?????? Well, the details are on my blog if you’re interested.
Lightening’s last blog post..I Need “L” Plates