The Mensch, the solicitor, the $500 a pop hooker and the documents … Tasmanian judge lost in tropics … Cunneen verdict from Bureau de Spank ... The file has vanished - handy new defence in misconduct cases ... From Justinian's massive archive of stories, August 2006
Marie Christos and Michael Ryan in happier times
THE Sydney Morning Herald tracked down the hooker who fished some draft statements out of the home garbage bin of Michael Ryan, solicitor for Marcus (The Mensch) Einfeld.
Mirka Christos, also known as Marie, is said to have done a bit of hooking at a Balgowlah knock-shop. She claimed to have met Ryan at the brothel in July 2000 and that he continued to pay for her services.
The figure of “up to $500 for sex” was mentioned.
The garbage retrieval showed that The Mensch’s public statement of August 9, 2006 was redrafted to delete any reference to the gender of the speedster behind the wheel of his racy Lexus.
The original version said:
“The fact is that I lent my car to an old acquaintance from overseas so that transport would be available to her whilst I was away. I do not know whether she allowed anyone else to drive my car but it was returned to my home before I returned.”
The later version said:
“I am uncertain as to who was driving the car at the time but I did authorise an old acquaintance to use it while I was out of town.”
The situation called for something shorter and vaguer, particularly as the various females he was fingering all had the habit of dropping dead.
It’s now emerged that The Mensch has used the “someone-else-was-driving” excuse on at least two previous occasions to get off traffic offences.
Another important change was the deletion from an earlier draft of the gag-inducing flourish: “I am protecting no one, not even myself.”
One of Rupert's papers described Mirka as a "spurned prostitute":
“She said she became involved in the Einfeld affair during the bitter break-up of her six year relationship with Mr Ryan.”
It went on to say that the relationship started soon after Ms Christos left a secretarial position “with a top Sydney silk”.
“To seek retribution against Mr Ryan after they broke up, Ms Christos said she rifled through his garbage looking for information to use against him.”
The "top Sydney silk" turned out to be Anna Katzmann, as she then was, now Justice Katzmann of the Federal Court.
Katzmann, as she then was, Christos' employer (pic. Mark Tedeschi QC)
The Sydney Morning Herald’s understanding of the Michael-Mirka relationship was entirely different. It quoted Mirka as saying matter-of-factly:
“Essentially, Einfeld got caught in the crossfire between Michael Ryan and myself. I’ve been trying to get rid of Michael for a few years and he won’t budge.”
The SMH added:
“Six years on, she said she was ‘pretty tired’ of Mr Ryan’s continuing attention.”
So how spurned was she? This is as big a riddle as the identity of the speedster behind The Mensch’s wheel.
Why would she be getting into his garbage if she wanted Ryan out of her life?
Mirka (Marie) gave further elaborate explanations to the media on August 23.
She said that she and Michael had a special bond but she went through his bins occasionally, just to make sure.
Right now, while Mirka seems to be having the time of her life, Michael is curled-up in a ball with the phone off the hook, quietly screaming.
* * *
Samoa: Tasmanian judge detained longer than expected
MUCH to report from the Apple Isle.
Hobart is rarely above 13 degrees at the moment with everyone wearing icy looks and horrible blizzard clothing. The work is just as grim, the lawyers are depressed and the clients tawdry.
Then there’s Justice Pierre Slicer who, as winter started to set in, shot off to Samoa to help out at the local Supreme Court. Apparently, the work has detained him longer than expected and Hollywood Pete Underwood CJ has had trouble obtaining a clear indication of when the Slice is likely to return.
The discontent about the extra pressure his absence has placed on the judges back home is made worse by thoughts of him sitting on the balcony at Aggie Grey’s Hotel and Bungalows being served umbrella adorned cocktails by dusky maidens.
Aggie’s rustles-up images of Michener’s Tales of the South Pacific and Somerset Maugham, Gauguin and Robert Louis Stevenson in its blub.
Back in Hobart they’re livid.
* * *
Stevie Wonder did not take the complaint further (pic. Mark Tedeschi QC)
STEVE Mark, the NSW Legal Services Commissioner, finally has determined the complaint made about crown prosecutor Margaret Cunneen by celebrity Sydney solicitor Chris Murphy and that recently departed adornment of the profession, John Marsden.
Stevie Wonder ruled that a disciplinary tribunal might find a ground of unprofessional conduct, but he did not propose to take the matter any further.
The complaint arose from Cunneen’s 2005 Ninian Stephen lecture at the University of Newcastle.
You can read our report on the complaints here and the speech itself is here.
Marsden’s complaint seemed to be no more than a general froth on Cunneen’s critical observations about some criminal defence lawyers.
Murphy was grizzling because Cunneen commented about one of his clients who was facing a retrial for rape. He said:
“The extent of media coverage of Ms Cunneen’s remarks about issues in the re-trial seriously puts in jeopardy the ability of [my client] to receive a fair trial. There is significant risk that a future jury will have read the media reports and be influenced by the personal views of Ms Cunneen about [my client’s] current matter.”
You might think that is a mite extravagant, considering that the prosecutor simply recounted the factual background as to what happened at MG’s trial and the appeal.
The accused’s identity was not revealed and the matters she talked about were all on the public record. It was highly improbably that any juror would be prejudiced, particularly as the retrial is not scheduled till November, about a year after the Newcastle lecture.
Really, these complaints should have been thrown straight in the bin.
As an indication of how much weight should be given to Mark’s determination I predict that this is the year that managers at the Grill will bestow on Cunneen a coveted nylon gown.
* * *
Mark: complained binned because solicitor lost the file
SPEAKING of the NSW Legal Services Commissioner, I have correspondence in my hand from a disgruntled customer of a Sydney solicitor.
The complaint was that the customer was billed and paid for services he didn’t receive, namely filing for his divorce.
The client claimed that as a consequence of the solicitor’s neglect he was required to fork-out hundreds of thousands of dollars more to his ex-wife than otherwise would have been the case.
He was so grumpy about it that he turned to Steve’s Bureau de Spank for relief.
Two year’s later the Bureau is saying that it can’t do anything about the complaint because the solicitor has lost the file.
This seems odd because the client has all the documents necessary to make an assessment of the complaint, plus he has all the electronic copies of exchanges with his solicitor on his computer.
The community relations department of the Attorney General’s Department explained that the reason it has taken so long to “finalise” the matter is because the “OLSC considered it necessary to examine the relevant solicitor’s file to properly consider [the] complaint”.
Not only had the solicitor’s physical file vanished but, conveniently, he had no electronic records that might allow the file to be reconstructed.
“Unfortunately, without the file there is nothing the OLSC can do to obtain a more detailed reply.”
This is an important breakthrough. As soon as the whiff of a complaint comes through the door the file should dissolve and the hard drive given a bit of a scrub. It’s foolproof.