Search
This area does not yet contain any content.
Justinian News

Sofronoff stripped bare ... Deceit ... Betrayal ... Drumgold hung out to dry as a result of Sofronoff-Albrechtsen information "tryst" ... Latest derailment of conspiracies about the prosecution of manosphere darling, Bruce Lehrmann ... Derangement syndrome ... Sofronoff's "serious corruption" ... Devastation among devoted Banana Benders ... Read more >>

Politics Media Law Society


Bag lady ... Don't call the results until the fat lady sings … Senator's criminal record hidden from view … Inspiration from our B-grade business leaders … Forget the sexual harassment, Dicey Heydon is coming out of the deep freeze ... Read on >> 

Free Newsletter
Justinian Columnists

Capital crimes ... Dangerous words likely to be scrubbed from the Trump era lexicon ... Musk and his techie vandals ... The shredder going full blast at the FBI ... Stolen national security documents sent back to Mar-a-Lago ... Cabinet clown show ... White supremacy unleashed ... Consumer protection prosecutions dropped ... Lawyers and law firms threatened ... Roger Fitch from Washington ... Read more >> 

Blow the whistle

 

News snips ...


This area does not yet contain any content.
Justinian's Bloggers

Letter from London ... Holiday season ... Mother's Day, Lent, Chocolate ... Publisher wants money from Russell Brand for unpublished books ... Paralegal accessed forbidden documents to qualify for legal training contract ... Birthday card payout ... Floyd Alexander-Hunt files from Blighty ... Read more >> 

"True to form, the ACT corruption watchdog has put itself at the centre of perceptions of bias with a finding against eminent former Queensland judge Walter Sofronoff KC that serves only to debase the definition of serious corrupt conduct."

The Australian with its unique perspective on "bias" ... March 22, 2025 ... Read more flatulence ... 


Justinian Featurettes

Judgment for sale ... Melbourne University Publishing's decision to produce Justice Lee's Lehrmann judgment as a commercial product is not without its problems ... The omnishambles continues ... Melbourne lawyer Nilay B. Patel explains ... Read more >> 


Justinian's archive

Defamation and other misadventures ... So sexy, said the actress of the Chief Justice ... Daphnis dunks women in hot water ... Another (male) judge frocks-up ... Inside Madge's mouth ... Stephen Archer defamed ... David Levine strangles more English ... Justice Dean Mildren "the idiot" ... From Justinian's archive, April 22, 2004 ... Read more >> 


 

 

« Judicial spin | Main | Atanaskovic wins over-wrought billings battle »
Friday
Mar262010

The $6 million magistrate

Junior Junior believes that his cases stand or fall depending who’s on the bench … It’s a difficult concept for clients to comprehend … If only the DNA of some of these beaks could be manipulated … A bit less grump … A bit more fairness.

The conversation usually goes something like this:

Junior: “So, I’ve got this contested hearing tomorrow.”

Barrister (with whom Junior is sharing chambers): “Do you know who you’ve got?”

Junior: “Magistrate (insert name here).”

Barrister: (Uncomfortable silence.) “Ouch, bad draw.”

Whatever happened to justice being blind?

Anyone at the bar will tell you that the eventual outcome of a matter will depend as much, if not solely, on who hears it. Not necessarily the quality or otherwise of the advocate, not the facts, not even necessarily the evidence, but the person in the big chair.

Try explaining that to someone you’re acting for.

Try telling them that if they walk through the doors and see the smiling face of Her Honour Magistrate X, there’s every chance that they’re not walking back out the same door.

However, if it’s His Honour Magistrate Y who greets them in the morning, the likelihood is that a community based order and a stern lecture is on the way.

I realise this is why the good Lord invented de novo appeals from the magistrate’s court – but that’s hardly the point.

If it was me, I’d like to think that my matter would be judged on its merits alone, not the peculiar whims or fancy or prejudice or predilection of the randomly allocated person hearing it.

Perhaps I’m showing my naïveté.

Sometimes as I sit in the back of the court waiting to be called watching person after person, with charges and backgrounds and excuses similar to those I’m about to articulate on my client’s behalf, receiving sentences usually reserved for underworld figures or terrorist sympathisers, I shudder and wonder how much better things would be if I could select my own beak.

Everyone has a favourite magistrate, even they are never perfect.

Just contemplate how life would be improved if you could build-a-better-bench.

Take a little bit from here, a little bit from there and create your own ideal magistrate.

Such a creature can be constructed. We have the technology.

Obviously this would be different for everyone. Those who lean towards the persecution side of things might like to use for their skeleton His Honour deputy sergeant (name removed for obvious reasons) from Geelong.

Add a sprinkling of “drug addiction is a lifestyle choice” and “punishment is the key focus of sentencing” and you should have your perfect prosecutor’s bench.

Likewise, your defence counsel types might like to start with some lefty who buys into that whole ethos of addressing the cause of the offending, rather than punishing the offence itself.

Take a large dose of faith in the redeemable nature of those who frequent the magistrate’s courts and a willingness to find “exceptional circumstances” in the most curious of places and you should be off and running.

You might add an infrared enabled bionic eye and the ability to run at speeds up to, and including, 60 mph – but personally I’d settle for a sunny demeanour and a bit of consistency.

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.
Editor Permission Required
You must have editing permission for this entry in order to post comments.