This is a case of another failure in our judicial system. It doesn’t matter who the Magistrate is when they have a error rate of over 87% of cases then it is time to step in and remove the Magistrate from the position. And that decision is in the hands of the ineffectual NSW Attorney General Greg (Socialism rules) Smith.
NSW Magistrates only work 10am to 4pm, and get $180,000+, but they also want a lifetime pension at 15% Superannuation rates:
When a Magistrate is able to make mistakes in 87% of the cases they hear, why do we continue to pay them this unreasonable wage, when they are not doing their job to a high or reasonable standard.
The Supreme Court found magistrate Pat O’Shane got the law wrong in 14 of 16 criminal cases it reviewed since 1999, write Michael Eburn and Ruth Townsend.
Her recent decision to dismiss charges against a man accused of assaulting an ambulance paramedic without hearing from the other paramedic and the arresting police has been referred to the Judicial Commission of NSW.
The Director of Public Prosecutions has appealed the local court magistrate’s decision to dismiss charges against African-born Kasian Wililo, 30, after she suggested the alleged victim Christopher Martin didn’t “like blacks”. Mr Wililo was accused of lashing out at the paramedic en route to St Vincent’s hospital last year after he was asked to get out of the ambulance.
But the Supreme Court was today told Ms O’Shane had disallowed crucial evidence in the case – including testimony from Mr Martin’s ambulance partner Karen Jacobs and photographs from the crime scene. DPP barrister Natalie Adams said the magistrate had made “manifest errors” during the January hearing and had rejected the assault allegations without giving proper reasons for her decision. “It speaks for itself that (Ms Jacobs’) evidence was relevant – she was a potential eye witness,” she said.
In the other 14 cases, the police or Director of Public Prosecutions had brought a case against a private citizen and then appealed when O’Shane dismissed the case. In one case she dismissed a charge even though the accused had entered a plea of guilty.
In different cases, Supreme Court judges have said:
O’Shane ”did not comprehend the real basis of the prosecution case or the significance of the evidence before her”;
That her conduct ”bore little resemblance to what was required by law”, she ”failed to comply with statutory procedures … and denied the prosecutor procedural fairness” and failed ”to give reasons as required by law”. That she dismissed a charge ”without proper regard to applicable law and practice”. That ”with all proper respect to the learned magistrate … it seems to me that there was a clear failure of procedural fairness in the way in which her worship dealt with the prosecution and with the prosecutor”.