Comments on: Cameron case shows up DPP’s lack of accountability http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/06/16/cameron-case-shows-up-dpps-lack-of-accountability/ now with extra source Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:48:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: p smith http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/06/16/cameron-case-shows-up-dpps-lack-of-accountability/#comment-17280 p smith Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-17280 You’re dead right. Except for the Vizard bit. Vizard was cleared of insider trading or any crime at all. The prosecution of Vizard was not handed over to the DPP in the Vizard matter because there was no prosecution or charges that could be laid. And that’s because after two years of investigation by both ASIC and the DPP, each of them independently found there was no answerable case and no evidence to support even a prima facie case. To have prosecuted Vizard when there was no evidence and against the advice of the independent QCs would have been a breach of ASICs charter, breach of the DPPs charter, illegal and an affront to justice.<br /><br />ASICs botching was in their media handling –they had so overpromised the Vizard Insider Trading story that when they came up empty handed they all over the media tring to convice us all( and didn’t do a bad job) that two years of investigation that not one lawyer would sign off on for a criminal prosecution , was a great victory.<br /><br />Cameron on the other hand was found to have an arguable criminal case by both DPP and ASIC, was prosecuted for crimes, pleaded guilty to crimes, yet gets less media and penalties than Vizard. <br /><br />Camerons difference is that ASIC promised nothing to the media up front, haven’t briefed the media and noone gives a shit. Would have been different if hed told shithouse jokes on a a national TV show.<br /> You’re dead right. Except for the Vizard bit. Vizard was cleared of insider trading or any crime at all. The prosecution of Vizard was not handed over to the DPP in the Vizard matter because there was no prosecution or charges that could be laid. And that’s because after two years of investigation by both ASIC and the DPP, each of them independently found there was no answerable case and no evidence to support even a prima facie case. To have prosecuted Vizard when there was no evidence and against the advice of the independent QCs would have been a breach of ASICs charter, breach of the DPPs charter, illegal and an affront to justice.

ASICs botching was in their media handling –they had so overpromised the Vizard Insider Trading story that when they came up empty handed they all over the media tring to convice us all( and didn’t do a bad job) that two years of investigation that not one lawyer would sign off on for a criminal prosecution , was a great victory.

Cameron on the other hand was found to have an arguable criminal case by both DPP and ASIC, was prosecuted for crimes, pleaded guilty to crimes, yet gets less media and penalties than Vizard.

Camerons difference is that ASIC promised nothing to the media up front, haven’t briefed the media and noone gives a shit. Would have been different if hed told shithouse jokes on a a national TV show.

]]> By: Jane Abbey, Michael Ats http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/06/16/cameron-case-shows-up-dpps-lack-of-accountability/#comment-17281 Jane Abbey, Michael Ats Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-17281 FYI<br /><br />Dad/Brian FYI

Dad/Brian

]]>