Comments on: Einfeld I: the legal profession never spares its own http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/23/einfeld-i-the-legal-profession-never-spares-its-own/ now with extra source Sun, 12 Feb 2012 07:14:43 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Engineer http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/23/einfeld-i-the-legal-profession-never-spares-its-own/#comment-20063 Engineer Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-20063 As a justice, there can be no refuge from perjury, especially when it is repeated and calculated, such as in the present matter. He did not plead guilty, but chose to be judged. There are few ameliorating factors about this case as it has been portrayed in the press. The former justice can consider himself lucky indeed that he didn't end up with a maximum sentence of about 14 years and a non-parole period of ten. <br /><br />This is not a situation where comparison with minor criminals' thrashing about is relevant. This man attempted to use his high offices as a judge and a QC in order to browbeat those who sought the truth. In doing so, he abused the very court he had derived his income from and to which he had pledged his honour on many occasions.<br /><br />This is also a case where punishment must be seen as a deterrent to the general public.<br /><br />It is not a matter of the legal profession supporting or not supporting its own. <br /><br />This has been a case of justice being done, despite steadfast interference in the process of justice by a knowledgeable and very capable insider who shows no remorse.<br /><br /> As a justice, there can be no refuge from perjury, especially when it is repeated and calculated, such as in the present matter. He did not plead guilty, but chose to be judged. There are few ameliorating factors about this case as it has been portrayed in the press. The former justice can consider himself lucky indeed that he didn’t end up with a maximum sentence of about 14 years and a non-parole period of ten.

This is not a situation where comparison with minor criminals’ thrashing about is relevant. This man attempted to use his high offices as a judge and a QC in order to browbeat those who sought the truth. In doing so, he abused the very court he had derived his income from and to which he had pledged his honour on many occasions.

This is also a case where punishment must be seen as a deterrent to the general public.

It is not a matter of the legal profession supporting or not supporting its own.

This has been a case of justice being done, despite steadfast interference in the process of justice by a knowledgeable and very capable insider who shows no remorse.

]]> By: MalB http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/23/einfeld-i-the-legal-profession-never-spares-its-own/#comment-20064 MalB Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-20064 I am not a lawyer but I do believe the sentence was fair. This gentleman was not just a lawyer but a Federal Court judge. Perjury and perverting the course, as you say, go right to the heart of our system of justice. I also believe that the more you are acquainted with, and earn a living from within, that system there is a greater responsibility to ensure its integrity. Therefore police would have a greater responsibility than the average punter, lawyers more so and judges even more. It is also not like he just forgot, or in a moment of madness lied. He kept on lying and trying to prove the lie. With each considered step he must have been aware of his responsibility. He didn't just 'drop the ball' for a moment, he systematically, deliberately, on a number of occasions over a period of time made 'mistakes'. The real shame is that he, not the courts, will have sullied his name and diminished, in the eyes of some, all the good work he has done. I am not a lawyer but I do believe the sentence was fair. This gentleman was not just a lawyer but a Federal Court judge. Perjury and perverting the course, as you say, go right to the heart of our system of justice. I also believe that the more you are acquainted with, and earn a living from within, that system there is a greater responsibility to ensure its integrity. Therefore police would have a greater responsibility than the average punter, lawyers more so and judges even more. It is also not like he just forgot, or in a moment of madness lied. He kept on lying and trying to prove the lie. With each considered step he must have been aware of his responsibility. He didn’t just ‘drop the ball’ for a moment, he systematically, deliberately, on a number of occasions over a period of time made ‘mistakes’. The real shame is that he, not the courts, will have sullied his name and diminished, in the eyes of some, all the good work he has done.

]]> By: Bob Dean http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/23/einfeld-i-the-legal-profession-never-spares-its-own/#comment-20065 Bob Dean Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-20065 The sentence was grossly unfair and poltically driven with the media having a say as well<br /><br /> If Marcus Einfield's career as a judge was taken into account in sentencing then his history and career of good works should have also been considered.<br /><br />This wasn't a case of Einfield "perverting the course of justice" in a criminal enterprise-it was to avoid a speeding fine. A shorter sentence with a suspended period would have been adequate.<br /><br />Consider the disgraceful actions of the AFP, a prosecutor and a government minister in their lies over the Dr Haneef affair-a clear case of "perverting the course of justice" with a deliberate aim to illegally incarcerate an innocent man. All escaped scot free. How many police who lie in court are charged ?<br /><br />Still-as long as Derryn Hinch and Paul Sheehan are satisfied, that's OK then. The sentence was grossly unfair and poltically driven with the media having a say as well

If Marcus Einfield’s career as a judge was taken into account in sentencing then his history and career of good works should have also been considered.

This wasn’t a case of Einfield “perverting the course of justice” in a criminal enterprise-it was to avoid a speeding fine. A shorter sentence with a suspended period would have been adequate.

Consider the disgraceful actions of the AFP, a prosecutor and a government minister in their lies over the Dr Haneef affair-a clear case of “perverting the course of justice” with a deliberate aim to illegally incarcerate an innocent man. All escaped scot free. How many police who lie in court are charged ?

Still-as long as Derryn Hinch and Paul Sheehan are satisfied, that’s OK then.

]]> By: PedroWilsoni http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/23/einfeld-i-the-legal-profession-never-spares-its-own/#comment-20066 PedroWilsoni Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-20066 They do spare their own, actually. Why doesn't a concerned Law practitioner pursue Einfeld over the serial offender aspect - as reported by Four Corners tonight.<br /><br />Einfeld was a complete FAIL on Four Corners - 'I don't know why'; I don't remember'; didn't have my diary with me'. Would you record your crimes in a diary?<br /><br />A respected judge and supposed upholder of the law - and moral principal - can't remember the (apparently) few times he broke the law? Only a liar would say that.<br /><br />[Paraphrased] Interviewer: "So you told more lies to validate the original lie"<br /><br />Einfeld: "No, it was the original lie with some embellishments". <br /><br />His attempt to obfuscate with "I don't know why I did it - it was some unexplainable abberation" shows he is only remorseful for the crimes identified. When it was put to him that there were earlier recorded instances of submitting false declarations to avoid traffic offences he was like a trapped rabbit. He acknowledged that "maybe" he would admit two of those - if they were proven in a court of Law, of course - but would deny the third... Pulleasese!!!<br /><br />He was a judge over others - I just can't believe the hypocrisy - but am not at all surprised by him.<br /><br />A liar through and through.<br /><br /> They do spare their own, actually. Why doesn’t a concerned Law practitioner pursue Einfeld over the serial offender aspect - as reported by Four Corners tonight.

Einfeld was a complete FAIL on Four Corners - ‘I don’t know why’; I don’t remember’; didn’t have my diary with me’. Would you record your crimes in a diary?

A respected judge and supposed upholder of the law - and moral principal - can’t remember the (apparently) few times he broke the law? Only a liar would say that.

[Paraphrased] Interviewer: “So you told more lies to validate the original lie”

Einfeld: “No, it was the original lie with some embellishments”.

His attempt to obfuscate with “I don’t know why I did it - it was some unexplainable abberation” shows he is only remorseful for the crimes identified. When it was put to him that there were earlier recorded instances of submitting false declarations to avoid traffic offences he was like a trapped rabbit. He acknowledged that “maybe” he would admit two of those - if they were proven in a court of Law, of course - but would deny the third… Pulleasese!!!

He was a judge over others - I just can’t believe the hypocrisy - but am not at all surprised by him.

A liar through and through.

]]> By: Ailie Bruins http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/23/einfeld-i-the-legal-profession-never-spares-its-own/#comment-20067 Ailie Bruins Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-20067 I'll bet Marcus Einfeld wished he had been a politician, then he really would have been above the law.<br /><br /> I’ll bet Marcus Einfeld wished he had been a politician, then he really would have been above the law.

]]>