Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
Sack Pendles (and De Goey!)

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:39 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
An ingenious method, getting people to come up with their own punishments! (Not necessarily a bad idea in theory...) Surprised


Not really, just a typical kid trying not to get a worse punishment - like losing his very lucrative job!

_________________
You never look good trying to make someone else look bad. Disrespecting & insulting other to prove your point just shows how shaky your own position is.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw 

"Phil had more talent in his little finger than both Abletts combined displayed in their entire careers"


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Wed Feb 21, 2018 7:02 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

K wrote:
I think it may be a good idea for teachers (at all levels) to use (for certain misdemeanours).

Returning to JDG, I'm pretty sure his manager came up with that and other things, in an attempt to head off a worse outcome for his client. I imagine JDG just sat there like a potato.

On other professions...

John Sneddon wrote:
In the prominent case of Ziems v. Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of New South Wales a barrister was struck off the role of legal practitioners after being convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to two years imprisonment for killing another person in a car accident whilst intoxicated.
Mr Ziems appealed his disbarment to the High Court of Australia which held that his manslaughter conviction had “neither connexion with nor significance for any professional functions as a barrister and therefore did not involve conduct that made the barrister unfit to be a member of his profession”.

It is probably worth observing that Ziems was decided over 60 years ago and there have been many recent cases in which the Ziems "it didn't have anything to with my profession" argument have failed dismally. In any event, Ziems himself was in an extraordinary position. As the facts were succinctly described by 5 members of the Court in 2004 in a joint judgment:

"It was a case where the particularity with which the facts were approached was important to a conclusion as to the barrister's fitness. He had been found guilty of unlawful homicide (in the form of manslaughter) and sentenced to imprisonment. Even when his offence was described with a little more detail, his position was not improved. He had been responsible for the death of a person while driving under the influence of alcohol. Yet, when the circumstances of the case were exposed, the picture changed materially. The appellant, while drinking at a hotel, had been attacked and beaten. He was seriously injured. A sergeant of police advised him to go quickly to hospital. The appellant asked the sergeant to drive him, but the sergeant went away leaving the appellant without assistance. The appellant then set out to drive himself to hospital, and, in the course of the journey, was involved in a fatal collision" (A Solicitor v Council of the NSW Law Society (2004) 216 CLR 253, [15]).

Reasonably extenuating circumstances, you'd think.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Wed Feb 21, 2018 7:19 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for that, P4S. Would you say Ziems v. Prothonotary set a precedent, but that has basically now been overridden by subsequent cases? Or would you say it's still an influential precedent, but only for peculiar circumstances?
[Ed.: I wrote the above before reading all of your post. Those were very peculiar circumstances indeed! I would be appealing the two-year jail term itself!]
How important is the role of precedent cases in general? The popular portrayal in the US is that they are the be-all and end-all.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie 

suge min pikk


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: Where ever i go, there I am

PostPosted: Wed Feb 21, 2018 7:31 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd like to think context should be considered in precedents.

60 years ago, a man who was probably drunk AND concussed had little options other than to drive himself to hospital.

Now we have mobile phones, taxis, Uber and Ambulances so the defence would be different, assuming the incident happened in a city.

_________________
I'd like to apologise to anyone I haven't offended yet. Be patient, I'm working through a list. You're entitled to your own opinion, but if it disagrees with mine, it's wrong.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw 

"Phil had more talent in his little finger than both Abletts combined displayed in their entire careers"


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Wed Feb 21, 2018 7:43 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

It’s the legal principle, not the facts of the case, that sets a precedent. The “strength” of the precedent depends upon the Court and the members of the Court that set it. Ziems is still frequently cited but precedents like that tend to get distinguished on their facts over time. So, eg, there have been recent cases in which lawyers have been done for offences that occurred in a “private” capacity but most of us would say go to the trust and confidence we could have in them continuing as officers of the court. My own view is that Ziems is grand authority for a very strong principle that is unlikely to apply to the facts of any case before another court.

Of course, none of that has anything to do with JDG, since he isn’t to be held to any special professional standard. I suppose, though, there is a prospect that Ziems and JDG will share in common that neither played for Collingwood again after they were done for drink-driving.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Wed Feb 21, 2018 10:03 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Pies4shaw wrote:
... Ziems is still frequently cited but precedents like that tend to get distinguished on their facts over time. So, eg, there have been recent cases in which lawyers have been done for offences that occurred in a “private” capacity but most of us would say go to the trust and confidence we could have in them continuing as officers of the court. ...

I'm pleased by that.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 8:32 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
I'd agree 100% if his drinking was getting in the way of his training or match-day performance. That would, indeed, be equivalent to you turning up to court drunk or not being able to do the work expected. But I don't see evidence of that actually being the case; what De Goey is accused of is doing other things that supposedly make his club look bad by association, something that I see as being dependent on the myth that football players ought to be shining lights in the community and that brands ought to be considered tarnished by their association with imperfect individuals. Needless to say, I see that as a much deeper issue than what happens to De Goey's football career, because I think it affects the broader public conception of work–life separation and the powers and responsibilities of employers – ultimately, I don't see it as being the employer's responsibility or right to sanction an employee for something that the legal system can adequately deal with.


We can philosophize all we want about what ought to be the case, but all that matters is what actually is the case. The question isn't whether footballers ought to be role models; what matters is whether children who look up to them as footballers are also influenced by their behaviour on and off the field. I don't know if there's been a serious attempt to investigate that question. There perhaps should have been, but maybe everyone has been too busy philosophizing about what ought to be the case.

If association has no effect on the brand, then presumably sponsorship by sportsmen of products not related to their on-field exploits is a waste of money. Do you think that's the case? Again, what matters is what is, not what should be. This part is just business.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
HAL 

Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.


Joined: 17 Mar 2003


PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 8:34 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Try to rephrase your question with simpler words.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 7:53 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/jigaboos-cheating-dagoes-victoria-police-s-head-s-racist-comments-20180226-p4z1u5.html

Do you Nicksters think this is relevant to his job, i.e. something that should lead to his punishment or sacking?
(I wonder how they linked his online activity to him.)
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie 

suge min pikk


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: Where ever i go, there I am

PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:26 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

I would say it is.

Smart enough to use an alias, not smart enough to cover his tracks well enough.

Not what you want in a deputy Police commissioner.

_________________
I'd like to apologise to anyone I haven't offended yet. Be patient, I'm working through a list. You're entitled to your own opinion, but if it disagrees with mine, it's wrong.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Mugwump 



Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Oxford, England

PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:32 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

K wrote:
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/jigaboos-cheating-dagoes-victoria-police-s-head-s-racist-comments-20180226-p4z1u5.html

Do you Nicksters think this is relevant to his job, i.e. something that should lead to his punishment or sacking?
(I wonder how they linked his online activity to him.)


Yes, I think there is enough real racism (ie proper racism, not the fake new Left sort) and sadism in this to justify his losing his job. If he were a fencer or a chef, I think his views would be unpleasant but irrelevant to his ability to perform his role. But the police force is not a normal job. Someone with coercive power over the public cannot reasonably hold different standards for some groups over others. It is tricky, as individual policemen and women should be able to hold strong political views as a private citizen, but you cannot depart so grossly from norms of civility in the most civil of roles.

_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw 

"Phil had more talent in his little finger than both Abletts combined displayed in their entire careers"


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 9:37 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Absolutely. Instant dismissal.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2018 5:04 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Apparently, he has now resigned (or "resigned in disgrace", as the media usually put it: e.g. "top cop resigns in disgrace").
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2018 6:58 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

What a fool what a tool, good riddance. No way he could stay.
_________________
You never look good trying to make someone else look bad. Disrespecting & insulting other to prove your point just shows how shaky your own position is.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Mugwump 



Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Oxford, England

PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2018 11:36 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

think positive wrote:
What a fool what a tool, good riddance. No way he could stay.


^ i think he crossed a line and he had to go. But I am not sure I know where that line starts. There are clearly dangers, when people are sacked because of what they say, rather than what they actually do at work. We assume that all views are acted out, but I am not sure this is true. I support his dismissal, but I’m uneasy about aspects of it.

_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern All times are GMT + 10 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 6 of 7   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group