Silence: Michael Laws and I agree on the right to silence.
From his splendid article in the Sunday Star Times -
"Simon Power will be remembered for his inability to rid this nation of the evil anachronism that is an individual's right to silence when they are linked to a major crime. And really nasty crimes like child abuse and child murder. The legal familiars have done their job – sown enough doubt in the minds of gullible MPs that bad people will walk free because politicians lacked the balls to challenge the legal profession front-on.
Indeed, the legal system is a joke in this country and many other similar western countries. Instead of seeking to discover the truth that surrounds a crime, presenting and providing all the known facts and allowing all the relevant individuals to be openly questioned, the justice system sets up a court room confrontation.
This has the natural effect of parties exaggerating or diminishing the facts to suit their pre-determination. As a consequence, police and prosecutors will often overstep the mark, defence teams will deliberately play ignorant and the judge is reduced to the role of referee.
The right to silence should form no role, ever, in any transparent justice system. It has the presumption that no man nor woman should be required to incriminate themselves.
Why not? If they are suspected of the crime, why should they not answer reasonable questions posed of them by either the investigative police or the prosecution? Why should there not be an onus upon them to establish their innocence?
Worse still is that this right to silence is always the first refuge of the really guilty. Everyone knows this, including defence lawyers.
But the current law states that this cannot be held against the person either under investigation or charged with the crime. In fact, exactly the reverse should apply: it should most definitely be held against a defendant that they refused to co-operate with investigating authorities.
Power wanted to shift this archaic burden. Although the Kahui twins murder investigation – and subsequent trial of their father – is widely credited with Power's policy imperative, the truth is that this has been a burr for many justice reformers for a long time.
Indeed it was entirely revealing that the subsequent coronial investigation – that did have the ability to cross-examine Chris Kahui, and the King/Kahui whanau – revealed far more than the criminal trial.
Had the jury access to the same information and impressions, I'd be wagering that a different verdict would have been returned.
Silence is a court tactic used daily throughout the country – the police stonewalled by smartass ferals and their smarter lawyers.
Just because something has been around forever does not make it right. Power knew this. The ordinary public knows this. Cross-examining defendants should be the absolute right of the state as it seeks to discover the truth and to protect its citizens. The politicians who resist this continue to imperil us all."
He said it much better than I could.
RWC: Canada weren't too bad, but against France, who only seem to put in the effort they want, you can't really tell. England beat Georgia easily on the scoreboard but were awful. They, England, don't seem to know the rules of the game. As for Samoa it was close but I expected Wales to win as they are more structured. A pity but it looks as if Samoa will be out.
On the night of the Ireland win I immediately looked how the draw should - but might not - pan out. To get an easier run through maybe we should throw the games against France (Justin Marshall has written along the same lines) but being NZ we won't, although France could. In cricket we have 'jacked' our run rate more than once to ensure a better draw. It would be strange to see two teams in Rugby trying to lose a game.
