Judge's dual role should be probed, state MP says

Ellen Whinnett, state politics reporter
03jul06

THE Government should investigate VCAT chief Stuart Morris' dual role as a property speculator, the State Opposition says.

No kidding. The guy has a lot of property that stands to increase in value based on his decisions. It's a clear conflict of interest.
This must be an example of Australian irony, right?

Justice Morris says his only involvement is as the owner of eight blocks of land, which he is selling to developers, and that he would stand aside if the case ever came to VCAT to ensure there was no conflict of interest.

Dear Mr Morris. That fact defines a conflict of interest.
Now, Mr Morris answer would be funny if it weren't for this bit.

Several residents have told the Herald Sun they had concerns about the proposal, but were worried to speak out against it for fear of upsetting Justice Morris in case they ever ended up in VCAT on planning appeals.

Justice Morris said they had no need to feel they could not speak out.

This must be more aussie irony?

Of course they're afraid of you, Mr Morris. Magistrates in Australia are worse than drug dealers and mobsters. Criminals may shoot you, beat you up or steal from you, but at least there would be a chance they'd be punished.

Where else can you find a job where people have to beg you to do it? .. and have to brave your bad mood to explain the job to you? ...and then you can punish your employers for trying to get you to do your job right??

Magistrates can take your life savings, your home and posssessions, limit your freedom of speech, association, -- even remove you from your family --, with complete impunity. I know, one did it to me. They do it to thousands every week in Melbourne alone.

Those people are not about to speak out or complain: You, Mr Morris, would be hearing the complaints!

They'd have to beg you to accept the evidence; and even if you did allow the evidence, you can just ignore it. It's called "magisterial discretion." (More aussie irony?) And then you can just gleefully ruin their lives.

But I wouldn't worry much, Mr Morris. You can ignore the complaints. I'm surprised the story even made the newspapers (on page 20-something in the corner..) But this is the best part:

Mr Davis said Attorney-General Rob Hulls, who appointed Justice Morris, should use laws passed last year to set up an investigative panel into Justice Morris's situation.

Mr Davis must be confused. Or talking about another Rob Hulls somewhere. The Justice Department under Rob Hulls could care less. Rob Hulls' Justice Department is there to protect political appointees, not to protect the legitimacy of the courts. After all, these are "the finest people I know", according to Mr Hulls.

The Judicial Committees are little more than coffee clutches. A magistrate can appear drunk in court and no one will care. He or she can jeer and insult the litigants (usually the self litigants since the lawyers all learned how to beg in school); and can return a judgment made up the night before after a few wines, -- unless the magistrate is threatening someone's election, they have nothing to fear.

Perfect job security until age 70; and the only absolute freedom of speech in the country. You can say anything about anybody in the courtroom.
What a job!