Begone, judges of bad character
AT what point should sitting magistrates be sacked for their behaviour?
Are there professional standards that they are expected to maintain? And why are those who repeatedly fail to act in a manner considered fair and reasonable allowed to continue in the job?
Among others, I’m talking about Melbourne magistrate Richard Pithouse, who, during a Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal hearing, suggested a sexual assault victim who claimed she was raped during a night out made the complaint because she suffered “buyer’s remorse”.
And Mr Pithouse didn’t stop there.
He went further, adding the victim had “put herself in that position” after she alleged she was raped following a night of drinking.
The victim’s family, who claimed she tried to take her own life after the trauma was exacerbated by Mr Pithouse’s comments, called for him to be sacked.
And then it all went to ground. The silence, deafening. Why? It’s not the first time this magistrate has been the subject of complaint.
In 2010, the family of another sexual assault victim claimed Mr Pithouse treated her with “utter contempt” during her sex assault case.
Her father asked why, eight years after complaints to the Chief Magistrate and then Attorney-General Rob Hulls, Mr Pithouse had not faced sanctions.
Fact is, no other business or organisation in this day and age would tolerate such comments being made, and anyone going down that road would likely be swiftly given their marching orders. But not Mr Pithouse, it seems. And there are questions. Why has the Chief Magistrate refused to comment on complaints against Mr Pithouse?
What is the Judicial Commission, established in 2016 as a watchdog on magistrates, doing in relation to the matter?
And please don’t tell me it is “still being investigated”, a term I have found equates to “Maybe if we keep quiet long enough, it will all go away”.
During 15 years as a court reporter, I sat in courts presided over by many magistrates.
Most were decent, fair and just administrators of the law, but there were others who, at times, had me shaking my head in disbelief.
There was the visiting magistrate who refused to sit in court while police prosecutors wore pepper spray canisters attached to their belts.
Forget that within any court precinct on an average day violence is only ever a sideways glance short of erupting.
Nor did it seem to matter to this magistrate that a female police prosecutor had been assaulted at the court just weeks earlier.
Or that a prosecutor armed with pepper spray could at least provide a modicum of protection for those within the courtroom — including the magistrate — should things go pear-shaped.
Instead, like a spoiled child spitting the dummy because they couldn’t get their own way, the magistrate stood down and refused to return to the bench while prosecutors wore pepper spray. His actions threw the court into total chaos for more than hour.
Custody prisoners were left languishing in overcrowded police cells waiting for their matters to be heard while the foyer filled with other accused, victims, witnesses and families, all waiting and wondering what the hell was going on.
Only when a prosecutor not qualified to carry pepper spray was brought in did the magistrate return to the bench, leaving other magistrates — already struggling with their own heavy workloads — to cope with the backlog he had created.
Then there was the semi-retired magistrate who habitually sent fine dodgers to the back of the court with a paper and pen to work out how much their fines were and deduct the late payment fees.
The fine dodger would then present the final tally to the court, unchecked, and the magistrate would wipe out all the late payment costs and put them on a payment plan for the rest.
So while you and I would pay our fines — and the late payment costs as well, if necessary — these deadheads were literally being rewarded by this magistrate for refusing to obey the law.
Victoria needs the very best out of its magistrates. While most fit the bill, it should come as no surprise that there are also a number who fall well short.
The least the Judicial Commission can do, for all our sakes, is to start sorting the wheat from the chaff. They could start with Mr Pithouse.
I have a few others to suggest, should they care to give me a call.