Points of Law – Omissions Of Judge Davis District Court

This miscarriage of Justice was not about a Maritime Crime – it was blatant Prejudice against Bolton

Points of Law – Omissions Of Judge Davis District Court
Link for Seeing, Signing & Sharing Petition – http://maritimenz.com/AnnulConvictionGainedByAbuseOfCourtProcess
In addition to the comprehensive Report of Julian Joy
here are 7 Points of Law that Judge Davis omitted to take into account in his erroneous decision – giving grounds for Appeal
1 : That ferries on regular runs do have a bearing on risk assessment
2 : That Bolton was not obliged at .5 nm distance to act as Give-way vessel in a harbour situation where the ferry would normally have turned at Browns Island from whence Classique had come, crossing safely astern Stbd/Stbd
3 : That the ferry as Stand-on vessel was not to have turned towards Classique, creating a reduction in safe passing clearance. Refer Rule 22.17
4 : That the ferry was to have carried out his normal course maneuvers i.e. turn at Browns Is & not use R22.17.2b as reason for continuing towards Classique or being prevented from turning to its port.
5 : That the ferry was to have had a complying horn, using it when doubt first arose in ample time rather than use his camera.
Rule 22.33b & Appendix 3, also Rule 22.34.4
6 : That M Pigneguy violated Rule 22.8.1,2,3,4, by not acting at a prudent distance off thereby creating an unnecessary situation with his superior speed.
7 : That Maritime NZ did not publish an incident report & notify TAIC – Transport Accident Investigation Commission first.
The above are serious omissions which need clarification for all harbour users where ferries are on regular runs – further more….
Maritime New Zealand’s expert witness Barry Young (deceased Dec’14) denied basic Navigational practice being taught at Maritime School, then said there’s a known angle Sky tower to Rangitoto on which he bases his fictional figures but foolishly said there was no fixed point to start plotting e.g. at Sth Motuihe.
M Pigneguy had drawn it on his evidential chart.
Other matters he could’ve been cross-examined on as well as his acting more of an advocate for MNZ’s case rather than an unbiased expert, primarily being helpful to the Court.
Judge Davis is not only selectively avoiding the Letter of the Law but ignoring its spirit & intent.
It is a fact that the original dispute between MNZ & Bolton, (said by Catherine Taylor ex Director MNZ to be in the “Public Interest”) wasn’t about a Navigational issue but about Classique’s Co-operative Cost Share Crewing Concept. This type of Crewing had been actively objected to by Keith Ingram, editor of Professional Skipper Magazine & M Pigneguy ex chairman of the Charter yacht Assn. This was entirely disregarded by Judge Davis.
Bolton with no Legal assistance or Representation endured a farce of Legal Proceedings, making a mockery of the foundational tenets of justice – apart from the cost to the community not only in expenditure of money but in every day Navigational confusion especially regarding areas where ferries are on Regular Runs.
Link for Seeing, Signing & Sharing Petition – http://maritimenz.com/AnnulConvictionGainedByAbuseOfCourtProcess

This miscarriage of Justice was not about a Maritime Crime – it was blatant Prejudice against Bolton
Points of Law - Omissions Of Judge Davis District Court2014-06-27_2109

Points of Law – Omissions Of Judge Davis District Court

Website Pin Facebook Twitter Myspace Friendfeed Technorati del.icio.us Digg Google StumbleUpon Premium Responsive

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge