Crown Law & Maritime New Zealand Appear Nautically Foolish

Judge Davis's unfamiliarity was taken advantage of by the witnesses for the prosecution

Crown Law & Maritime New Zealand Appear Nautically Foolish
Appellant’s Submissions in response to Submissions of Crown Law Mark Davies, Meredith Connell in opposition to Appeal against Conviction
Link for Seeing, Signing & Sharing Petition – http://maritimenz.com/AnnulConvictionGainedByAbuseOfCourtProcess
Crown Law wrote on behalf of Maritime New Zealand
12 A: “The Judge found that the non reporting by Maritime New Zealand to TAIC – Accident Investigation Commission was neither here nor there”
B: “That Bolton had submitted there existed a body of customary law/practice outside of the bounds of the Marine Transport Act which included consideration of the course that the appellant asserted the Seaway actually took. Mr Bolton asserted he was entitled to take account of such customary law/practice in the decision he made.”
13 : The judge found that the first point was “neither here nor there.” In relation to the second point he found :
(a) there was no evidence that such a body of customary law/practice existed; and
(b) even if there were such evidence, there was no evidence that the “rule” Mr Bolton asserted he had applied formed part of it.
The Appellant (Bolton) seeks to respond to the Crown submissions
Response 13. For the Judge to find the above point neither here nor there as well as his findings regarding 13(a) and (b) is perhaps an indication of the degree to which his nautical unfamiliarity was taken advantage of by the witnesses for the prosecution.
==================================
Note in addition to Response 13
A: For Judge Davis to say that it’s neither here nor there for Maritime New Zealand to disregard their mandatory obligation to notify TAIC – Transport Accident Investigation Commission is condoning a violation of the Maritime Transport Act sections 31 & 60.
This was probably done by Maritime New Zealand to take advantage of a District Court Judge such as Judge Davis who admitted having no Nautical Knowledge.
B: This lack of Nautical Knowledge is displayed in his unfamiliarity of a navigator’s rightful practice to assess as part of his risk management “the future course of a vessel from her position at a particular moment & this greatly depending on the nature of the locality where she is at the moment” (especially regarding Seaway being on a Regular Run) – as verified in Farwell’s “Rules of the Nautical Road.”

Click here to view – Farwell’s Rules of the Nautical Road

Crown Law & Maritime New Zealand Appear Nautically Foolish

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