Perjuries & dishonestly misleading prosecution evidence ignored by both Judge Davis & Judge Toogood
Judge Toogood Just Repeats From Judge Davis’s Decision
The findings of the District Court Judge
“After taking time to consider the evidence, the Judge rejected the defences. He held that it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had failed to take the evasive measures which he was required to take under the Rules, thereby operating his vessel in a manner which caused unnecessary danger or risk to the Seaway II and its passengers and crew. Two alternative charges under the Rules were dismissed accordingly.”
Bolton in his Appeal against Judge Toogood’s Decision writes …
Judge Davis wrongly rejected the defences (of Bolton)
Admitting to having no Nautical Knowledge, Judge Davis was mislead by the prosecution who misconstrued the situation & application of Maritime Rules. In fact if the claim presented to Maritime New Zealand is to be believed, the ferry is the violator. MNZ failed to assess the validity of the claim. It is impossible for the ferry to have carried out his stated actions in the 10 seconds time available as from the 80 mtrs point. Unfeasible and a violation of rules – it did not occur at all.
Note in addition to the above Submission …
Considering it was the wrongful decision of Judge Davis which gave valid grounds for Bolton’s Appeal, it seems absurd that Judge Toogood will not question the findings of Judge Davis.
It appears futile that regardless of the evidence from Bolton, backed up by the two Reports of Julian Joy, that Judge Toogood simply reiterates the same miscarriage of Justice.
Maritime New Zealand was found to have failed to assess M Pigneguy’s unfeasible claim. Then they employed Barry Young who acted as a Hired Gun to dishonestly deny valid Navigational Principles & Practices, which succeeded in misleading Judge Davis on every material point.
Link for Seeing, Signing & Sharing Petition – http://maritimenz.com/AnnulConvictionGainedByAbuseOfCourtProcess