Obdurate opposition from Crown Law & Maritime NZ

Obdurate opposition from Crown Law & Maritime NZ
Julian Joy’s Report is being prevented from making it to a Rehearing for Bolton to have his wrongful prosecution annulled.
In their submissions Crown Law say on behalf of MNZ that “Bolton was urged to seek legal representation, chose not to do so & seeks to reopen the hearing only after the release of an adverse determination of the charges.”
——————————————————————————-
MNZ & Crown Law had both been informed by Bolton that he had assessed M Pigneguy’s claim & prosecution documents with Nautically competent Queens Counsel & other Navigational authorities – his evidence was valid & well prepared. There was no reason that his evidence would be insufficient on a factual basis. Obviously Bolton was only interested in having a Rehearing because of the adverse decision from Judge Davis who unfortunately chose what he thought should be a safe choice to go along with the fiction fed to him by the prosecution
Judge Davis had asked at the hearing whose “science” should he adopt & Bolton responded that he would be better off if Mr Young’s “science” was rejected. “I thought he was to be an independent witness & would be helpful, but unfortunately I wasted my time.”
Judge Davis would not expect the prosecution witnesses to be leading him astray with fabrications, distortions of the truth & false interpretations of Maritime Collision Prevention Rules.
Bolton was not prepared to be facing such dishonesty either.
It’s called Perjury, Perverting the Course of Justice & Misleading the Court – something Crown Law is obviously wanting to hide & the boating public is been denied true Maritime determination.

A Rehearing to clarify the facts of the case
would be interesting in a competent Forum.
download (5)

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Your email address will not be published.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