by June Khaw

What should you do if the judge presiding over your case dozes off in the midst of your argument?

Meet Judge Ian Dodd, a New South Wales District Court judge who had a reputation for nodding off in court in the midst of trials.

In 2002, he dozed off in a corporate fraud case and during a hearing on a shooting. In 2003, he nodded off while a rape victim was testifying. In 2004, he managed to get some shut-eye at various points during the seven-month long trial of seven men accused of smuggling 383kg of cocaine into Australia (they were all convicted, by the way).

Court officials had to keep waking up Judge Dodd (a.k.a. “Judge Nodd”) by banging tables, dropping thick bundles of documents on the table, raising their voices and clearing their throats loudly. However, none of the lawyers who experienced the judge’s sleeping bouts were willing to speak to him about the problem.

In 2005, Judge Dodd presided over the trial of two men accused of smuggling drugs into Australia. Unsurprisingly, he managed to sleep through bits of the 17-day trial. His naps ranged from a few minutes to as long as 20 minutes. He dozed off more often after lunch breaks and when video and audio tapes were played in court.

At times, he snored so loudly that he woke himself up.

Some jurors laughed and mimicked him in court, some rolled their eyes, some just dozed off along with him.

The accused and their families were not amused though. However, when one of them tried to protest, his solicitor just said “Look mate, it doesn’t really matter. It happens with this judge”, and they pressed on with the trial. Hmm.

The two men were convicted and they appealed (of course).

However, their first appeal was rejected by the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal, which felt that despite the frequent naps, there was no error in judgment. Judge Dodd, amazingly enough, missed none of the important evidence and even managed to sum up the case accurately and in a balanced manner to the jury. Shocking.

But could the jury have thought that the judge’s sleeping bouts meant that he felt the defense was not even worth staying awake for? 

Apparently the Australian High Court thought so. The Court believed that the distraction caused by Judge Dodd’s constant sleeping resulted in a gross miscarriage of justice and ordered a retrial.

Judge Dodd was subsequently diagnosed with sleep apnoea, a medical condition where the sufferer stops breathing for short periods during sleep. These disturbed periods of sleep causes fatigue to the sufferer in the daytime, which explains Judge Dodd’s slumber in court.

Shortly after that drug-trafficking trial in 2005, Judge Dodd retired after eight years on the bench and received treatment for his sleep apnoea. He currently receives a yearly pension of A$152,000. We bet he’s not complaining.

So, are there other judges out there who sleep during trials? It appears so.

Other reported cases of judicial sleepiness include:

• Judge Roderick Meagher, another New South Wales judge who is known for his ability to fall asleep on the bench. He was said to have “brought colour to the Court of Appeal, but not…much movement.”

• A Nigerian judge on the International War Crimes Tribunal who had “regular sleep episodes” during a 2001 prosecution.

• A previous Ontario case where the judge had fallen asleep during the criminal defendant’s cross-examination (a new trial was subsequently ordered as a result).

• Another Ontario case where one of the judges, Justice Ginsberg, fell asleep during a 2006 redistricting case. The other two judges, Justices Souter and Alito reportedly “looked at her, but did not give her a nudge”.

• Yet another Ontario case, Leader Media Products v. Sentinel Hill Alliance, where the judge was reported to have fallen asleep several times during the trial.

Hmm, must be something in the Ontario air…
 

PRESS RELEASE

Communication Cluster III

(non official – for media information only)

Arusha, 18 December 2008

Protais Zigiranyirazo Sentenced to 20 Years Imprisonment

Trial Chamber III composed of Judges Inés Mónica Weinberg de Roca, Khalida Rachid Khan and Lee Gacuiga Muthoga, on Thursday 18 December 2008, convicted Protais Zigiranyirazo of genocide and extermination as a crime against humanity and sentenced him to 20 years imprisonment. Credit was given to him for time spent in prison.

The Trial Chamber however acquitted him of conspiracy to commit genocide, complicity in genocide and murder as a crime against humanity. The Chamber found that the Prosecution failed to prove that Protais Zigiranyirazo conspired with officials, at various meetings, to plan or facilitate attacks on the Tutsi population. Likewise, the Prosecution failed to prove any criminal responsibility for alleged involvement in the Interahamwe, or in killings on Rurunga Hill. Furthermore, the Prosecution failed to prove that he was responsible for the murder of the three gendarmes or of Stanislas Sinibagiwe.

However, the Trial Chamber found that Zigiranyirazo, also known as “Mr. Z”, whose younger sister was married to the late President Habyarimana, was guilty of having participated in a joint criminal enterprise with the common purpose of committing genocide and extermination of Tutsi at Kesho hill, as well as aiding and abetting genocide at the Kiyovu roadblock.

(more…)

We received a request from Richard Granat, who is presently co-chair of the eLayewring Task Force of the Law Practise Management Section of American Bar Association, to post the below contest: 

The James I. Keane Memorial Award for Excellence in eLawyering is awarded once a year by the Law Practice Management Section of the American Bar Association at the Annual ABA TECHSHOW in Chicago.

The  Award is named for James I. Keane, the founding Chair of the ABA eLawyering Task Force. The Task Force was created in 2000, when ABA President William G. Paul, of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, took the unusual and creative step of asking a Section to assume responsibility for one of his presidential initiatives, namely an examination of ways that lawyers could use the Internet and other electronic resources to deliver legal services to people of moderate means more efficiently and effectively. Last year\’s recipient was the law firm of Cowell Taradash, P.C., based in Chicago, for the web site at Illinoisdivorce.com .

The ABA eLawyering Task Force of the Law Practice Management Section will review the nominations and select the recipient. The Award Guidelines and Nomination Forms can be found here. Law firms can nominate themselves.

The deadline for submission is January 15. 2009.

Please visit http://www.abanet.org/lpm/award/jimkeane/index.shtml for more information.

Incest – the act of having sexual relations with a family member. It’s a taboo that has lasted through the ages, and prevalent across the world. A taboo so strong that the law makes it illegal.

But recently, the debate on whether it should be decriminalized has arisen again. In early March 2008, a German man, known as Patrick S, had appealed to Germany’s highest court of appeal for his conviction on having an incestuous relationship with his sister to be overturned. His appeal failed.

According to the court, incest should be outlawed as it “do[es] not affect them exclusively, but also can have an effect on family and society and have consequences for children who arise from the relationship”. However, one of the judges dissented, arguing that the law “is based exclusively on moral beliefs rather than with the objective of legal protection”.

Is incest such a despicable act? History has shown that it is. For example, when the cruel King Henry VIII of England wanted to rid of one of his many wives, Anne Boelyn, he concocted a heinous crime against her – that she was sleeping with her brother. The only known civilization that ever accepted incest was ancient Roman Egypt, where relationships between brothers and sisters were common. Arguably, this has a lot to do with the idea of maintaining the purity of a bloodline.

(more…)

In March 2008, an 8-year old boy shocked the Brazilian legal fraternity by passing a law entrance exam, and initially enrolled by a private law school. The boy, Joao Victor Portellinha de Oliveira, attended his first class with his father. Upon realizing its mistake, the law school, Universidade Paulista cancelled Joao’s enrollment and returned his tuition fees to his family. It clarified that the mistake was made by one of its’ employees, and that a student must graduate from high school to be qualified to be enrolled.

On what inspired him to take the exam, Joao said “My dream is to be a federal judge. So I decided to take the test to see how I would do. It was easy. I studied a week before the test.”

In Brazil, students are required to take an entrance exam before enrolling into a college. Each college has its own exams, and it is commonly perceived that exams from private universities are easier than those from public universities, which offer free education.

Understandably, Universidade Paulista’s mistake of enrolling Joao has generated much uproar in the legal circles. The Brazilian Bar Association has stated that this serves as a warning about the low standards of some of the country’s law schools. Education Minister Fernando Haddad has since ordered an investigation.

Is such an unfortunate scenario possible in Malaysia? Maybe so. In Malaysia, there are no compulsory entrance exams. Both private and public law schools generally require students to have taken SPM and a foundation course (e.g. STPM, ‘A’ Levels, Diploma, Matric). But like Brazil, entry into private law schools are commonly perceived to be easier than that of public law schools.

(more…)

Since the dawn of humanity, women have always been bullied, dominated, and abused by men. But not anymore, with the rise of feminism in the last century or so. Day by day, more and more of their suppressed rights have returned, their stifled voices heard. Society has changed, and so has the law.

Sexual empowerment for women is getting better. But it can get funny and ugly, too.

In early March 2008, a 38-year old Japanese bikini model, popularly known by her professional name as Serena Kozakura, was facing criminal charges. But she was acquitted, for the simple reason that her breasts were big. Very big, in fact. It’s a case which proves that size DOES matter.

What happened was that she was charged for property destruction. A man accused her for kicking in the wooden door of his room, and crawled through the hole she had made. Apparently, he was with another a woman inside. No doubt, a typical love triangle, jilted feelings and revenge was thrown in the mix.

So how did her big breasts make the difference? Simple. In her appeal, her defence counsel brought a plate showing the size of the hole before the Tokyo High Court. He showed that it was impossible for her to fit through the hole with her 110cm breasts. Satisfied with such incontrovertible evidence, the court acquitted her.

(more…)

The Lawyer and The American Lawyer have produced a list of the Top 100 law firms globally, ordered by 2006 revenue.

It is no surprise that UK and USA firms lead the pack - with the number one firm - Clifford Chance - grossing £1,030.2 million (around RM6.5 billion).

To give you a flavour of these Top 100, we have listed the Top 10 below:

1. Clifford Chance, £1,030.2m – International law firm (headquartered in the UK)
2. Linklaters, £935.2m – International (UK)
3. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, £884.6m – New York City (USA)
4. Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, £882.1m – International (UK)
5. Latham & Watkins, £776.1m – National (USA)
6. Baker & McKenzie, £742.9m – International (USA)
7. Allen & Overy, £736.3m – International (UK)
8. Jones Day, £706.0m – National (USA)
9. Sidley Austin, £617.6m – International (USA)
10. White & Case, £574.7m – International (USA)

(more…)