You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] 17817725? ago 

It's not unusual for a court to appoint a lawyer to an accused if the judge is afraid the person is not able to fully and capably represent themselves. In these cases it is the roll of the lawyer to act as Second Chair to the accused.

0
0

[–] 17820222? ago 

I am aware of the possibility in general, but can you provide any relevant NZ law or precedent on the issue? Where I live person's will regarding representation is almost absolute. There is pretty limited set of rules where a lawyer can be forced onto the defendant by the court, and even then that lawyer has to shut up and let the defendant represent himself if he is able to(not mentally or physically impaired). So when I see two lawyers assigned for some reason, even if from the same law firm, it looks really weird to me, but maybe NZ law allows for this…

0
0

[–] 17820236? ago 

I honestly don't know NZ law on the subject. My law training is Canadian and here it is well established as a protection to the defendant. To be clear, "Second Chair" means they are there to assist only. They can take over questioning or prepare documents if the defendant wants, but the defendant is free to ignore all the advice they are given and not let the lawyer speak in court at all. This arrangement can only help the defendant (for example suggesting the defendant object when the Crown crosses the line in what they are doing or finding precedent cases that support the case the defendant wants to make) and there really is no room for the defendant to be harmed by the lawyer's presence.

0
0

[–] 17817790? ago 

Any chance the faggot lawyer has the right to talk over or for Brenton? This is a kangaroo court after all.