No Mercy for Confused Defendant

by Keith de Ridder

There is often criticism that court procedure intimidates defendants and can not be understood by many people. It appears that Mr Patterson S.M. is making a thorough job of ensuring that this oppression continues.

A Maori defendant stands before him; The magistrate hears the charges, and the request for the defendant to be remanded until a later date. He then asks the defendant, "What do you have to say to this." The defendant looks very confused and says "Beg your pardon. Sir." It is obvious that he must have heard what the magistrate said as he is quite close to him, and I am right at the back of the Courtroom and have heard Mr Patterson quite clearly. Therefore, from his question it is obvious that the defendant has absolutely no idea of what he is being asked and what he is supposed to say.

All this delivered in thundering tones while glowering over the bench at the defendant.

The defendant looks slightly panic-striken, but manages to stammer out "No Sir". By this time it is obvious that he is very confused and doesn't really know what he has said 'No' to. But he knows that he has avoided further raging by not daring to raise any possible objections, or asking to have something he doesn't understand clarified.

One would have thought that a magistrate of Mr Patterson's experience might have been able to realise immediately that the defendant was confused or afraid. But absolutely no effort was made to try and calm the defendant and clear his confusion. It appears that Mr Patterson, in his handing out of justice' will not be inconvenienced by checking to see if he has been understood. This is a case of utter lack of interest in a defendant's predicament, and of blatant intimidation.