Talk:Margaret Cunneen
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
Added specifics of the allegation that led to the ICAC investigation
[edit]I think it is an important matter of public record that Cunneen was investigated for advising Tilley to pretend to have chest pains to avoid a roadside breath test. I have fully sourced my insertion of the specifics. I think this more specific allegation carries more interest than simply "investigated for perverting the course of justice". Please do not remove without further discussion. [1] 58.161.74.2 (talk) 00:17, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
References
Source
[edit]- http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/prosecutor-called-to-account-for-attack-on-defenders/2005/09/25/1127586747253.html
- Moved here from article because it doesn't really add to the article at this stage, although it could if inserted into the text. The references and external links are not designed to be a repository for every news item on the subject. -- Mattinbgn/ talk 01:00, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Perception of unfairness... why?
[edit]Could someone explain to me (or give a link) why "Perception of unfairness" is a problem for a prosecutor? I can understand "Perception of unfairness" applying to the judge and jury, but why should it apply for the prosecution (or defense) lawyers. Their whole job is to take sides. Peter Ballard 05:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Its all explained in the link!
The court found Ms Cunneen had "deliberately or without sufficient reflection" breached rules for barristers and prosecutors by speaking about one of her current cases. The rules were designed to guarantee the integrity of the criminal justice system. Any breach "may diminish public confidence in that system", it said.
The court said Ms Cunneen had implied in her speech that MG was guilty even though his appeal was still pending. This displayed "partiality" and a "lack of detachment" and "potentially compromised her capacity to fairly prosecute" the case.
Basically if the prosector acts out of line like she did, what else might she be doing that no one knows about? or atleast cause the question to be asked. This can hang over the head of the conviction and even be grounds for an appeal.--Polygamy4 16:13, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
The prosecutor doesn't take sides, he presents the evidence to do justice. Australia is not America. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:DC52:D900:300E:A2E0:8ECD:40FE (talk) 09:31, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Date of birth
[edit]Two different dates of birth are given - one in the lede and another in the infobox. Neither is sourced. Otherthinker (talk) 09:48, 30 May 2014 (UTC)