Actually Puffy FYI... CASA must provide a brief of evidence that will make their case "beyond reasonable doubt" in a court of law....and will all likelihood the result of a conviction.
The CDPP evaluate that brief and if its a "goer" they take it to court to do the prosecuton on CASA's behalf.
BUT...as in the case of J Quadrio CASA's dicky brief and "evidence" they supplied led the CDPP NOT to have a "go" in court on CASA's behalf.
No matter...with his licence suspended and not returned after a AAT hearing..thus he is seriously penalised ...no job, no income and NO CONVICTION in a court of law. !!!
How's that for JUSTAR$E...the CASA way
!
I'm sure pruners are well aware of the distinction of 'case dismissed', or 'no conviction recorded'.
What do you say when CASA produces a brief of Class A BullSh*t to the CDPP..who decide to run with it because they do not know they have been presented with BS, as their aviation expertise does not run to having that knowlege.
CDPP accepts it because A... they believe it to be true, and B.. because they also consider they can obtain a conviction on the "evidence" provided by CASA.
When the CDPP was advised it was a load of bollocks and bs, they dropped it like the sh*tty stick that it was. (With a no cost claim proviso)
THEY didnt want to have to pay for CASA's "lemon"
So.. what happens in court. They certainly don't say to the Magistrate ..'This case will not proceed because we have countervailing evidence from the accused that leads us to believe that the brief is untrue therefore it is highly unlikely we will obtain a conviction as CASA seeks.'
It simply passes off as .. 'NO evidence tendered'. The charge is thus "struck out".
And everybody can just fcuk off home happy and off the hook.
Except for the victim. Justar$e is served.
The CASA way.
Over the years Ive seen and heard so much bullsh*t come out of CASA and the mouths of some "staff" persons that I am HIGHLY SCEPTICAL.
Remember..whatever it takes...any old bullsh*t will do.
The CASA way