Ghahraman and the Judge

The Herald reports:

The judge presiding over Golriz Ghahraman’s court hearing yesterday previously worked on cases with the former MP when they were both lawyers.

Criminal barrister Marie Dyhrberg KC and former Auckland District Law Society president told 1News the judge would have been “very much alert” to the “reality of not having bias” but also the “perception … which is really important”.

A perceived conflict of interest can be raised by lawyers or the judge.

The District Court Recusal Guidelines read: “The guiding principle is that a judge is disqualified from sitting if in the circumstances there is a real possibility that in the eyes of a fair-minded and fully informed observer the judge might not be impartial in reaching a decision in the case.”

I don’t see this as a big deal. There were no real decisions to be made at this hearing, except media photography. The judge may not even have known which cases they had until that day.

It would be very different if this was a sentencing appearance. In that situation having a former colleague decide your penalty would be problematic. But for merely taking a plea, I see no issue.

More details of the offending have come out. They are:

• 22 Oct: Stole black Zambesi shirt costing $695 from Cre8iveworx by placing the shirt inside her clothing or bag.
• 21 Dec: Stole from Scotties an Acne Studios single breasted coat valued at $1900 and a Commes des Garçons wallet, valued at $160 by placing them in her bag.
• 22 Dec: Stole from Standard Issue a navy blue cardigan priced at $389 by placing it in her bag
• 23 Dec: Stole from Scotties a $650 Issey Miyake bag, a $333 Two Squares dress, a $4500 black Row Calanthe dress, and a $290 Lemaire Crepe tank top. Refused to allow staff to search her bag

Also of interest is she claims not to remember some of the offending. You have to wonder how many other times she has shoplifted but has forgotten about it.