Dear Belly,

The man has been very publicly shamed for
lying about a minor traffic offence -
let's put things into their proper perspective
here, please.

Were he not who he is - would it even have
attracted any media attention?

Let's not read anything more into it. He lied,
so he's human. He got caught out, now he's
going to pay for it in jail.

What else should be done - have him crucified?

Foxy, you appear to have missed the fact that he was a Judge, one of those appointed to sit in Judgment upon the rest, and to uphold the Rule of Law. That role carries many benefits,and responsibilities, one of which is to OBEY the law. A firie who sets fires, a police officer who steals, a soldier who kills civilians, anyone who crosses the line of their duties, is far worse than Joe Bloggs committing the same offence, IMO.
And to watch his supercilious contempt was insulting to the rest of us.
Unfortunately, half a life spent watching and listening to his peers has convinced ME that his attitude is commonplace, and he will bear no disgrace amongst them, in fact he will actually gain sympathy because the "serfs" have made him answer for it!
I'm willing to bet he will be out in under a year, probably for "health" reasons. The fact that he will keep his generous pension is the final straw, that's obscene!

I still think Belly has a valid point - which is that even in punishment, there is one law for the rich-and-famous, and another for the rest of us.

Spikey asks:

>>Which of us has never told a lie? Then told another, to cover the first?<<

The judge described his actions as "deliberate, premeditated perjury", which is a couple of steps up from lying. Einfeld's involved a statutory declaration, and I can safely say that I have never once told that kind of lie. Hizzonner also pointed out that "...Einfeld had engaged in 'planned criminal activity'" and proceeded to detail the "numerous lies in his police statement".

I can assure you, Spikey, hand on heart, that I have never made a false statement of any kind to the police.

And Foxy, your heart is so full of kindness that you are prepared overlook the seriousness of Einfeld's actions.

>>The man has been very publicly shamed for lying about a minor traffic offence - let's put things into their proper perspective
here, please.<<

I believe that the proper perspective is that his disgrace diminishes us all. If our "national treasures" behave this way, what does that say about the rest of us?

>>He got caught out, now he's going to pay for it in jail<<

If he were being sent to the same jails that he has sent those less privileged than himself, I would accept that it is a fair punishment.

However, I suspect he will be going to a suite in the Alan Bond wing of an open prison somewhere in the pleasant NSW countryside.

Pericles,

I mostly think your posts rational and well considered, but your performance on this topic is below par. I'm surprised to see you joining the baying crowd.

On the basis of having met the man (how often, for how long, and under what circumstances?) you declare him to be "little more than a posturing, arrogant, self-important buffoon". You told him this to his face I presume, and gave him a chance to defend himself?

On the basis of a TV show you conclude "the man still has no concept of right and wrong, as it applies to himself". I wish I could make such sweeping conclusions on such tenuous evidence.

You simplistically conflate the punishment of going to gaol with being punished in gaol. Furthermore you assume without any evidence that he will receive "kid-glove treatment". "I suspect he will be going to a suite in the Alan Bond wing of an open prison somewhere in the pleasant NSW countryside."

I presume he will be incarcerated in a manner appropriate to the circumstances of his crime (perjury), his age (70) and his former occupation (judge). Would you have him locked up with the people who came before him when he was a sentencing judge? They could slip the boot in too. Would that make you feel better?

You engage in empty, tabloid rhetoric: "If our "national treasures" behave this way, what does that say about the rest of us?" Personally, I think it says nothing at all about me or anyone else in my circle of family, friends, colleagues or acquaintances.

I wonder why you want to sink the slipper so viciously? The man has been tried, convicted and sentenced - as appropriate. What more do you want?

Dear Max,

I may have missed the point as you say, but
I'm judging his actions, i.e what he did
as a private individual, not as a judge.

Can't the two be separated in your opinion?
Or do you believe, that as an individual he
should be 'infallible,' like the Pope?

It's my very own, personal opinion, Spikey. It wasn't intended to be a crowd-pleaser.

>>...your performance on this topic is below par. I'm surprised to see you joining the baying crowd.<<

My overreaction is principally driven by the sight of someone in a position of great moral responsibility, trashing the entire concept of ethics, and of behaving ethically.

>>You engage in empty, tabloid rhetoric: "If our "national treasures" behave this way, what does that say about the rest of us?" Personally, I think it says nothing at all about me or anyone else in my circle of family, friends, colleagues or acquaintances.<<

Good for you. But my view is echoed by the man himself.

"It's all criminal and it's wrong and ah, and it's not just morally wrong either by the way, it's communally wrong. And if people break those rules like I did, ah the society will collapse in anarchy, and it's as bad as that, because people could be lying every day." (ABC Four Corners)

Here are some of his utterings on the programme that brought the bile to my throat.

"I don't think I'm in the slightest bit dishonest. I just made a mistake"

"I think I genuinely believed that I was not the driver of the car on the day."

"This morning at about nine o'clock my lawyers delivered a comprehensive dossier to investigating police. This information establishes that I was not driving my car which was photographed by a speed camera on the day in question. I stand by that."

"I never lie in statutory declarations if I can conceivably have any hope of it being true. I never tell untruths. There may be occasions when I've made mistakes in memory and things of this kind. And in details. I may have. I don't know."

"There were three events plus this one. I've admitted to this one. If I'd been called upon to meet the others I might have admitted to one of those when I'd got the facts and I'd checked up on them."

That last statement, from a national treasure.

Priceless.