Negligence?

Greetings peeps. I am enquiring about a legal issue which has had me frustrated for some time(years) in that I have been thus far unable to asertain the exact, or even general nature of the law regards this issue. In other words, in the past I sought answers, but none were forthcomming...I suspect due to the lawyers I consulted pulling rank in a small town.

I reside in NZ, however the NZ legal system is generally based upon the Westminster system so I would very much appreciate any advice given even if such advice pertains specifically to UK law. For at least then i can draw some parallels. Back in the mid 2000's I was charged with cannabis possesion and cultivation for supply having been busted.

I employed a lawyer to defend me against these charges. He then represented me for approximatly the next 2 years while I was in and out of court and remanded for future dates. During this time the lawyer strongly encouraged me to plead 'guilty' to the lessor charge of 'possesion', and 'not guilty' on the 'supply charge', so as to lesson any possible sentence(upon being found guilty) and from his point of view, I pressume in part, to conduct a more straight forward defense.

Because the police had searched my property without a warrant under the MODA, I was not prepared to plead guilty to any of the charges on this basis, and because the entire pretext of the search was like Swiss cheese(illegal).

Notwithstanding this, I was a medical user of cannabis which has always aided me in alleviateing depression and anxiety in general. All of this was made clear to my lawyer.

When the police had searched the property, they had found about 30 plants, half of which were seedlings and the other 15, medium to large. They also found some cannabis(about a LB or 2) in my house. The police determined that all the cannabis was worth approximatly $29'000, a figure of which was in their notes and known to the lawyer in question who was very familiar with the case.

I never denied the cannabis was my own. I admitted it was mine. However, I wanted to plead 'not guilty' to all charges on the basis of the aforementioned, ie illegal search and medical necessity - which I pressumed was my right despite the alleged evidence and any such admissions of ownership regards the herbaceous material.

Now let me get the crux of this enquiry. About 3 days prior to my eventual trial, I went and saw my lawyer. He again tried to get me to enter a 'guilty' plea for 'possesion', and a 'not guilty' for supply. I explained to him again my reasons for not wanting to do this - after all I would have ordinarilly thought it would be my 'right' to plead which ever way I chose.

He then said to me in these exact words: "I will not represent you unless you plead guilty to possesion".

I was of course flabberghasted and quite stunned at his 'ultimatum', especially considering I was quite possibly going to be housed in a cage for possesion of a herb. I then advised him again that I would not plead guilty to any of the charges. He then handed me a form and asked me to sign it. I signed this form, feeling quite bewildered at this point and somewhat confused, and taken by surprise. 

I pressume(I realised after the fact) this form was presented to me so that I'd have signed a form to discharge the verbal contract we had - so he would have proof I pressume, that I had terminated him as being my legal representitive.

I left that office feeling quite sick to be frank. My now ex lawyer had hastily arranged for a new lawyer to defend my case for me. She also encouraged me to 'plead guilty' to possesion, but again, I calmly and politely explained my reasons for not wanting to do so. She became exasperated with me in fact...but accepted that I would not plead guilty to any of the charges so went ahead and represented me any way.

During the course of the trial, the crown prosecutor alleged that the the quantity of cannabis was 33 LBs(before the jury) and that this was a 'conservative estimate' - which @ $3000/LB monetary value the crown attributes to cannabis, would have made this quantity worth over $100'000(at least); even though the police in their own notes with the court, stated quite clearly that the cannabis was worth $29'000(which in itself was a gross exageration).

As a peripheral issue, I believe this prosecutor, despite qualified privaledge, was guilty of a 'lack of duty of care'. This prosecutor also stated during these proceedings before the jury that the rest of the cannabis(aside from that presented in court which was about a pound) was at the police station in the evidence room(33LB's?).

At this point I was sure I could expose this 'lie' because there would be no way that amount of cannabis could be there if it had come from my property. I'd estimate myself, that in total, there would have been 6-8 LB's of cannabis(max) recovered from my property.

The same prosecutor also claimed that in order for me to have been growing/possessing this amount of cannabis for 'personal use only', that I'd have to have smoked over 100-120 joints per day.

During this trial, before a jury, my own lawyer never questioned these allegations as to quantities(though I brought it up with her). She was in fact at the same time(day), representing another client who was defending rape charges and I believe she was not very familiar with my own case and preoccupied with that one; where my ex lawyer who dumped me as a client 3 days prior most certainly was familiar with the evidence. After all, the new lawyer only had but 2 days to get to know my own case.

Now during these needless and senseless proceedings, the media reported on them. They somehow took the '100 joints' per day 'allegation' and multiplied this by 365 days I pressume. And even though their math did not add up, on the second page of the local newspaper was the heading, "Drug enough for 44'800 joints"(I was very pissed off about this to say the least), not to mention other defamatory wording, and of course the allegation by the prosecutor that I was a "drug dealer".

Keep in mind the jury would have also read this article before the trial commenced the next day. The next day indeed, going back to court for the commencement of the trial, I showed my lawyer the newspaper article, sure that I had good grounds to have my entire case thrown out. She effectivly fobbed me off, though I sensed she knew there had been a major F@#Kup and that perhaps she herself was culpable.

I was eventually found 'guilty' by the jury for 'possesion', and 'not guilty' for 'supply'. However the same newspaper did a follow up article after this verdict, stating these 'facts'. But then at the end of that article they repeated the claims made by the prosecutor earlier in the trial that,  "I was a drug dealor", even though I had just been found 'not guilty of supply'.

I was of course, even more pissed off. I went to court some days later for sentencing...and based upon the allegations(33 Lb's 'conservative estimate') there was a good chance I would be going to jail I thought. But, during the short spiel before sentencing, the prosecutor appologised to the judge and said, "Sorry your honour, but all the cannabis is not actually at the police station but had been destroyed months prior".

It was as if he too realised he had Fu%ked up. How on earth proceedings can be conducted and allegations made to the jury, which are then 'retracted' after the trial is beyond me. Any one?

I believe even the judge realised(based upon the newspaper articles and then retraction by the prosecutor) that there had been a major F&ckup, although I only assume so much; possibly because he sentenced me to a suspended prison sentence(9 months) and community service. A pretty lite sentence considering the allegations made by the prosecutor(33 Lbs 'conservative estimate').

Indeed, ordinarilly, in most any other case, such a defendant would have most certainly been placed in a cage at the behest of the illogical and immoral 'war'. Any way...I did get off relativly lightly in terms of sentencing, but for the life sentence of a conviction. However, the newspaper article was most damaging to me. Because of their 'quantification'(44'800 joints) I believe that this would have left no doubt in the community that I was a drug dealer and a big one at that despite having been found 'not guilty of supply'.

And then the same newspaper then repeated the words of the prosecutor, "He is a drug dealor", even after I had just been found 'not guilty of supply'. I sought to seek redress for what I considered to be one totally messed up process to say the least; lack of duty of care, and defamation. I sought to see my lawyer and she avoided me - perhaps because she too knew she had 'fuc%ed up' on the basis of not challenging the quantities etc.

I went and saw another lawyer and he fobbed me off similarly...on the basis I suspect, because he knew all these characters - they do all call themselves 'friends' after all and in small towns there is certainly collusion. 

In effect, I was never able to reach a satisfactory result in terms of me understanding exactly what the law is on this issue. Specifically...I contend that all the 'lack of duty of care' during the trial and more importantly the 'defamation' in the newspaper was brought about by the 'negligence' of my first lawyer who 'dumped' me as a client at the final hour. Had he represented me, I do not believe any of this would have occured. So I signed a document he put before me(that fateful day) to 'theoretically' absolve him of his duty toward me as a client notwithstanding justice itself.

However, I believe the circumstances under which I signed that document were, 'duress and undue influence'. Not only was the relationship at that point extremly one sided(I had no idea what my rights were and thought I had no choice but to sign and he advised me not) and also because I was suffering from depression and anxiety at the time(which this lawyer knew full well as part of my defense). I was most certainly of a diminished capacity to sign in order to make such a nullification of contract lawful.

It has been some years now, but if there is any one out there(with integrity and concience) who could take the time to read this and let me know some of your learned thoughts I would be very appreciative.

Is there any chance I could sue the first lawyer for 'gross negligence'? 'Breach of contract'? Damages?

One thing which made me wish to explore this here is because as I stated above, too many lawyers 'pulling rank'. It just disgusts me to think that this same lawyer is quite possibly employing these same despicable practices and not allowing clients to plead which ever way they please, even if it is to their own peril or detriment. In my case, because he did ditch me as a client for no good reason other than my wish to plead not guilty to all charges, resulted in consequences which were so easily avoidable had he stayed the course. All the 'bleh' was because he neglected to do his duty.

Of the essense is the sincere and sound application of the persuit of justice. Unless corrupt practices are dealt with, they prevail and bring the entire legal process and profession into disrepute aswell as the justice system.

Thankyou all...look forward to your feedback. All the best....subbie.

Edit: paragraphs.