Talk:Marcus Einfeld

message: Einfeld is not a former High Court Judge, he was a justice of the Federal Court.  The controversies which have arisen following his traffic offences are very relevant to his place in Australian judicial history.  They also explain why he has received so much media attention.  To "cleanse" these controversies is really not excusable, as they reveal a very interesting case.  The fact of the controversies is really beyond doubt, the merit of the allegations is what is open to question, but so long as the controversies are stated as such, then what is wrong?  Its not defamatory to record the truth, but it does not serve the interets of truth to "cleanse" the truth from articles.  Who is to be the judge?
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Larrymemate (talk • contribs) 05:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleansing or balancing? 

message: The perjury incident is more than just a controversy. In fact, there's nothing really controversial about it (everyone agrees he his guilty). Maybe the Perjury incident should be moved out of the Controversy section, and made a top-level heading.--Lester 23:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks WWGB for elevating the heading.--Lester 01:08, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy section 

message: It seems that Einfeld's name has been removed from the list of National Living Treasures . I don't recall seeing any media concerning this. Does anyone else? If his "status" was revoked, it may warrant mention in the article. WWGB (talk) 22:54, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  No longer a National Living Treasure? 

message: I've put brackets around the following sentence: 
* A conviction or simply paying the original fine would have left Einfeld with only one demerit point on his driver's licence.
It seems almost to be condoning or excusing his actions.  It is factual information, but I question its relevance.  I think I'd rather see it gone completely.   We don't want to be seen as sympathetic to his situation by seeking to understand what drove him to break the law.  --  JackofOz (talk) 12:03, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that goes to motive. We take the right to drive for granted, yet when we are threatened with the loss of that privilege, who knows what thought processes are involved? It certainly appears that there was a calculated endeavour to use the "nominated driver" provision to avoid any consequence. WWGB (talk) 12:09, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh absolutely.  There's no doubt that he lied about Theresa Brennan, because he was known to have sent condolences to her family when she was killed.  But whatever his motive may have been, that's really irrelevant to the fact that he lied under oath.  That fact is all that's important for our readers to know.  There is no extenuating circumstance, particularly for a judge.  Leaving the sentence in might lead some to think "Gee, I might have concocted a similar story if I were in the same situation", and thus lend some nuance of condonement.  We should remain absolutely neutral and stick to the facts, but only those that are known to be relevant to what led to his fall from grace.  We can't say for sure he acted as he did because he would otherwise have come within a whisker of losing his licence, or even imply that.  --  JackofOz (talk) 09:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You raise an interesting point. According to the court transcript , "Einfeld denied having any exact knowledge of being at 11 demerit points on his driver’s licence, if convicted of the speeding offence". Yet the Crown presented this as significant evidence (see paragraphs 70, 81, 82 and 113 of the transcript). I lean towards leaving it in the article for now, as a "possible" motive. WWGB (talk) 12:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, but if we leave it in, I think we should say more about it than just the bald statement.  Maybe something along the lines of "The prosecution suggested the reason he lied under oath was that, had he lost the demerit points for the speeding offence, he would have been close to losing his licence.  However, Einfeld denied he was aware his points were so low.".  --  JackofOz (talk) 12:36, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds perfectly OK to me! WWGB (talk) 12:53, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I've inserted that sentence, in a more appropriate place in the text.  --  JackofOz (talk) 21:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Demerit points

message: The WP:LEDE (which is intended so summarise the article) says he's notable as a spokesperson both for and against Israel and Jewish causes. While there's some explaination in the rest of the article about his support for Israel and Jewish causes there's nothing on his opposition. I see JackOfOz who added the section  mentions his opposition to Israel's hardline policies, it would be helpful if more on this is added to the article Nil Einne (talk) 08:13, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just wondering the same thing and I am very surprised that after so long no one has added more information on the subject. I have added a . --William Case Morris (talk) 04:47, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Israel 

message: I've added a new section called "Removal from the Roll" dealing with the findings of the Court of Appeal in Council of the New South Wales Bar Association v Einfeld [2009] NSWCA 255, being the proceedings in which the NSW Bar Association sought to have him struck off.
Originally I added this as text to the Criminal Conviction section but on reflection even though the proceeding does discuss his convictions (among other things) they aren't criminal proceedings but disciplinary ones.  I believe this case is important as the Court examined not only the 2006 matters on which he had been convicted but the allegations that they had merely been the most recent in a series of false statutory declarations he had produced since 1999 to avoid traffic infringements.  The Court also made findings as to his state of mind. Armourhistorian (talk) 02:55, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Findings of the Court of Appeal