Craig Thomson MP, who earlier this year called for a speedy trial to prove his innocence of the charges alleged against him yesterday asked for more time to prepare his defence.

Here's a note from the same Melbourne lawyer who has given us his commentary through Mr Thomson's history with the Melbourne Magistrates' Court.

I wrote to you after Mr. Thomson's last appearance at the Melbourne Magistrates' Court to correct the impression that Mr. Thomson sought to create, that is that the police were unprepared for the Committal Mention with the implication being any allegation he faced was unfounded and/or trumped up.

As a result of the media reports on today's Committal Mention as a practitioner I again feel it necessary to write to you in the hope of providing insight into what transpired and why.

It was reported that Mr. Paul Galbally, Mr. Thomson's solicitor said that the Committal Mention needed to be adjourned because "...counsel had not yet been formally briefed on the case. He said there were more than 140 witnesses in the case, of which potentially 43 could be called to give evidence."

Further, the volume of the brief was such that the Mention ought to have been adjourned. "Paul Galbally said the defence needed more time to prepare for the case that included 25 volumes of material and more than 140 witnesses". 

Granting Mr Thomson more time to prepare his case magistrate Luisa Bazzani said the complexity of the matter meant it was only fair his lawyers had ample opportunity to prepare."

The Herald Sun in the article referred to above states, "During a brief hearing lawyers for Mr Thomson requested more time to prepare for an upcoming committal hearing."

It was not clear whether the fact that because 19 new charges have been laid, that too was a basis for adjourning the Committal Mention. In any event, the Mention was adjourned to 1 July and bail was extended it seems in the same terms as his last appearance.

There are a number of matters that need to be set out and clarified so your readers have a better understanding of why this adjournment arose and what it means.

Firstly, why the Mention required adjournment is beyond my comprehension. Even if one accepts that the brief is voluminous, why wasn't the matter sent off for Committal rather than adjourning the Committal Mention to 1 July? The current time frame for setting down a multi-day Committal is about 3 months. That timeframe allows enough time to prepare for the Committal itself. 

Secondly, the recent addition of 19 new charges which are in the same vein as the 154 earlier charges is not a substantive reason to adjourn the Mention of Mr. Thomson's prosecution.

Thirdly, a barrister does not need to be briefed for the Committal before the finalising of the Committal Mention. In fact a barrister could be briefed the  morning of the Committal! Mr. Galbally's point if accurately reported doesn't strike an intellectual chord with me.

Fourthly, Mr. Thomson has long known of the nature of any prosecution case against him- both from a civil and criminal perspective. The brief of evidence in this Magistrates' Court prosecution is similar in nature to the findings in Investigation into the National Office of the Health Services Union under section 331 of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 by Terry Nassios dated 28 March 2012. The prosecution brief in this Magistrates' Court matter was served at least 4 weeks ago. As I noted in my earlier email, Mr. Thomson should have put his application in (Form 32) to cross examine those witnesses with whose evidence he takes issue with. He has not done so. The fact that additional charges have been laid does not change his defence one iota as he completely denies any wrong doing in approving any of the payments, and he denies he is the person who has attended the brothels or solicited escorts for example in those alleged transactions. It might be characterised as an 'all duck or no dinner' type defence.

I have also been provided with some background on the Magistrate who heard the application for an adjournment of the Committal mention yesterday.

Luisa Bazzina's appointment to the bench was made by the Steve Bracks Labor Government - here's the announcement from her alma mater the Monash University Law School.

This copy of Lot's Wife, the Monash Student Association news letter carries the announcement of Luisa Bazzina's appointment to the Monash Fabian Society Executive Committee.

This further delay of the Committal Mention date until July almost certainly pushes any committal date out beyond the September election and has the effect, beyond Her Worship's intention that the interests of justice be served, of ensuring the evidence that Mr Thomson might like to see tested at committal isn't heard and reported during the election campaign.