dabbler wrote:

---

Given the illogical vindicativeness on display in Social Media at times, I would rather stick with our current system, warts and all.

---

Twitter does not represent mainstream opinion in Australia.

This is a mistake far too many 30 year old journalists with degrees in philosophy make.

Twitter and the rest of (un)sociual media should be ignored.

No system in the World is perfect when one is dealing with criminals, Yuglamron. The Chief Justice is correct when he says that the general public have no say in sentencing. However, they do have the right to express their views if they are a victim. This is recorded in the form of a Victims Impact Statement and is tendered by the prosecution at the time of sentencing. It has a bearing on the sentence that the offender receives. The average outraged citizen has little impact as the Court sentences according to the law and the sentencing procedures that have evolved over hundreds of years.

In relation to listings, one's wealth has no influence whatsoever. If the accused is in custody then his or her matter is given priority over an accused on bail. Depending on the type of offence, especially if it is a sexual assault, then this will also be given priority. The listing procedure is done at a call over before the listing judge or the registrar and wealth does not come in to it. The major reason for delay in trials is that it takes the police and the prosecution a great deal of time to prepare the brief of evidence and interview all witnesses.

In relation to the poor farmers being subjected to mining companies, that is the same for everyone. The land owner does not own the minerals beneath the surface nor does the land owner have a right to stop aeroplanes flying above it. There are remedies for unlawful entry and nuisance, but these companies come in after their application for entry has been determined. These determinations hear any objection from the landholder. It is not a matter of the company pulling up at the front gate unannounced and barging in with a digger.

In relation to the ceiling insulation this was not the prime minister's fault. It was the fault of some dodgy contractors who were prosecuted by the authorities as well as sued for damages by the victims's families. It has nothing to do with parliamentary privilege. Parliamentary privilege is there for a reason. It allows your local member to raise issues without the fear of defamation proceedings or injunction that would close down all debate in parliament.

Finally, in relation to these mongrels having a violent past, I am sure they will have just that. As to being on bail, if that is the case it would be for a minor offence.Bail laws and the presumption against bail for violent offending has really been ramped up in the last few years, and about time. However, there is also the presumption of innocence that is the cornerstone of our justice system so without it, everyone who is accused of a crime would remain in custody until their case came before the court. That is the case in most of the muslim countries of the Middle East and especially in countries like China.

Our justice system is not perfect, but what is? I would rather have ours because no matter how hysterical some people get, Australia is still a very safe place.

I see we have a Typical legal answer.

Sentencing is supposed to reflect an element of deterrence and an element of punishment. It is also supposed to reflect the wishes of the people. This is from the Justice Guidelines in Australian Law.

Victim Impact statements. Do you know the percentage of statements tendered in court? not as many as you would think.

OK Change Rich to Powerful. Re speed of getting to Court.

Recent eligibility debacle about qualifying to be elected to parliament.

Cases got heard pretty quickly. Other cases taking years to reach the courts. There are other much higher  profile cases still waiting today.

Insulation debacle. Who set up the whole shebang?  Always been the Pollies or heads of Companies denying responsibility.  The whole thing was set up by Politicians. Who employed the companies who did the work? Yup the Pollies.

Twitter and Social media.

If it has no bearing on modern life why do all our Pollies have twitter accounts. Why do all the Government departments have twitter accounts, why do our govt have alert systems tied in to Twitter, Fire, Ambulance, Main Roads, Police etc.

Yes you will have people sensationalise stuff. It's like the rest of society you have to cull out the crap.

People will Whinge. nature of the beast, however if you don't know what the problem is how are you supposed to change things.

Comments saying we have the best country in the world and we have to take the bad with the good.

Why do we have to take the bad. Get rid of the Bad. We voted in people to make laws to run the country. To make things better and get rid of the bad.

...."As to being on bail, if that is the case it would be for a minor offence.Bail laws and the presumption against bail for violent offending has really been ramped up in the last few years, and about time".....

Well we all read that this is happening, but it would be good to see evidence of it being applied consistently. In two recent cases of sickening violent attacks in Melbourne, bail was granted resulting in public anger and frustration at a system that fails us yet again. The incidents were well publicised and televised, and I'd detail them below except I'm sure someone would point out that the offences can't be publicly debated with trials pending, or some such tripe. All that I and countless other ordinary people want to know is, what the hell are these low life's doing back on the streets in the meantime?

Each of these attacks involved clear human and/or cctv witnessing. If ever there were cases which justified a denial of bail, then here are two classics. Apart from their physical injuries, the victims of these attacks are undoubtedly suffering significant psychological damage, I wonder how they feel about their attackers roaming free?

No one is going to convince me that this topic is about "whinging", or that the system is as good as it can get. These two cases alone prove that, not to mention countless others with similar results.

In commerce, successful organisations live by and invest in strategies of 'continuous improvement'. Those that don't subscribe, fold very quickly. This philosophy needs to be applied to a system that we charge with the responsibility of protecting us, its citizens. As others have suggested, we should not accept a flawed system, and through any fair means we should continue demanding very loudly that enough is enough.

You have certainly got yourself into a lather Yuglamron. Perhaps it might be time to have a break from watching all those current affairs shows on the telly and listening to the shock jocks.

What is your proposal?  Set up lynch mobs and promote total anarchy? Don't ever let the facts get in the way of a good rant. I know, it's all the fault of the lawyers.

DMaxer wrote:

---

You have certainly got yourself into a lather Yuglamron. Perhaps it might be time to have a break from watching all those current affairs shows on the telly and listening to the shock jocks.

What is your proposal?  Set up lynch mobs and promote total anarchy? Don't ever let the facts get in the way of a good rant. I know, it's all the fault of the lawyers.

---

As you stated DMaxer; you are a barrister of 40 years experience so let me turn your question around and ask you what you think is the answer? Because it's clear many people (the plebs) don't think the current system works well for them.

What is your solution? Or should we all just be quiet and do as we're told?

Mike Harding wrote:

---

montie wrote:

---

If we want to change the laws there is a process to do so.....it's called democracy...we vote.

---

It's a wonderful theory but, you know, it just deosn't seem to be working that well....

---

 Mike I agree, but the system is in place to change it....otherwise we become vigilantes.

We have an election coming up.....

montie wrote:

---

Mike Harding wrote:

---

montie wrote:

---

If we want to change the laws there is a process to do so.....it's called democracy...we vote.

---

It's a wonderful theory but, you know, it just deosn't seem to be working that well....

---

 Mike I agree, but the system is in place to change it....otherwise we become vigilantes.

We have an election coming up.....

---

Gday...

Ya beginning to get the right ideas fellas .... remember I sed this just a few posts ago ?

If Shorten/Turnbull/di Natale/Hanson etc are not in YOUR electorate then find out which candidate is going to do something for YOUR electorate, not which party they are in ... not just one who will follow their party line and therefore perpetuate the status quo irrespective of the colour of the government they form.

We get, and quite probably deserve, the politicians we chose ... not only do we put them in, we continue to vote for the same ones and they end up with a career of many years, and then leave with a pretty pension etc.

The decision is YOURS. Make your collective votes count for real change ... or stop whinging.

Cheers - and think about who you vote for - John

Mike, I don't have a solution. In every society there are people who are violent thugs who will break the law. You cannot legislate for criminal activity not to take place. All governments can do is to make laws for the protection of the public and apprehend and punish and attempt to rehabilitate those that are in breach of the laws.

Capital punishment is not the answer. Although it takes that life out of society, the figures show that it does not deter others from offending. Crimes of violence usually happen without premeditation by offenders, who are either drug affected, alcohol affected or just have a propensity to violence. We could lock everyone up at birth and only release people once they have proven they are law abiding, but then who would be the judge of that.

I have spent a lot of years in the law, some as a defence counsel and some as a prosecutor.  All society can do is have a legislative framework to deal with breaches of the law. Death penalties, life sentences and mob rule does not stop criminality, it has been there since the Garden of Eden.

When these hideous crimes of violence occur, people are justifiably outraged. However, the answer is not to blame judges, lawyers and or politicians. It is society's issue that probably goes back to abysmal parenting, personality defects and a poor upbringing. By the time the courts get to see these people,the damage has been done. 

We are blessed that we live in what is still a very safe and law abiding country.

DMaxer wrote:

---

Mike, I don't have a solution. In every society there are people who are violent thugs who will break the law. You cannot legislate for criminal activity not to take place. All governments can do is to make laws for the protection of the public and apprehend and punish and attempt to rehabilitate those that are in breach of the laws.

Capital punishment is not the answer. Although it takes that life out of society, the figures show that it does not deter others from offending. Crimes of violence usually happen without premeditation by offenders, who are either drug affected, alcohol affected or just have a propensity to violence. We could lock everyone up at birth and only release people once they have proven they are law abiding, but then who would be the judge of that.

I have spent a lot of years in the law, some as a defence counsel and some as a prosecutor.  All society can do is have a legislative framework to deal with breaches of the law. Death penalties, life sentences and mob rule does not stop criminality, it has been there since the Garden of Eden.

When these hideous crimes of violence occur, people are justifiably outraged. However, the answer is not to blame judges, lawyers and or politicians. It is society's issue that probably goes back to abysmal parenting, personality defects and a poor upbringing. By the time the courts get to see these people,the damage has been done. 

We are blessed that we live in what is still a very safe and law abiding country.

-- Edited by DMaxer on Monday 6th of August 2018 09:33:42 AM

---

 People are usually outraged eh wonder why ..

goes back to parenting ,personality defects eh,poor upbringing,there is no excuse for murder we cant give these creatures another chance its to risky ,they dont deserve it ,they often kill again,the law has an attitude that theres no such thing as a person that cant be rehabilitated and because of that loophole monsters are released....

DMaxer wrote:

---

Mike, I don't have a solution. In every society there are people who are violent thugs who will break the law. You cannot legislate for criminal activity not to take place. All governments can do is to make laws for the protection of the public and apprehend and punish and attempt to rehabilitate those that are in breach of the laws.

Capital punishment is not the answer. Although it takes that life out of society, the figures show that it does not deter others from offending. Crimes of violence usually happen without premeditation by offenders, who are either drug affected, alcohol affected or just have a propensity to violence. We could lock everyone up at birth and only release people once they have proven they are law abiding, but then who would be the judge of that.

I have spent a lot of years in the law, some as a defence counsel and some as a prosecutor.  All society can do is have a legislative framework to deal with breaches of the law. Death penalties, life sentences and mob rule does not stop criminality, it has been there since the Garden of Eden.

When these hideous crimes of violence occur, people are justifiably outraged. However, the answer is not to blame judges, lawyers and or politicians. It is society's issue that probably goes back to abysmal parenting, personality defects and a poor upbringing. By the time the courts get to see these people,the damage has been done. 

We are blessed that we live in what is still a very safe and law abiding country.

-- Edited by DMaxer on Monday 6th of August 2018 09:33:42 AM

_______________________________________________________

Excellent post DMaxer. Especially, "

When these hideous crimes of violence occur, people are justifiably outraged. However, the answer is not to blame judges, lawyers and or politicians. It is society's issue that probably goes back to abysmal parenting, personality defects and a poor upbringing. By the time the courts get to see these people,the damage has been done. "

We sure are.

Aussie Paul. 

Mike Harding wrote:

---

DMaxer: Thanks for the thoughtful reply. In essence I agree with you.

It seems to me the base problem is that Western society (in many
countries) has lost both a sense of community and most of the basic
moral values which were common fifty years past. The desire for money
and possessions, in many (most?) families has surpassed the basic
purpose of a family unit to rear well adjusted and socially and
physically healthy children. I think this is aided and in part caused
by loose sexual morals and the demise of religion (I'll point out I'm
an atheist and no prude). Additionally, the majority of children
receiving most of their "parenting" from child-care workers then
teachers is far from ideal. And, of course, the breakdown of marriage
and the vast numbers of children in single parent households is
simply a disaster.

None of this helps the poor devil who is attacked by some young thug
with a knife or club. I do think stronger sentences, especially for
repeat offenders, would help but probably not a lot. What I think does
have much merit is to change the law to lessen the test of "Reasonable
force" (as per UK) against home-breakers and to permit the public
access to weapons of defence - mace or similar perhaps. The reality
is that currently most older people have zero defence against a young
male (and, increasingly, female!).

The situation is only made worse by governments always having
re-election as their primary goal and political parties almost wholly
made up of professional politicians who see their career as far more
important than their constituents.

The English doctor and prison psychiatrist Theodore Dalrymple has
written extensively in this area, you may well have read him, and is
well worth reading.

Frankly DMaxer, I'm sick of it. No one actually cares unless it
affects *them* and this current generation thinks it knows bloody
everything and all previous generations were fools - they have a
shock in store I think. I'm going to head bush for my remaining years
Far From the Madding Crowd and probably re-read it. I'll leave the
current generation to stuff up the society we and our forebears
built. They seem to be doing a good job so far.

---

Yes, yes, yes & more yes Mike. 

Aussie Paul.