The Legal System - Good, Bad or Corrupt?

[GreyCrow]

There has been discussion across a few threads. Concerns over the Vic Police and courts in the Williams thread and *circus in the Claremont thread.

There are some suppression orders that seem on the surface to be concerned over protecting the criminal over the victim. There is one from the 21st June that all I can say a sentence was passed in the District Court on that date. I cant tell you anymore. I can give you his initials as they were printed in that days paper. But his sentencing remarks are still not available on the CourtsSA site. Prominent Adelaide identity M.P. O .Could be anybody

In the Williams thread there seems to be allegations yet I wonder how old they are? I know of some concerns surrounding early 1980s to late 90s - but unless these are fresh allegations then there needs to be some leeway given.

Lets not mistake this for an apology thread. I recognise mistakes are made and always hope they are fixed. Henry Keogh had to wait 21 years.

Do you think your experiences have seen you give the Legal System a thumbs up or down?

 

[Iworkthecircus]

Thumbs down , rail roaded threw a heap in Vic , magistrates don't listen , it doesn't matter what you say in my opinion , I once heard a magistrate was the case before mine he asked how much the bloke made per week then rebuffed I'm taking x of that , that was in Frankston .

The self reporting policy as well like ibac being supposedly independent is a joke , you can't investigate yourself lol .
The whole planet really needs a wake up call .

 

[Kurve]

In the Williams thread there seems to be allegations yet I wonder how old they are? I know of some concerns surrounding early 1980s to late 90s - but unless these are fresh allegations then there needs to be some leeway given.

We could be forgiven for thinking things have been going just swimmingly since the underbelly wars were mopped up in Vic for arguments sake until you realise how many suppression orders, can't get a true number in many instances the fact there's even a suppression order is suppressed, are being made, arbitrarily it's said.

Some attention though by the Andrews government.

• Restricting the use of suppression orders, so that they can’t be made if other laws already prevent publication
• Allowing adult victims of sexual assault or family violence to disclose their identity after the offender has been convicted – including where they were abused as a child
• Allowing previous relevant convictions of youth offenders to be reported if the person continued to engage in serious offending as an adult
• Specifically requiring courts and tribunals to provide written reasons for making a suppression order
• Treating all suppression orders as ‘interim orders’ for the first five days, so that interested parties, including the media, can make submissions against the need for the order
• Improving judges’ understanding of suppression order laws with new programs and materials developed by the Judicial College of Victoria
• Creating a central, publicly accessible register of suppression orders made by all Victorian courts and tribunals.

https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/suppression-orders-set-for-major-overhaul/

Do you think your experiences have seen you give the Legal System a thumbs up or down?

Overall, down. That's not to say I would fully condemn but seen too many thrown under a bus, at the bottom end harried or careless legal aid lawyers in jammed courts advising guilty pleas just to get it out of the way, guilt or innocence irrelevant they haven't even heard the story. The naive or inexperienced buy into it without realising they've just been locked into the system.

At the top end, shonky lawyers doing deals trading one off to let another go.

Snake_Baker wise scribe today ... said this: "If you want to take on the system, learn the law yourself."

I don't want to bragg but won every one with self representation, I have some law but I'm not a lawyer. My most hilarious success was a grovelling apology, a retraction and costs I blew out from ... a criminal lawyer. Obv he wasn't a very good lawyer, whatever moral of the story is stay out of the courts but if you must go to war, fight to the death. And do it, certainly take charge of it yourself.

Also, it helps to chip at the enemy's self confidence in the foyer by drawing attention to their sprayed on hair.

 

[freofc1994]

Hi thanks for labelling me that , I don't live in Perth i dealt with the previous goverment and they tried to deminish what happened to me here in vic , I'm allowed to have a opinion on the topic , I'm not related to Bradley , I've open said I've spoken to his brother about my concerns , what else you want me to say .... It's your choice how you think not mine .

I think its been quite clear that you're happy to run with some sort of conspiracy and obviously the way you have been treated (which you wont embellish on in any meaningful way) in your discussions with his brother.

Again your post above doesn't address anything

" i dealt with the previous goverment and they tried to deminish what happened to me here in vic"

Diminish what? Were you a victim of crime? Were you wrongly accused of a crime or were you pursued by WAPOL in regards to a crime? Did you commit a crime that WAPOL were unable to charge you with due to lack of evidence?

You see that sort of info would actually help to determine if your claims would have any varsity, otherwise they appear simply as a conundrum wrapped in a riddle, I'm sure you prefer it that way.

 

[freofc1994]

Overall, down. That's not to say I would fully condemn but seen too many thrown under a bus, at the bottom end harried or careless legal aid lawyers in jammed courts advising guilty pleas just to get it out of the way, guilt or innocence irrelevant they haven't even heard the story. The naive or inexperienced buy into it without realising they've just been locked into the system.

At the top end, shonky lawyers doing deals trading one off to let another go.

Interesting statement. I'd say that that all the Lawyers I have ever dealt with (quite a lot unfortunately) look at almost every case objectively. They assess the risk to their client in fighting it. Time is money of course and fighting the law doesn't come cheap. If their advice is to plead guilty then you have a choice to make, take the advice you are paying for or don't. I take your point on board that the ignorant who take advice and don't truly appreciate the outcome is who I feel sorry for.

 

[Snake_Baker]

We could be forgiven for thinking things have been going just swimmingly since the underbelly wars were mopped up in Vic for arguments sake until you realise how many suppression orders, can't get a true number in many instances the fact there's even a suppression order is suppressed, are being made, arbitrarily it's said.

Some attention though by the Andrews government.

• Restricting the use of suppression orders, so that they can’t be made if other laws already prevent publication
• Allowing adult victims of sexual assault or family violence to disclose their identity after the offender has been convicted – including where they were abused as a child
• Allowing previous relevant convictions of youth offenders to be reported if the person continued to engage in serious offending as an adult
• Specifically requiring courts and tribunals to provide written reasons for making a suppression order
• Treating all suppression orders as ‘interim orders’ for the first five days, so that interested parties, including the media, can make submissions against the need for the order
• Improving judges’ understanding of suppression order laws with new programs and materials developed by the Judicial College of Victoria
• Creating a central, publicly accessible register of suppression orders made by all Victorian courts and tribunals.

https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/suppression-orders-set-for-major-overhaul/

When are they going to do this? When they cover up and dispatch all of the existing corruption matters?

This is load of hogwash.

 

[Iworkthecircus]

I'll refer you to as person as I don't know who you are , I can give you a brief synopsis for you to try rebuff.
Had a business
Hired different soughts
Had problems
Rang local Le
Told to record next wave
More problems ensue
Local Le wash hands
News papers
Correspondence with gov
Arrest of man that I believe non guilty
Enter the shills

So why and how did this come about..... my sunny disposition .
With out braking down the forensic entomology of a heap of maggots . Take it as you will .
You asked and I provided Tia

 

[Kurve]

When they cover up and dispatch all of the existing corruption matters?

Want to share details?

When are they going to do this?

Sooner the better, it's getting attention that's a start.

 

[Kurve]

Interesting statement. I'd say that that all the Lawyers I have ever dealt with (quite a lot unfortunately) look at almost every case objectively. They assess the risk to their client in fighting it. Time is money of course and fighting the law doesn't come cheap. If their advice is to plead guilty then you have a choice to make, take the advice you are paying for or don't. I take your point on board that the ignorant who take advice and don't truly appreciate the outcome is who I feel sorry for.

Is your experience in a criminal law setting freo?

 

[Snake_Baker]

Want to share details?



Sooner the better, it's getting attention that's a start.

Yes, but the horse will have already bolted.

It's posturing, nothing more.

 

[freofc1994]

Is your experience in a criminal law setting freo?

Industrial and WC. Generally speaking both from a professional and personal experience I haven't seen to many people in court on charges where they aren't "nervous" about the outcome.

Nervous because they are bang to rights or nervous because there may be an out but to get to that its going to cost plenty.

 

[GreyCrow]

Yes, but the horse will have already bolted.

It's posturing, nothing more.

As is this

 

[Kurve]

Your poll started out all NO's but I see there's been a rather determined looking rush to square that up .. neck to neck!

Must be some lawyers in here .... come on fess up who's the lawyer?

 

[Snake_Baker]

As is this

Nah mate, I am informed.

You're just another apologist for bureaucratic corruption.

My guess is that you are either professionally involved or related to someone in these fields.

 

[GreyCrow]

Nah mate, I am informed.

You're just another apologist for bureaucratic corruption.

My guess is that you are either professionally involved or related to someone in these fields.

Then inform.

My point was you say you have info and when asked you jump onto the posturing platform. It makes you either a liar or someone with nothing to say. I'm asking you to provide some indication of your 'knowledge'

I certainly do see corruption but I dont see it in every case that comes to court. I know the police make mistakes , as do the courts. For every Henry Keogh there is a Gabe Tostee . For every Paul Daniel there is a Mick Hawi.

 

[BrisLion]

The murder of Graham Jensen and the behaviour of the Victorian Armed Robbery Squad in the late 70's early 80's.

Talk about criminals with badges.

Jensen was straight out murdered as was Gary Abdallah!!

 

[BlueE]

Couldn't see where to post this as I thought there was a thread, but can't find with all the new ones. Remember the channel 7 program highlighted many police procedure irregularities, ie they suggested multiple cases of planted evidence.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/wes...age-on-scott-austic-case-20180807-p4zw07.html

Scott Austic was jailed for life in 2009 over the stabbing murder of Stacey Thorne in the town of Boddington, 120 kilometres south-east of Perth.

A state prosecutor told the court they would seek access to unedited footage of a Sunday Night television episode which examined the case this year.

The prosecutor told the court the episode — which aired on March 18 — "dealt with matters relevant to this appeal" and contained statements, as well as footage of the 2007 crime scene.

The application by the prosecution to get access to the footage was not opposed by Austic's legal team in court.

Justice Robert Mazza granted the state leave on Tuesday to issue a summons to Channel 7 to produce or make available footage of the March 18 program.

Mr McCusker, who was among those interviewed for the Sunday Night program, has previously told WAtoday he wanted to see the Austic case dealt with as soon as possible.

"If as the petition contends he is in prison because of a serious miscarriage of justice, it is essential that this be dealt with swiftly," he said in April.