The Law The Many Problems With Our Legal System

Remove this Banner Ad

The conduct of some very senior people needs external and impartial scrutiny and if necessary some recommendations as to their ongoing fitness for roles in public life at the very minimum
If the case concluded and a guilty verdict found, that would absolutely be the case.

However, now with the case withdrawn, there is every chance those 'very senior people' were acting in the best interests of everyone involved, including the public interest.

Or are you referring to a Royal Commission that is broader than this specific case?
 
If the case concluded and a guilty verdict found, that would absolutely be the case.

However, now with the case withdrawn, there is every chance those 'very senior people' were acting in the best interests of everyone involved, including the public interest.

Or are you referring to a Royal Commission that is broader than this specific case?
The whole case reeks of it interference from the start
 
If the case concluded and a guilty verdict found, that would absolutely be the case.

However, now with the case withdrawn, there is every chance those 'very senior people' were acting in the best interests of everyone involved, including the public interest.

Or are you referring to a Royal Commission that is broader than this specific case?
I question two things about this post.

One: I question the equaminity of this response compared and contrasted with your earlier response in this thread. Why is this case's withdrawal due to concerns over the accuser's trauma should it be recommenced worth less in this case than the one you linked? Is it just because they're children?
Two: I question how a cover up of the proportions demonstrated here could possibly be in the public interest, let alone the interests of everyone involved.

How is the covering up of her sexual assault for the purposes of winning an election in the best interests of Brittney Higgins?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Do you consider answering a question with another question an acceptable way to converse?
You've jumped to the conclusion a sexual assault occurred and was covered up.

I myself can't know for sure that a sexual assault occurred, as it wasn't tried through to a conclusion beyond reasonable doubt in our judicial system.

I like to understand frames of reference when conversing.

So, was it an alleged sexual assault, or sexual assault?
 
You've jumped to the conclusion a sexual assault occurred and was covered up.

I myself can't know for sure that a sexual assault occurred, as it wasn't tried through to a conclusion beyond reasonable doubt in our judicial system.

I like to understand frames of reference when conversing.

So, was it an alleged sexual assault, or sexual assault?
How about you answer the rest of the questions posed to you, hmm?
 
Should name and shame the spineless piece of s**t Judge Richard Maidment KC. 11 months in the joint is plenty of time for the nonce to get deservedly shivved etc.
 
A paedophile who crept into a 12-year-old girl's room and sexually assaulted her has been sentenced to just one year behind bars because a judge fears the creep might be raped himself.

Everyone but the judge and the perp would have been OK with that possibility
 

A paedophile who crept into a 12-year-old girl's room and sexually assaulted her has been sentenced to just one year behind bars because a judge fears the creep might be raped himself.

Tyler Sullivan, 22, pleaded guilty to possession of child abuse material, using a carriage service for child abuse material and sexual penetration of a child under 16 in Melbourne's County Court.

The 'baby-faced' rapist was handed a far lighter sentence than the maximum 15-year term partly due to his 'childlike appearance' and fears he may be targeted by predators in prison.


Dan's legal system working as intended.
Blaming Andrews for this is pretty foul.
 
Have you considered trying to make the country better by highlighting its flaws and offering solutions?

The biggest flaw in our country right now is that it has basically turned into a real life Grand Theft Auto. All of the crime going on today, you would have rarely heard of 20 years ago.

The solution: Build another prison and make harsh minimum sentences with no exceptions. Parole eligibility needs to be tightened significantly. The "be nice" approach has failed.
 
The biggest flaw in our country right now is that it has basically turned into a real life Grand Theft Auto. All of the crime going on today, you would have rarely heard of 20 years ago.

The solution: Build another prison and make harsh minimum sentences with no exceptions. Parole eligibility needs to be tightened significantly. The "be nice" approach has failed.

Well tough on crime does not work… that is fact, whether you agree or not.
You sound great… like Dutton sounds tough.. but I repeat tough punishments leads to more crime!!!
Do you want more crime or less crime?
Surely any reasonable person with the slightest level of intelligence would look at facts and what actually reduces crime!!! What actually works!!!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The Singapore prison system has changed significantly in the last 20 years with focus on rehabilitation and schooling inside the prison system… that doesn’t fit your narrative does it?


Have you been to the US?

That's great. Norway's program sounds great in terms of reducing the levels of re-offending and being a world leading program, I would have no issues in following that. But since this program is focussed on re-offending, it doesn't seem to me that it has any influence on offending in the first place or preventing crime.
When it comes to preventing crime, Singapore is certainly the world leader. So why wouldn't we take a leaf out of their book as well and adapt it to our own system? We obviously won't be going down the path of capital punishment of any kind but there are many other things we could learn from them I'm sure.
 
The biggest flaw in our country right now is that it has basically turned into a real life Grand Theft Auto. All of the crime going on today, you would have rarely heard of 20 years ago.

The solution: Build another prison and make harsh minimum sentences with no exceptions. Parole eligibility needs to be tightened significantly. The "be nice" approach has failed.
I think before we have to get onto solutions, we need to get onto justification.

Can you demonstrate that crime has gone up, BLU?

I believe you when you say you'd have rarely heard about it 20 years ago; retail groups had significantly less lobbying power then, and - frankly - the addition of self serve checkouts has made what thieves there are more blatant. There are more cameras in store and in the public's hands, and media is seeking an ever shortening attention span; footage of a shoplifter sprinting away from a store, their loot falling out the sides of their overstuffed hoodie gets plenty of clicks.

Before we call the fire department, let's see if the house is actually on fire first.
 
Last edited:
That's great. Norway's program sounds great in terms of reducing the levels of re-offending and being a world leading program, I would have no issues in following that. But since this program is focussed on re-offending, it doesn't seem to me that it has any influence on offending in the first place or preventing crime.
When it comes to preventing crime, Singapore is certainly the world leader. So why wouldn't we take a leaf out of their book as well and adapt it to our own system? We obviously won't be going down the path of capital punishment of any kind but there are many other things we could learn from them I'm sure.

If we had better prisons with more of a focus on rehabilitation, then you'd find Magistrates would hand out sentences more frequently.

At the moment, you send someone inside for car theft, and they're coming out an armed robber.

The way our prisons work, you tend to come out harder and more of a crim than you were when you went inside.
 
If we had better prisons with more of a focus on rehabilitation, then you'd find Magistrates would hand out sentences more frequently.

At the moment, you send someone inside for car theft, and they're coming out an armed robber.

The way our prisons work, you tend to come out harder and more of a crim than you were when you went inside.
Definitely correct
 
Definitely correct

They know if they send someone inside for a relatively minor crime, they institutionalize the person and they tend to come out worse.

You're locked in a cell surrounded by hard bastards, who are your only peers. It's a pretty easily foreseeable outcome that blokes are going to both network with other crims, learn new s**t on how to be a crim, and harden up themselves.

That said, I'm an advocate for longer sentences in the Sentencing Act for certain crimes. Twenty-year minimums for murder, with whole of life terms handed out more liberally for multiple murders and the like.
 
If we had better prisons with more of a focus on rehabilitation, then you'd find Magistrates would hand out sentences more frequently.

At the moment, you send someone inside for car theft, and they're coming out an armed robber.

The way our prisons work, you tend to come out harder and more of a crim than you were when you went inside.

That's because of the attitude of our society and the crooks themselves.

A Scandinavian model wouldn't work here without a complete shift in mindset of everyone.
 
They know if they send someone inside for a relatively minor crime, they institutionalize the person and they tend to come out worse.

You're locked in a cell surrounded by hard bastards, who are your only peers. It's a pretty easily foreseeable outcome that blokes are going to both network with other crims, learn new s**t on how to be a crim, and harden up themselves.

That said, I'm an advocate for longer sentences in the Sentencing Act for certain crimes. Twenty-year minimums for murder, with whole of life terms handed out more liberally for multiple murders and the like.

If someone gets locked up for a relatively minor crime, unless there's extenuating circumstances or their a recidivist crook going back in for the umpteenth time, (so already institutionalised) then they're not getting locked up in Max security with hard campaigners.

You're first two paragraphs show you don't know what you're on about.
 
I think before we have to get onto solutions, we need to get onto justification.

Can you demonstrate that crime has gone up, BLU?

I believe you when you say you'd have rarely heard about it 20 years ago; retail groups had significantly less lobbying power then, and - frankly - the addition of self serve checkouts has made what thieves there are more blatant. There are more cameras in store and in the public's hands, and media is seeking an ever shortening attention span; footage of a shoplifter sprinting away from a store, their loot falling out the sides of their overstuffed hoodie gets plenty of clicks.

Before we call the fire department, let's see if the house is actually on fire first.

Shoplifters don't sprint from stores, they just load up their trolley and walk out, they don't care and staff are instructed not to confront them.

People don't shoplift a mars bar and a packet of chewy anymore, they will load up a trolley with a few thousand dollars worth of high end meat and cosmetics or simply do their weekly shop and walk out with it.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top