I'm not interested in the ins and outs of this case, which clearly affect individuals, not the rest of us. However, when an Aboriginal politician puts in an oar for Aboriginal people against non-Aboriginal people, and the Law comes down on the side of the Aborigines, then our society has reach a parlous state. Aborigines can expected to be treated equitably; they cannot expect to be treated differently merely by dint of being Aboriginal. Apartheid has arrived in Australia. The law is NOT colour blind in this country.

I don't see two laws or treatment here! Just normal legal jurisprudence, with respect to a person who died intestate? And given no will was made or found, only blood relatives have any claim! End of story!

Interestingly, a foundling, left on the stoop of a Catholic church many years ago, was taken in by the church and baptized Ciril Plato?

No connection by blood, with any other person of that name!? [Unless there was a Father Plato?]

Ciril grew up married and prospered. And given his wife predeceased him, died effectively intestate. His wife being my father's sister and given he stood in his father's shoes!

He rightly thought he might inherit the extremely valuable (worth many millions today) estate as being the only living blood relative to the intended beneficiary, (his sister) with a claim?

Now remember than Ciril was a foundling!

Even so, the legal firm who, shall for the present, remain nameless, searched the world over, at considerable expense to the estate and found dozens of Plato's, apparently?

To whom they allegedly dispersed the remaining considerably diminished bulk of the estate between? My father's (inlaw) share being three pounds, ten and sixpence? ($7.05)

Q: If as you drove out of our little rural village, you spied three lawyers buried up to their necks in sand? What would that indicate?
A: A severe shortage of sand!
Alan B.

I agree with the judge's verdict in this case, on condition that the same result would have occurred if the deceased had not been Indigenous: that the blood-relations who he knew closely and loved for more than twenty years, rather than people who - technically, since he had been adopted - were his adopted half-sisters who he scarcely knew at all - were the beneficiaries.

In other words,

* if he had been non-Indigenous, and had been born to a single mother who had no means of looking after him (i.e. before about 1971), and so put up for adoption; and

* if his adoptive parents had separated, with the adoptive father re-marrying, producing distant step-half-sisters; and

* if he had found his actual half-sisters and kept in close contact with them for the rest of his life; and

* if he had died intestate, but leaving an estate -

- then clearly, it should have gone to his actual half-sisters, with whom he had been in contact, rather than to technically step-step-half-sisters who he barely knew, and who had contributed little or nothing to his general happiness or well-being.

That should be the law, and his Indigeneity should have nothing to do with it.

If this is an example of a 'stolen generation' child, then huge numbers of non-Indigenous children - institutionalised, fostered and/or adopted - could as easily step up and demand an apology and compensation. Our mum took out a court order against our father in the 1940s, with absolutely no public funding support in those days, and had to withstand pressure from her mother to put us into care - Christ knows how we survived.

[TBC]

[continued]

Before 1971 of so, when a single mother's benefit was instituted, what could single mothers do ? Live off their parents ? Imagine the conversations after about two weeks, along the lines of, 'Look dear, we've had to set aside a room for you and your baby, and provide you with all your supplies, food, etc., and we really can't keep doing this for years on end. Can you please consider putting your baby up for adoption ?'

Ironically, most Indigenous single mothers, then and now, would have had some family or community support, just one more child in a large family, or support from aunties - so Indigenous people may have suffered from these polices LESS than non-Indigenous people.

Wash my mouth out !

Joe

I also agree with the judge's decision.
The three biological sisters had a close
and familial relationship with their brother
for over 20 years until his death. No such
relationship existed with his adopted sisters.
Yet they still were given $8,000 dollars.
Seems fair. Had the man left a will - he
probably would have left everything to the
biological sisters he knew and loved.

Dearest Foxy,

Yes, can a will, who is to get what, be 'inferred' from a person's habitual actions, associations and relationships in the years leading up to his/her death ?

Perhaps Linda Burney had no need to 'Indigenise' this issue, let alone stick her oar in as an MP. That actually could have prejudiced the case against favouring the three sisters, not to mention other legal and constitutional consequences.

Love,

Joe