kekenda, I am no lawyer so I cannot answer the depth of your questions but what seems wrong to me is that two different judges can give two different judgements on the same two crimes.
If you get a 'soft' judge, he/she may let the alleged crim off with a warning and the crim simply goes and does it all again, simply because he/she has learned nothing by being let off.
It happens far too often for it to be permitted to go on .
The law has become a tame wimp because bleeding hearts win every argument.
If you deliberately hurt someone you must be taught that you too can be hurt.
The law is not respected because it does not earn respect.It is a joke.

Mickijo,

I also am no lawyer and perhaps like you, would think this world a far better place without them in many instances, as their collective morals are on a par with politicians. I have in two occasions have had severe actions being taken against them by a court - but that is another story.

Judges are in my opinion mere second rate lawyers overseeing two morons and deciding which of the two tell more plausible lies - sound familiar? AND of course you are so correct when you say that "The law is not respected because it does not earn respect." You are also correct when you say it is a joke, but the problem is that the joke is usually on us..... the decisions that have been handed down from some Magistrates and many Judges most definitely do not reflect community values and I have seen (as no doubt you also) so many repeat convicted offenders laughing their way out of courts with less than a slap across the wrist for crimes worthy of many years in jails.

You have however, shown some prejudice when you make use of the word "alleged" crim - everyone must be afforded the benefit of innocence until proven guilty - THEN, and only then should they be punished for their transgressions - that much should be quite clear.

We have too many laws and of course, we have too many more being made which mean absolutely nothing to the people. What we have now are so many laws, that no one can understand them – what we have a re so many simple and effective laws that are just not used properly and effectively by the judiciary who are far out of touch with the populace – they are just plainly incompetent!

– but then again would you go to the extreme of the sharia laws?

Oh – by the way my name is kekenidika – not kekenda

Thank you.

kekenidika, sorry about the name, by the time I get to respond to other's posts,severe I-can't-remember-the name has set in and I have to make a guess, no disrespect intended.
I used the word 'alleged' because a person is ,as far as I know, not a criminal until judged.As far as I know.
I would resist with all vigour any form of sharia law coming into this country. Despite some saying it is similar to westminster law, it is a law worthy only of brutal,dogmatic,backward countries. In fact our government should legislate against any form of practice of sharia. It is foreign and totally unAustralian.