Don’t waste any pity on Judges. While they are well paid and seven thousand dollars a week tax free is not bad pay, it should be taken from all Australian Judges, because while they remain half educated backside lickin lackeys who are slaves to the Statute Laws of the various sponsors who pay their salaries they are below contempt.

We would love our lawyers if they knew their trade. Lawyers have the possibility to be the greatest movement for good in any society if they were properly educated, and truly understood the power of the common law. Conversely they can be the very agent of everything that is bad.

They would not have to charge their outrageous fees, which only a criminal can afford to pay, if they knew how the law is supposed to operate, and operated within that limit. The biggest criminals in Australia today work for the State Governments, and these criminals have an illegal army of armed individuals to back them up. If lawyers since 1900 were on the job, these illegal and illegitimate regimes would never have grown to be the cancer on society they are currently.

What is really sad is that all the law is there just waiting for a true legal eagle to rise up from within the ranks of the legal profession, and restore the rule of law. It could well be a woman. It could be Julia, or Nicola or even Belinda, whose hubby has a bit of a roving eye, or one of the four in the Liberal Party. When I was studying law, 80 percent of the students were female. In some ways they make great lawyers, but there is some sort of a built in mechanism in women to obey rules, rather than test them.

The ultimate power in Australian society rests not with Parliament, where in nine different locations laws are proposed, but in the grass roots political meetings where the laws must be enforced. If lawyers understood that simple fact, we would just have to love them. They have the power, and should use it.

Raebee and Pelican, I'd certainly agree that legal fees put justice out of the reach of everyday people. I have only been embroiled personally in a legal action once and it was horrible. At least I could represent myself. But it really made me feel for people who weren't legally trained. Yes, I think something has to be done about the fact that to defend a basic action, it will often cost more in legal fees than it will to just roll over and wear the claim. Seriously, I've been wondering if some kind of "Legalcare" (like Medicare) would work? Also please be aware that there are community legal centres which will provide free advice if you get into trouble. All I wanted to say is that it's not cut and dried - some lawyers are bad, some are good. We're a mixed bunch, just like everyone else.

When New South Wales abolished the Common Law Procedure Act 1899 in the Schedule to the Supreme Court Act 1970, they paved the way for the total destruction of the Legal Profession as a force for good in the community. Many qualify and look at the profession in disgust and many enter it and find it morally repugnant to them, and use the skills learned to become qualified in another way.

The way it should work is that every Solicitor is a Judge to whom a complaint of a wrong can be taken. If the Judge was confident his judgment would be vindicated in a jury trial, he should advise his client appropriately. In her first speech Nicola Roxon described litigation as a casino.

It was not always that way, and before it became a casino a good lawyer, relying on precedents set in court cases that had gone before, could advise his client not to waste his money, or if he had a good case, rely upon the other side, also represented by a good solicitor to settle. This no longer happens because the Supreme Court Act 1970 abolished the common law. The Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 has also abolished the common law, and Statutory Courts have replaced courts, and destroyed the morality of lawyers who practice in them.

An old maxim of law was never trust a textbook less than forty years old. There are no such textbooks given weight in Australia since 1970. Every textbook is younger than forty years old. In that year the Constitution was rewritten, for lawyers by lawyers without a referendum. Everyone is poorer for it.

If lawyers understood the foundations of justice, we would probably love them to bits. If they worshipped Almighty God instead of the Law, and understood the system we had before 1970, where the common law was Christianity, they would serve both themselves and their communities better.

We would simply love to have a great legal profession. They could reform themselves and become lovable again, but we may wait a long time. Let’s hope not

To Legal Eagle, I think there has to be a way for fairer, affordable representation but there seems little hope at present for justice. Yes, I think most know about the Public Solicitors' Office who help people when they are stranded at a hearing out of the blue with what seems like no help at all. They are brilliant and they are the standard the profession need to keep to, unfortunately somewhere along the line the profession loses it's course and ultimately become greedy bastards, so it seems anyway.

To Peter I agree, some judges are not what they should be but how do we change that? The state government here in NSW is not about to do anything positive about anything, in particular, they are not going to challenge the decisions handed down by tired, worn out, old judges. Yes indeed where are the good women in law? Bit like the good women in health, trying to balance two full time jobs?

On the positive side the more discussion there is the more people like us get a message across one hopes. I wonder though and have wondered for a long time if in general people are too busy to care or indeed not prepared to say what they believe if they do care. I have found most people would rather let someone else do the hard yards, so we get what we deserve I suppose. No say!

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which lawyers refuse to accept is legitimately enacted is the basis of S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth). All lawyers, Judges and Magistrates are caught by the Criminal Code. Will Kevin allow Tony to enforce it?

Lawyers mounted a widespread and systematic attack on the civil populations of the States from the parliaments of the States, where so many of them find refuge and accumulate great wealth. . It started in 1927 in South Australia when the Liberals abolished civil juries, by S 5 of the Juries Act 1927.

The final stake in the heart of justice is the Australia Act 1986 which makes the States Sovereign, and neutralizes the power of courts, to annul bad legislation. Lawyers have ruled supreme ever since its enactment. Six months after its enactment the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was continued as Schedule 2 to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 .

S 268:12 makes it a crime punishable by seventeen years imprisonment, for any lawyer, and Judges and Magistrates to fail to apply Article 14 of the Covenant. Article 14 makes all people equal before the courts and tribunals. There is no difference between criminals and others who seek justice. S 80 Constitution guarantees criminals a jury trial. Article 14 extends that to all people.

When a court is constituted by an Officer only, it is a State Military Court. On the 26th August 2009, the High Court said these are illegal. The Supreme Court in New South Wales has been illegal since 1970. Queensland was taken over and has been run by lawyers since 1991. Victoria since 1986. It is essential for the continuation of the Commonwealth, that lawyers be suppressed, and the laws of the Commonwealth enforced without fear or favor.

It will be a mark of the Rudd Government if it allows the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police to give one warning to all Judges, Magistrates and Registrars of all courts, to abide the provisions of 268:12 and stop discriminating, or face indictment

Legal Eagle, lawyers as you say are like every other profession a mixed bunch.

However, like politicians I think sometimes people start on a course with good intentions and then get embroiled and entrapped in the money, mortgages, debt, holidays, kids etc. And then those good intentions sometimes get overlooked in pursuit of the good life.

The concept of LegalCare may work and the eager young lawyers looking to make a difference might hang around for a while before being snapped up by a big law firm. One suspects that there may be an imbalance of quality, money and experience though when it comes to trying a case. Not sure how people would feel about more money being paid in taxes to support it - it might be a hard sell although many might perceive that in the long run 'justice' would be accessible.

What about legal insurance to cover the eventuality of an adverse event that would require legal representation (with the exclusion of crime). Legal insurance is already built into car registration and the like and fire service levies which is a type of insurance.