http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/court-defies-newman-on-sex-crims-release/story-e6frgczx-1226777481068?sv=e2146a30ae8bc04c5e98b1f7011ccd26

It certainly makes me & others I spoke with wonder.

We wont always like the decisions of our judiciary but they should never be subject to the whim of politicians or populist leanings.
SD

Shaggy Gog,
I for one do not question the Judiciary, I question the mentality of those entrusted with the priviledge of exercising judicial power. This is one such event.

Indi,
It is our system and like anything set up by us humans it is less than perfect.
To hand it all over to Premiers and Prime Ministers with Dictatorial Delusions is not really an option to me.
The population would really suffer if we ever allowed this to happen as it has elsewhere.
SD

I agree Shaggy Dog.
Of course the judiciary are going to get it wrong sometimes, just like everyone else does.

Lumping them all in the same basket is juvenile, but Individual wouldn't like them because they all went to university...

Suseonline,
why are brainless remarks your only defence ? The judiciary got it wrong, we agree on that. So, what are they doing about it ? If we get something wrong accidentally does the judiciary say "ah well, people do get it wrong occasionally". No, of course not. we get hammered. Also Suseonline if you were a little more switched on you might have found that I didn't throw them all in the same basket, only these sick perverts who see that as a weapon against undermining the present Qld Government.
How can people have any confidence in our legal system with judgements like that ? The Police must be just so frustrated.

The problem with the Judiciary is that they are more interested in protecting the legal system, which elevated them to their present height, rather than the people the system is supposed to serve.

I could be wrong, but I assume Justice & Judiciary are from the same base, but justice is most definitely one thing you should not look for in our "justice" system. When ever you hear that a court is in closed session, taking legal argument, you know some other crook is about to use expensive lawyers to get off his criminal activities. Lionel Murphy QC any one?

No the lowly common people get the law, not justice, while the privileged get the law they can afford. So please folks, do stop pontificating on respect for the Judiciary, that is the last thing most of them deserve.

Hasbeen,
Maybe you are right but I would prefer our Justice system and the associated Judiciary to anything a short term populist Prime Minister or Premiers of little ability could serve up. These pollies are purely looking after their own welfare and their only qualification is an excess of ego and delusions of grandeur.
Our Justice system does have its flaws but let our pollies run it and what flaws we have now would pale into insignificance as our personal freedoms are abolished.
SD

Shaggy Dog,
The QLD Govt. recently gave the CMC a much overdue run for it's money. You should have seen all the feigned indignation uproars from the hangers-on. For once a Government did something that the greater population agreed with & what do the hangers-on do ? Bleat all sorts of things like "going back to the bad old Joh days" etc etc. The CMC was a total waste of our much needed monies. I wish this Govt gets stuck into all the consulting rorts as well along with so many other shonky outfits.
I think organised crime has already grown roots in our public service, let's hope it can still be weeded out.
Evidence has already shown us that we can't rely on our judiciary to do that.

And yet Individual, we live in one of the best countries in the world.
Who should we rely on with crime fighting and punishment then?

Should we just arm everyone with several of your favourite things...guns, and let anarchy rule?

Maybe that is exactly the world that small-minded people would like to live in...

Should we just arm everyone with several of your favourite things...guns, and let anarchy rule?
Suseonline,
I suggested to arm them with sense & not guns i.e. my advocating a non-military national service.
The small mindeness you refer to is what we have now.

A little OT, but is it just me who can't access the article linked in the OP?

Either a) some of you are in so deep with Rupert he allows you free access to his organ, b) some of you are in so deep with Rupert that you actually subscribe to his organ or c) Rupert knows exactly what I think of his organ, knows where I live, and is singling me out for punishment.

On a more constructive note, can anyone actually tell me where I can find out what is going on here, without my having to pay a Rupert-tax?.

Pericles,
Perhaps I'm too slow on the uptake here but I for one can't fathom what that waffle is all about. Just in case I do actually understand correctly & you can't open the link, do what I did. Google QLD Govt vs CMC.
If people think what the Qld Govt did with this CMC crowd was wrong then they should take a deep breath & check what the CMC was supposed to do but didn't.
In a conversation with a magistrate the other day I was told "their hands are tied by legislation." What on Earth are they there for then ? What are we paying them top money for ? To have the crims run the show ? I really can't see how there won't be a rise in vigillanteism with so much injustice so openly on display.

Susie why are brainless remarks?
Sorry old son but that is just about the best evidence people who live in glass houses should never throw stones.

I have noted, with some satisfaction, you have put effort in to your recent posts, A FIRST!
But once again you prove true to the thoughts of many, see you in another thread and hopefully with a touch more respect for others

Belly,
Please read Susieonline's posts a little more carefully & you'll easily filter the nastiness. She does mix a lot of acid into her posts & I will retalliate in kind. I just don't beat around the bush.
Have you noticed how she doesn't answer at all or offer solutions ? It's always some condscending remark, never anything of substance. I don't know about you but I see this Forum as a great place to offer solutions rather than produce some pointless quibble. At times, I feel I have to lower my standard to hopefully stir up some hidden percentage of sense in those posters who only have ridicule to resort to.

Dear Individual,

I, like Pericles could also not access the link
you gave, however I managed to get into the
Courier Mail website and was quite shocked to learn
that Fardon had been released after all. I was
so sure that the man would be kept in jail for the
rest of his life. His victims swear he will re-offend.
I can't understand what the technicality was that got him
off. And keeping him out of jail "under supervision,"
just doesn't cut it with me. If he needs to be "supervised,"
then wouldn't it be simpler to just keep him in jail?
I don't get it. This is a case of "the law," being an "ass."

‘‘because we have a legal system, not a justice system’’.

The Qld Att. geneneral said the above. How true.

"...but is it just me who can't access the article linked in the OP?"

Nope. Me too.

But I enjoyed the laugh of being asked to pay for 'premium content' whilst being subject to strip ads. Made me want to ask to be paid for my time being used for having been forced to look at ads I didn't request.

Is not the basic issue here that governments are subject to the law, not arbitrarily above it, even though they are its creators over time?

Specifically the principle that a custodial sentence once served has been completed unless conditional release conditions were applied at trial.

Oh come off it Belly.

I couldn't open the silly link either, so I was just commenting on Individual's comments.
You can't say he ever shows respect for others, but you are right, maybe I shouldn't come down to his level.

I can't bear the thought of vigilantism , which appears to be what Individual advocates, and the constant putting down of anyone who has been to university.

Suseonline,
you don't approve of the offers for solutions put forward so how about offering some yourself for a change ? What do you think is needed ?
How would you go about curbing increasing crime & corruption ? What do you think is needed to curb the criminal waste in the public service ?
Do you think the CMC was a good thing ? If so, please tell us.

Individual, like you, I am no expert on criminal law, and unless we are actually in the court room, or able to read the full trial transcript, I doubt we can understand the full stories behind these trials.

Of course I get as upset as the next person if I think a miscarriage of justice has occurred, but I think the Judiciary have only the current laws and sentencing made available to them to use.

Maybe it is the politicians that need to update these laws?
Certainly, the lawyers should be able to use past crimes committed by the accused, during any current trial.
If that had happened before Jill Maher's rape and murder, then it have no doubt she would be alive today.

But only the Parliament can enact laws, so it is them we should be angry at.

Suseonline,
thank you for replying but what would you instigate to curb it all ? My solution is non-military national service & flat tax. No teacher enters the class room without serving national service first.

Suseonline, "Certainly, the lawyers should be able to use past crimes committed by the accused, during any current trial"

I want all cases cleared and all criminals behind bars and preferably, working their butts off to earn their own keep. However what you suggest opens the door for all sorts of abuses, including the very obvious abuse of the information by the jurors who are supposed to be examining evidence and finding fact, not presuming guilt.

The accused either gets a fair trial or s/he doesn't. The rules of evidence have evolved through continuous, rigorous examination by highly trained and disciplined legal minds. Even so, there are innocent people in gaol, for example as proved by later DNA evidence, and of course there are criminals who have managed to avoid conviction, or even being identified.

The very best we can do is have a highly trained, professional police force, and not waste police resources on PC B.S, traffic, and other time-wasting exercises as we presently do. Courts need to be managed efficiently too (not much hope of that).

Read Bleak House by Charles Dickens. Over one hundred years ago the judiciary were taking longer and longer until all funds were exhausted by them.
Fifty years ago a murder trial would take a week now it takes a year. Simple answer, Parliament sets legal fees for every crime. Result lawyers would be finished at the doors of the court.
I find it quite disgusting that sleazy fraudulent lawyers operate with impunity. Molesting children and stealing our money. The law does not belong to lawyers it belongs to us and we have to reclaim it.
If they do not like that they will have to find another living.

Sorry OTB, you've got this wrong. You say "The rules of evidence have evolved through continuous, rigorous examination by highly trained and disciplined legal minds", if only that were true.

The rules of evidence have been bent & mangled by the legal profession to make it easier to get their high paying clientele out of any trouble they have got themselves into.

When you have a judiciary who spent most of their careers touting for the business of criminals, is it surprising their sympathies lie with the criminal, rather than the victim, in so many cases?

The legal fraternity can't afford to have too many of the crims behind bars for too long. How are their regular clients going to generate new business for lawyers & judges, if they are in prision?

Susionline Indys efforts may make us all pay the price.
How many first look posters give us a miss after thinking we are all like that.
Thinking however is not a concern Indy seems to have

Hasbeen,

I don't disagree that the legal profession is often self-serving, that the self-regulation works against the public and that courts are notoriously inefficient.

Expect much more of the same as the many hundreds of over-supply of law graduates continues to flood the market and they and the entrepreneurial partners they work for open new fields of legal 'problems'. 'Gender', 'discrimination', and (residential) tenancy regulations have been 'beneficiaries' of the over-abundance of lawyers. The public wonder where their taxes disappear.

Fortunately I count numerous lawyers (and their fellow non-productive bandits, humanities academics) among my acquaintance, so fortunately I am never short of a glass of expensive wine, a try-out of the most recent Mercedes-AMG and clever, high-sounding rationalisations for enjoying same.

Teachers persist in telling girls to do law. How many more can the public service take? LOL

All professionals are self-serving.
You don't really think they did the free (HECS, they never repay it) degree in the first place because the cared about the proletarian cultures.
They did it for the money silly
That,s self service if I have ever seen it.
As far as Mr "I'm a serial sex offender" is concerned I am sure that he will come to a sticky end real soon.
He doesn't seem to realise that most people simply want him dead.

I almost forgot.
The judiciary is so far off this planet they qualify for astronaut status although they seem to thing God status is more appropriate.

Get together with a few others , organise a proper petiton & have it tabled in Parliament. Pressure them to change legislation. It does work if you bother to read up on how to do a petition.
First things first ask for punishment to reflect the severity of the crime. For a start that is.

You all may whinge about the Judiciary and suggest they are all the same, but how fast would you turn to them if a crime us committed against you?

There are good and bad in all professions, just as there are good and bad in all walks of life. Generalising by placing all in the one boat is just boring.

There are many really good lawyers who work pro-bono part-time for poor people who qualify for Legal Aide. They certainly don't do it for the money...

Lawyer billing practices. :(

but how fast would you turn to them if a crime us committed against you?
Suseonline,
Give me another legal option & I'll deal with the culprit in my own way. I'd stay away from lawyers as far as I could. It's not a matter of choice we have to use lawyers.

Suseonline,
Any chance of getting some idas what options there are to not using lawyers when there's a requirement to go to Court ? If I do my own defense & ask that no lawyers be involved in my case, will I get my wish approved by a court ?

Individual, some crazy people do their own defence in courts.
Good luck with that.
I hear the jails aren't so bad once you get used to them...

some crazy people do their own defence in courts
Suseonline,
Yes, because they either can't afford a defence lawywer or they have too much integrity to engage one. I either case a victim has a tough chance fighting corrupt lawyers & judiciary & if they happen not to be corrupt then they're incompetent. No matter what, the victim always emerges short-changed because we don't have a judical system.

If we all had guns we could dispense our own justice and stuff the lawyers.
Funny how the bad guys never handed in their guns.

A judicial system looks after the interests of the victim. A legal system is governed by the amount of money available.
In Australia the Law protects the criminal & the Judiciary persecutes the victims.
It really is all upside down i.e. downunder.

If anyone needs any evidence that the judiciary in Oz is not only out of control, but has gone mad, try todays report of one of the ratbags awarding $467,000 in a sexual harassment case, where the woman "THINKS" she was raped.

"Although rape has not been proved, Ms Ewin's belief that she was raped was a reasonable reaction to what she had in fact experienced," the judge said in his December 5 decision.

So we don't know if it ever happened, there is no proof it ever happened, we don't know if the woman agreed, or asked for it if it ever happened, but the woman in question thinking it did, & she didn't want it, is enough for this ridiculous award.

I wonder if the judge actually knows what a quick bit of nookie is worth, & where he gets his values from, but obviously this one should be retired, along with most of his mates.

Hasbeen,
In that case I think i might have been raped too, about half a million Dollars' worth. What an insane situation we have arrived at. That judge should be made to have psychiatric assessment along with all others. Then again the Psychiatrists are probably even more insane so there goes that theory.
I really believe Academia has lost its way decades ago & the time has come to stand up & make a move against such insanity being let loose on society.
The people in the judges' electorate must be encouraged to table a proper petition in Parliament to review the sanity of the judge.

It'll be interesting what decisions Judges & Magistrates will make in the case of those overnight riots in Sydney. One bloke got stomped on his head. What penalty will his assaillant get ? Probably a sponsorship to become a defence Lawyer ?