A thug did $15,000 damage to a female police officer's face. There are likely to be ongoing costs for the officer and taxpayers. The penalty was 200 hours community service.

"AN ICE-ADDICTED thug who left a female police officer needing dental surgery after a sickening assault has been handed a measly 200 hours’ community work.
The decision has enraged the Police Association union, which has attacked the courts for not jailing Ahmed El Lababidi, 26.

In April, he attacked the 29-year-old senior constable — repeatedly punching her in the face — as she was making an arrest at Glenroy, Melbourne.
The Glenroy resident faced multiple charges, including one of assaulting an emergency worker, which carries a mandatory six months’ jail.

However, the charges were dropped after it was argued there were exceptional circumstances in his case due to mental illness, according to Herald Sun reports.."
[news.com.au]

If mental health problems is used as an excuse, to avoid jail time, it's acceptance should result in a definite, full lifetime in a protective mental prison. This to protect the public, not the criminal.

This should be totally non revocable, as it appears that mental health professionals are the most easily conned people in the country.

That's 'separation of powers' for you. The people we elect to serve our best interests have no power over our pathetic, gutless judiciary.

The female police officer probably copped what she got from the Muslim offender because he would have been upset to be arrested by a female. Something else the multi-culti idiots didn't take into account.

Solution: get rid of female police who cannot defend themselves, and/or get rid of Muslims.

If other workers did the same piss-poor job that our judges and magistrates do they would be sacked.

There may be another reason here is his name "Ahmed El Lababidi, 26YO"

Hmmm...
In a nation that prides itself on the ideology of multiculturalism, instances such as this must be written off as 'cultural enrichment'...

If that was a white Australian male, I bet he'd have gotten that mandatory 6 mths jail + another 18 mths for the female cops face.
If it was a mum who killed her own child she'd probably get off to.

You almost have to wonder whether or not its a fact now that identity politics and leniency towards refugees and minority groups has officially been established into our courthouses

Isn't it possible for victims of such crimes to seek damages in civil action in court ? Say some stupid kids burn down a school during school holidays, then surely the Ed. Dept. can sue their parents for damages ?

If someone brutally beats a police officer or social worker, then surely they can sue for at least the medical costs ?

If someone steals and torches a car, surely a civil action can be brought to order the perpetrator to pay full value of the car ?

Who knows, a few cases where criminals are ordered to pay all damages might pull some potential criminals up. Nah, probably not. Still, why should victims pay for crimes against them ?

Joe

Joe,

The victims would not get Legal Aid so in most cases the expense is the decider.

What I object to is mandatory prison sentences for anyone who hits a cop. The police don't seem to give a damn about thugs who hit doctors, nurses, ambos or anyone else.

It seems to me very strange that the civil military, being the police, who are trained in unarmed and armed combat, are the biggest whingers of them all.

Police should have no privileges under the law. They should be covered the same as everyone else.

As for the issue with the female cop. Why are they even in the police force?
Women are pathetically weak and fragile. Even the toughest of women who know all kinds of martial arts, will be ironed out by some ice fueled thug and the thug doesn't need to be that big either.

I have little sympathy for anyone, especially women, who deliberately put themselves in harms way, all because they have swallowed the feminist mantra and believe they are as good as men and can do whatever a man can do. Once they get hurt, they and their pussy begging male supporters have absolutely no right to complain.

If they don't want the women hurt, then tell the white knight male cops in charge to keep the girls in the office and let the men take care of the hard stuff.

When have you seen women in the sewers, on construction sites, in any filthy dirty and dangerous jobs? You don't, because they don't have any glamour and do not attract the media attention. Not only that, girlies don't like to get dirty and most a scared of danger. Oh and there is that one very obvious fact that they are just too weak and can't do the work a man can do.
This is why over 97% of work place deaths are men.

Time to shut down the feminists and their mangina supporters and bring this country back to the once great country it used to be, before all the men were emasculated and too scared to speak out against any woman.

The West has lost the will to survive. The Koran advises that infidels will perish 'by their own hand'. Our idiot politicians are proving that this is correct - multiculturalism; cowering to the United Nations; denying that African gangs are a problem; useless police declaring that Muslim terrorism is not actually terrorism; putting female midgets into police forces; 'normalising' homosexuality via fake marriage between people of the same sex; dumbing down schools and universities; mass immigration of useless people totally unsuited to the West. We began the downhill run with the abolition of the White Australia policy.

You name it, we've got it wrong.

100000 unborn babies murdered each year. Could not all be lone rangers and mental health. Once we called murder evil. Now its a mistake.

AC: If that was a white Australian male, I bet he'd have gotten that mandatory 6 mths jail + another 18 mths for the female cops face.

If it was a mum who killed her own child she'd probably get off to.

You hit the nail on the head there, AC. Especially the Infantacidal mother.

TTBN...You're really full of it, my ill-informed friend '...get rid of female police who cannot defend themselves...'? I reckon you just like to hear those quiet murmurs of you're own voice, spew out detritus on subjects or matters for which you invariably know nought. This one takes the cake TTBN! And what of male police, if they can't defend themselves; we get rid of them as well? Or merely shoot the aggressor? And you TTBN, I suppose you can defend yourself against all comer's?

Theres no doubt, the more I stupidly glance at your many 'rants' the more evidence I have that you're very much misogynistic in many of your cockeyed views. In fact TTBN you're a misanthropic acolyte. Somehow I don't think you're sufficiently worldly enough to understand the real parameters of a legitimate misanthropic attitude? Anyway how sad that must be for you in the tiny confines of your simple mind. Friendless, lonely, bitter, resentful, aggrieved et al?

You seem to possess an abhorrence for everything TTBN, why? Surely no one individual can possibly hate everybody? Every race, every culture; all ethnicities - other than Anglo Saxon (caucasian)? Yet every time you enter a discussion your arch conservatism arises. I'm also a strong Conservative in my politics, but I try (and fail) NOT to use the word hate or even imply it if I can.

Hi LOUDMOUTH...All there best to you and yours for 2018. The female copper will be appropriately covered by workers comp. like everyone else. FYI Joe; in the day, if a female police officer coped a flogging, the 'flogee' would usually have a deep and meaningful conversation with another Officer, in order to help him review his negative attitude towards police. The practice was not limited to police women, but others of the female gender, who've suffered brutally at the hand of some cowardly assailant.

However, this is another time; the present, nearly 2018, and we're all far more enlightened than previously! Where it would now seem the learned judiciary don't feel quite so outraged about a female cop getting a belting. Nor does it trouble them when other women suffer horrendous sexual assault and battery. It would seem inter alia, the judiciary are so academically high minded, they exist purely in an esoteric world of Legal dogma, none of which us mere mortals would dare question, least of all, understand.

I could name at least a dozen or so of these individuals who're regularly on the criminal list, who should never have been granted a practicing certificate. Let alone preside over criminal matters. But once called - they're there for life unless the do something very very naughty! That my friend is a very brief precise of the problem.

Thanks, O Sung Wu, and Happy New Year to you and yours :)

Joe

Hi o sung wu, hope you had a great Christmas.

I agree completely that the application of justice was much more direct, & much more sensibly carried out, before we suffered all this "progress", with bleeding hearts & activist judges.

o sung wu,

What you think of me and my opinions is a matter of monumental indifference to me, but I have to agree that your are indeed 'stupid' (your self-description) for looking at my posts seeing you are so hostile to them.

Any police officer, female or male, who is not up to the job should be invited to look for other employment. Nothing to do with me being a misogynist. If they can't protect themselves, they cannot protect the rest of us. But, feel free to call me a misogynist and a misanthrope if that's what it takes to make you feel virtuous, and not just the irrational, sad old man you are.

“ Somehow I don't think you're sufficiently worldly enough to understand the real parameters of a legitimate misanthropic attitude?”

What the hell is that supposed to mean? What “parameters”? What is a “legitimate misanthropic” attitude? The opposite to an illegitimate” one? Please explain. When is it legitimate to be a misanthrope, and when is it not?

Finally, I notice in your comments to Loudmouth that you again revert to your dinosaur days as a rough policeman, chuntering on, with little disguise, about police violence. You are a real Jekyll and Hyde character. I should pity you, I suppose; but, as a misanthrope, I can't find it in myself to do so.

Pretty clearly, Australia now has a problem with the mentally-ill. Their propensity for committing violent - and terrorist - acts, perhaps in the name of some god or other, shows that they are a danger to our society. Obviously, it's not their fault, since they can't properly understand what they are doing or why, but on the other hand, our security services need to be stepped up to combat this wave of terrorism by the mentally-ill.

I would strongly recommend that anybody diagnosed with a mental illness be confined in new facilities, perhaps in remote areas; that the mental health system be brought under our new Department of Homeland Security; and that police be armed with sedative darts along with more lethal weapons. Strobe and UV lights should be installed in areas of large numbers of people, such as major city streets, in order to confuse mentally-ill, would-be, terrorists, and make their bizarre responses more identifiable to DHS and AFP officers, who should be trained to identify such bizarre behaviour as soon as possible and to take appropriate action.

Clearly mentally-ill Muslims do not represent all Muslims, who are peace-loving and law-abiding Australians, nor is Islam to blame for the crazy actions of supposed adherents. We have to differentiate would-be terrorists from ordinary Muslims, and Islam in general for any perverted interpretation of it.

We may be in for a long battle with the mentally-ill, but we must fight it together.

Joe

Mental illness is just a cop out for dangerous lunatics who know full well what they are doing. It's just an excuse used by people who don't have what it takes to deal with dangerous people. There has been no sudden surge of mental illness in Australia or anywhere else in the West. The problem is yes, you guessed it, multiculturalism. Non-Westerners are given to beliefs and behaviour so bizarre and alien to us that we have no words to describe the behaviour - hence the misnomer and totally inaccurate diagnosis of 'mental illness'. Stopping the immigration of such people, and deportation of those here, is the only way to go.

o sung wu,

All the best in the New Year for you and your's.

Regarding 'direct' policing, when I was a very young smoker we had to be careful where we lit up as the local police, who of course knew our fathers, would take our cigarettes off us (to be slowly destroyed later!!), give us a clip in the ear and probably tell our parents.

Didn't stop us smoking but it sure limited our intake of nicotine.

When the penny finally dropped I gave up the habit and haven't indulged in over 50 years, except for a drag on a 'tailor-made' in 1997 and it tasted so horrible that I threw it in the camp-fire.

Hi Ttbn,

There may not have been any rise in the numbers mentally-ill in Australia, but clearly many of them have turned to violence in the last few years. We face an unprecedented crisis in how to deal with them. Clearly, we need far more anti-mentally-ill bollards in public places with high population. Perhaps anybody with a mental illness should be denied a driver's licence, and certainly a gun licence. Perhaps a knife licence as well.

How to combat the mentally-ill ? How to deter them from turning violent ? Of course, many of them would be incurably insane, so armed police should be trained for quick-response against any totally-unpredictable behaviour. I'm not saying, shoot first and ask questions afterwards, but it may come to that.

Obviously, there has been an epidemic of violent mental illness just in the last four or five years. We need to understand where that's come from, and to disregard any pretexts used, such as Islam. After all, where does it say in the Koran that the mentally-ill shall go to Paradise just for brutally killing innocent people ? That's the sole right of true believers, not nut-cases. Islam shouldn't be used as a cover for mental illness - we have to call out what are the real causes of violent terrorism - mental illness in all its forms.

Joe

TTBN...You claim 'Mental Illness is just a cop out for lunatics who know full well what they're doing...'? OK and what would you have done with them? Are all those inflicted with mental illness who face the courts, some citing the 1843 'McNaghten rule' as a defence to murder, are they too playing the mental illness card as well?

Let me get you argument crystal clear; are you inferring everyone who faces the Courts who claim mental mental illness as a defence, are just manipulating the 'game'? Or are you, yourself confused with the term 'mitigation' as opposed to 'defence' in criminal jurisprudence?

You see TTBN your problems are - Much of your arguments, like you yourself, lack relevancy. That's why you tend to make these bizarre comments in the hope that it will shock other contributors into agreeing with you.

To your misanthropic attitude:- Since you've come on the Forum, you've done nothing but rant 'n rave about immigrants; refugees and boat people (some are neither bona fide immigrants or refugees). You've never had a kind word to say about anyone who's happens to come from the middle east or it's environs. That's your right of course. But to claim you're anything else, but overtly misanthropic, would make the tenets of DSM V a 'monumental' joke.

You say I was a 'rough' policeman in early days, 'chuntering on' about police violence. So? Further, you say I'm to be pitied? No TTBN, that pity would be entirely wasted on me. I've witnessed far too much human suffering, both as a copper and in South Vietnam; I'm (almost) immune to it, therefore your pity would be wasted. Better for it to be directed inward, to yourself. Otherwise to pursue your own negative ideology, who knows, one day your own name may appear 'writ large' on the daily crime sheets. Mate, you share many of the symptoms I've observed in crim's I've known, who've suffered from chronic episodes of psychopathy. You seem to hate everyone and everything? You want evidence, read the antecedence of MONIS, of the Martin Place, Lindt Cafe siege.

Could it be that any excuse is acceptable to an out of touch Judiciary or the politicians are to blame, as this story suggests, the judge should be removed.

A serial drink and unlicensed driver from Western Australia has been handed a $500 fine for his sixteenth driving conviction.

Mitchell Walsh, who hit and killed a ten-year-old girl in 2003, has once again been banned from getting behind the wheel - this time for just three months.

On Friday he pleaded guilty to drug driving, as the Police Minister called for him to be taken off the road for good.

Walsh has racked up seven convictions for drink driving and eight for driving while disqualified.

When he fatally hit ten-year-old cyclist Jess Meehan in Clarkson, Perth, in 2003, he blew three times over the legal limit.

However, he was found not guilty of dangerous driving causing death.

He has been fined $500 for his latest offence after admitting to driving under the influence of meth and marijuana.

It is the maximum penalty for a drug driving first offences.

Driving or riding in a car without a seat belt carries a heavier fine of $550. Riding in the back of a ute receives a $550 fine.

Walsh opted not to appear at court today. He submitted a plea of guilty but provided no explanation and no apology for his most recent crime.

The Minister reiterated her intent to get Walsh and other repeat offenders off the road.

"I'll see what's appropriate and legally possible in that regard," she said.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/38440904/serial-drink-and-unlicensed-driver-handed-a-500-fine/

Marxism itself is a mental illness. That is why it defends and gets on well with Islam. To dumb to see they are being used by Islam as useful idiots.

G'day to you IS MISE...

I'd bet pounds to a 'bucket of goat sh.t' you took up smoking and boozing in the Army? Or am I wrong? I never smoked myself, but overseas we did have the odd drink or two. Malaya it was 'Tiger' and Vietnam it was the ol' reliable 'Buds' amply supplied by the yanks! They'd fly pallets of the stuff in on the huge B 'something or other' freighters, therefore we were never actually dry except when outside the wire of course. I reckon you'd need considerable willpower to give up smoking, you're to be applauded I reckon.

There's absolutely no doubt those facing Court will proffer anything at all, if they believe it'll get them off whatever charges they're facing. And that's their right. If I were facing criminal proceeding I do everything possible to have myself acquitted too.

The problem arises where many in the magistracy are simply too gullible and they often believe all these little fantasies and excuses, they've been regaled with, by the accused. Another area that many outside the judicial system don't realise, the average Magistrate doesn't like to see his/her determinations appealed and overturned, thus losing 'judicial face' if you like in the presence of their peers? To be described as being too soft, is far more acceptable (in chambers) than to see they've got it plain wrong.

Unlike Judges and Justices in higher Courts, Magistrates can be removed by governments under certain circumstances. So none of them like to blot their copy book by having many of their decisions overturned. And coppers, could spend hundreds of hours preparing a solid brief of evidence, only to have it blown out of the water by some timid magistrate too nervous to do what's right.

The proffer of mental illness in Court, is often driven by the Defendant's Counsel. Rarely will you see a matter dismissed, on the grounds of Mental Incapacity. Where it is occasionally used, in matters of homicide (murder). And the proof of which shifts from the Crown, to the accused.
The criterion that's used is the 1843 judgement known as the McNaghton Rule. It say's...

VERBATIM: "It is a defence to a criminal prosecution for the accused to show that, at the time of committing the act, he was labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as to not know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know this that he did not know that what he was doing was wrong".

I'd be safe in saying, many a murderer has tried this route, and failed miserably in the process.

o sung wu,

As I said I started smoking at an early age, about 11 or so, but I'd given it up before I joined the Army but started again in Korea.
A tin of 50 free from Lord Nuffield every payday (usually Capstan, pommy fags and not the best) or Lucky Strike, Chesterfields etc., at 10 cents for 20 and "El Roi-Tan" cigars were also 10 cents, but each.

I also took up drinking in the Army, but in moderation, as our OC had only one rule on drink, "Drink as much as you like, lads, but you'd better be sober at Reveille", to comply was VERY necessary and to be able to do so meant moderation and it stuck.

On 'direct policing', we lads were well aware that mildly offensive behavior could earn a few well directed whacks if not a boot in the posterior as a parting gift.
Consequently, we learned to curb our exuberance and to practice the social behavior that we'd been taught.

osw,

Rave on. That's the good thing sites like this: you can talk all sorts of make-believe bullshite. Malaya, Vietnam. You were probably never a cop either.

ttbn: you can talk all sorts of make-believe bullshite. Malaya, Vietnam. You were probably never a cop either.

You've over stepped the mark, 'ol mate. Time to get some respect to those who have done their bit for humanity. I our day it would have been a size 9 & tell your dad for him to sort you out.

I do detect some mental illness, judging by your replies here & elsewhere. Get thee to a Doctor post haste.

Jayb,

You have made insulting remarks about me in the past, so I am not going to take any notice of you. I haven't “over stepped the mark”, and I am not your “ 'ol mate.”

I have absolutely no respect for o sung wu, and we have only his word that he has ever done the things he claims to have done. I repeat: “That's the good thing sites like this: you can talk all sorts of make-believe bullshite. Malaya, Vietnam. You were probably never a cop either.”

I also suggest that you check out o sung wu's past posts where he has admitted problems with his own grey matter. And, think about your own obvious gullibility before you make smart-arse remarks to other people.

Hi there JAYB...

He's got me JAYB - my ruse has finally been exposed. I'm a retired, 'cooks assistant' in a low rent Chinese Restaurant. So best I exercise caution otherwise TTBN will have me deported, shot or something just as grievous? His 'spluttering' affirmation that he doesn't respect me, means he's very annoyed and he's been hurt. But he'll get over. We all do.

I see our friend TTBN has remonstrated with you as well, for daring to refer to him as 'my ol' mate'. Well to be fair, thats where his trouble lies - He's devoid of friends, and of course, it hurts him. As it would hurt anyone of us. He forgets, no man is an island, we're all social creatures, we need friendship, companionship and fellowship. And many of us need love. Surely these are the necessary constituents that bind us all together, I suspect that's why he lashes out at anyone who dares question his opinions or credentials.

Anyway JAYB, he's now outed me - and he's probably given you good advice, perhaps you should check my past contributions where I'm contradictory, abusive and mendacious in every way. It's called being human, We all make mistakes. We make errors, lots of them sometime. And hopefully we learn from them. Anyway it feels so good JAYB, no more pretence, the only issue I can now speak of with some amount of knowledge, is cleaning Chinese cooking Woks and other ancillary utensils! So decide the order of your question(s), and bring 'em on.

O Sung Wu,

Don't worry, I suspect that Ttbn is, in fact, make-believe bullshite, that she doesn't actually exist - either that or she exists only in her own mind.

Clearly, 'Ttbn', whoever you really are, we're all pretty clear on the distinction between Muslim and mentally-ill, even if those two categories do seem to often overlap. We know that when someone yells out "Allahu Akbar" that he/she (oops, no 'shes' yet) isn't a Seventh-DayAdventist, or even a Mormon. If someone waves, or secretly has, an ISIS flag, we know they are not members of Opus Dei or the Mouseketeers.

But it's enjoyable stating the obvious by deliberately 'misunderstanding' it, it's all part of the game: you may not believe it but I see that 'misunderstanding' as taking the mickey out of the Opportunist Left, with their craven suck-up to right-wing Muslim terrorists. Still, for all that, I'd be wary of the mentally-ill, especially if they are waving weapons about or driving in a manner dangerous. Again, terrorism seems to afflict only the male mentally-ill. Only, it seems, the Muslim male mentally-ill. Strange, that.

Cheers,

Joe

O Sung Wu,

Ah, that was you in the 'Thai Man Tide' a couple of weeks back who dropped the Green Curry Barramundi coming out of the kitchen ? Don't worry, we got a second lot for nothing. Four stars !

Cheers,

Joe

Hi (again) LOUDMOUTH...

Yup, that was me Joe! I do some 'moonlighting' occasionally at other restaurants. Did you like the dashing way I whipped out my trusty dishcloth, almost before the Dish even hit the floor; and we had that Green Curry mess cleaned up and away, faster than you can say 'mop 'n bucket'! You see Joe, we masqueraders can be quite adroit with our trusty dishcloths! Seriously, I bet the Restaurateur, wouldn't be too happy with their waiter dropping such an expensive dish?

Yeah, but you should have wrung out that dishcloth further out of sight >:(. It was still tasty though :)

An 83-year-old Australian has died as a result of that mentally-ill man driving through crowds in Melbourne last week.

In Egypt, a mentally-ill man has murdered twelve Coptic Christians while they were praying. ISIS has falsely claimed responsibility, but obviously it' just the work of a mentally-ill man, shouting 'Allahu Akbar !' Nothing to do with Islam, of course, it's the religion of peace. Early this year (or maybe last year?) three hundred Coptic Christians were murdered in a similar way, by mentally-ill people wearing suicide vests.

Earlier this week, mentally-ill people murdered dozens of students in Kabul, mostly Shi'ite Muslims, so obviously it has nothing to do with Islam: surely Muslims don't kill Muslims ?

Mentally-ill men - and a few mentally-ill women - have been involved in tens of thousands of terrorist attacks since 9/11, killing perhaps hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

Surely something must be done to restrict the movements of the mentally-ill ? They do seem to be a danger to innocent people.

Where next ?

Joe

I just love it when gay, lefty, mentally ill, bogan, greenies go off. The prose is beautiful to read. Hard to understand, but beautiful never-the-less. Chuckle, chuckle.

OSW has reached the bottom, with sad attempts at humour and the bizarre claim that he 'knows' that I'm “devoid of friends” - even though he suggests that I'm “our friend”; I am “very annoyed and hurt” (as if he has the power to make me feel that way); I apparently “ forget.., no man is an island, we're all social creatures, we need friendship, companionship and fellowship” - when that sentiment just reveals his own insecurity and need for a suck blanket, and I apparently “lash(es) out at anyone who dares question (my) opinions or credentials”. So, other people defend their opinions, but I “lash out”. As far as 'credentials' go, I don't believe that I have ever claimed any, unlike the great man himself – hero of civil policing and the military. However, given the moniker he uses, I am prepared to accept that he did, indeed, work in a Chinese eatery.

As for my 'lashing out': how about OSW,s hammering of me on 29th December, when he could have ignored my opinions, which had nothing whatsoever to do with him? If I commented on all the posts I disagree with, I wouldn't have time to eat or sleep. Unfortunately, OSW is one of those people who has a need to 'challenge ' and harass people he disagrees with, which is pretty daft if you accept that other people stick to their opinions just as much as you do. OSW doesn't know this.

Here is part of an OSW post recently:

“.....It sort of sneaked on me, in the strangest of ways, essentially by my not being able to recognise incorrectly spelt words, syntax 'simply' spelling even basic punctuation. You've probably noticed it lately? Certainly my wife has....”

Posted by o sung wu, Tuesday, 19 December 2017 3:18:52 PM

OSW has a problem, regrettably. But he really should think how it affects him, and if his penchant for lecturing other people is sustainable or dignified.

As usual I come to some of these discussion a bit late.
Mental illness is a theme throughout this thread.
When I point out that muslims have been marrying their first cousins
for some 2000 years, it all goes silent.
It is a subject that no one wants to discuss. Too politically incorrect !
However mental illness is a prominent factor in terrorist reports.
If we are not prepared to put it up front we are ignoring why it is
that muslims acts so irrationally.

The NSW Health Dept and the UK's Midlands National Health servise
have made reports on this very matter.
It explains why they follow the word of the Koran and the wildest
immans that hand out such rubbish, but so many of the congregation
cannot see it for what it is.

Because not all are affected to the same degree it explains why many
muslims have the intellect to ignore the "kill the infidel" rhetoric.
Those affected the most seem to be Pakistanis with a 70% first cousin marriage rate.
My writing this would have me gaoled in the UK, Canada and some European countries.

Dear O Sung Wu,

You and I have known each other on this forum for
over a decade and we've seen all sorts of posters
come and go. I've learned over the years it's best
to ignore people who are not capable of discussion.
These trogs only want an argument. Don't give it to
them. You won't win and they'll bring you down to
their level and beat you by experience.

You have many friends here who will stand by, and
your reputation will remain in tact. You will continue
to be respected. That cannot be said for them.

Happy New Year to you and yours and a great big
raspberry to the nasties! (smile).

Hi there BAZZ...

I think you're right. Perhaps this penchant for some Pakistani Muslims to marry within familial can lead to mental illness, inflicting the progeny of that union? I guess it's all somewhat conjecturable, though not surprising given the advice and safeguards western medicine has given us all?

My only argument would be, notwithstanding the influence and domination of some religions, or evidence of any criminal antecedents. For anyone to deliberately and calculatingly, take a gun or explosives into a public street or place, and consciously and randomly kill people who've rendered no particular harm to them or their family...! There's got to be an element of insanity inculcated within the culprit! I don't believe any ordinary human being, capable of doing such a thing, without being driven by a powerful motivator.

Moreover, I've yet to see a dedicated Christian, or one who follows the tenets of Christianity to commit such a horrendous crime! Similarly, same thing goes for the Buddhists, you never hear of them wrecking havoc on the community? Most of these crimes, that are occasioned against the community at large - 'seem' to come from followers of the Islamic faith.

Like you BAZZ, if I were to shout-out such a claim on the street corner, I'd be locked-up for some time, for breaches of this 'n that and whatever other charges they think, may succeed?

Anyway all the very best to you and yours for 2018 BAZZ.

Although not the same as suicide bombers there are numerous instances of Buddhists and others setting them self on fire.

Hello there TTBN...

I'm really sorry that our little discussion(s) have distressed and agitated you? I'd be careful not to allow a simple difference of opinion, to grow into some pathological saga, that eats at you day and night until you blow a metaphoric fuse! I understand you've not slept too well, and you're off your food? No doubt you're slowly simmering with rage and longing for revenge, to 'get at' that miserable maggot 'Sung Wu' - The Asian kitchen hand! Well, as long as it occupies a little of your time, I'm always prepared to help out a young fella!

Interestingly you claim inter alia, that I like to 'challenge and harass' people. Sonny boy, if only it were true? Believe it or not, I'm closer to eighty years of age than you'd think; and if only I had the energy and verve to harass & challenge people, as you've contended, I'd be a very happy little puppy indeed, believe me. As you are so fond of reading through others contributions, have a peek at my earlier efforts of about six+ years previously - You'll note they're full of piss and bad manners? Reason.... I was an undiagnosed sufferer of war caused PTSD, of which I receive a 100% Pension from DVA. Since then I've tried to clean up my act, and I reckon I've done OK. And if you reckon I'm aggressive now TTBN, well....?

Something that does strike me as being quite odd about your personality. The contemptuous way in which you address other contributors on this Site, indicates to me, you're unafraid of being impertinent to them. As is your ability to become hostile and belligerent, in order to cower others into thinking or accepting what you say. Sonny boy, if you pulled any of these little stunts in the military or with your peer group in the coppers, you'd be flat on your face sucking up concrete by now. No 'siree', you've never worn khaki or blue TTBN, that's unabashedly evident! My advice...cool it! Before it becomes bigger than 'Ben Hur' in your mind?

Yes Philip, but not others.
Since I wtoe the above I read an article.
The cost in the National Health UK was L12 Billion pounds in 2004
just for Pakistanis and no more recent figures available.
Some horrific family stories being told.
More later

Hi there PHILIP S...

Pardon my ignorance, there are instances of Buddhists uprisings for sure, I was trying, but failing, to juxtapose other religions on those of the militant Muslim terrorists. Sorry PHILIP S.

Dear FOXY...

Your kind words know no bounds, and I thank you so much for them, believe me. Please remember in my earlier days on this Site,I was both aggressive and very unkind with many of those contributors who opposed my views. Visiting upon many of your Contributions, FOXY; POIROT'S; and DAVID F (I think, a very educated American born gentleman), as well as many other terrific contributors. All have taught me that aggression and rudeness gets you nothing. I realised I was no longer dealing with the human detritus that was my paid occupation for the past 32 years, but with educated, thoughtful, and very decent individuals. Chief among them was you; FOXY, albeit our politics are diametrically opposite, my respect for you has no bounds!

I'd like to wish everyone on the FORUM a very happy, healthy and safe 2018. Especially you FOXY and your dear Mum currently comfortably in care. I also now have to confront this scourge of Dementia as it slowly creeps into my brain?

And you too TTBN - Have a really great 2018, and we'll all see each other in the New Year. Til then 'be kind to each other' - The staple remark from, John LAWS, formerly King of Sydney Talk Back Radio.

O Sung Wu, you mentioned Altzheimers,
Just in case you were serious in your comment.
I went to a talk on it by a Professor from UNSW and she told us about
a product by Blackmoores called Brain Active. She is part of a
worldwide group studying Altzheiners and they found this area in India
that did not have it in their population. It seems they eat a root
vegetable called Cummarim.
They have had positive results with it, not a cure of course but a preventative.

It is a terrible disease and my wife's brother's wife has it and two
of her sisters and a brother have died with it.
That is the genetic version of the disease.

OSW,

There is no point trying to project your madness on to me. I am not distressed, and I sleep like a baby, eat like a horse. I'm not 'sonny' to anyone; I am 75 years old. You have no idea what my experiences are, as I don't share your need to talk about myself or try to impress anyone. Your suggestion that I would seek “revenge” on somebody like you is laughable; it would be inhumane of me. You are too unimportant for me to seek “revenge” on. You are clearly entering your second childhood and acting accordingly. I will take that on board in future and try to do nothing to cause you to make a fool of yourself as you have been doing. You, in turn, might like to express your opinions and not bother about the different opinions of others. Had you not read the post that started all this, or just read it and decided whatever you wanted to decide about me, this totally unhelpful - and probably boring to other posters – exchange would never had happened. I do not resile from the opinions you objected to, and you still object to them. What a waste of time! I'm moving on.

Bazz,

Good point. However, as far as Australia is concerned, I still think that what passes for authorities here are just using the mental thing to cover up their stupidity in bringing terrorists here. Most, if not all, terrorists are Muslim, and it must make our politicians feel like real jerks for having brought these Muslims her in the first place – where terrorism was totally unknown before they arrived. They would prefer to blame mental impairment (over which they have no control) than inappropriate immigration over which they do have control.

The first one is the women who refused to marry her cousin and started
a movement to change the practise.

http://tinyurl.com/mk59awt

http://tinyurl.com/nskd7dp

This link is the first one I have seen that connects the cousin
marriage to terrorism. I had thought it my own proposition.

http://tinyurl.com/zf8ytqa

The Physiologist Nicolai Sennells is mentioned in this one and he
appears to be the only professional who publically takes it seriously.
Just read the statistics, it is frightening.
Child deformity,mental and physical seven times the rate of others.
The overloading of special schools in the UK is a major problem.

Yet all this is too sensitive to mention. It is the cruelest thing
anyone could do to a child. The parents should be charged.
But then there would be no one to look after them for the rest of their lives.

Sennells said elsewhere that if they stop the practise now it will
take hundreds of years and many generations to repair their genome.

Phill S: Setting themselves on fire.

Setting themselves on fire. Not everyone with-in shrapnel distance, there-in lies the difference.

Hi BAZZ...

No mate, it's not Alzheimer's, and to be sure I don't joke about such a thing - As it was explained to me, it's early onset of 'age related dementia'. And you're right it's (apparently) becoming endemic within western cultures. I've no knowledge whether other ethnicities are being stricken by it. However, I guess on the balance of probabilities, some ethnological groups surely must be?

Or perhaps the word 'Dementia' has replaced the hitherto, much used word, 'senility'? Moreover I could never actually ascertain whether there's a clear distinction between Alzheimers and Dementia per se? Is it one of the same? Or is it a case of severity? Or an altogether different type of Dementia?

A mate of mine attended the Neuropsychology Section at the Repat. Where he was given some exhaustive tests in order to measure his memory. He told me later, they'd diagnosed him, from the results of those tests, and he had shown episodes and symptoms of age related Dementia, but not Alzheimers? To a layperson one can only conclude there must be a difference? Thanks for the 'heads up' on that Blackmoor's preparation 'Brain Active', I appreciate BAZZ!

Hello there TTBN...

And a happy 2018 to you too our little mate! As you say; '...you sleep like a baby...' and behave like a baby? You're seventy five years of age are you? Well I find that positively astonishing that a gentleman with your attitude together with your blatant impertinence and puerile approach you adopt with people on this Forum. If you were to adopt the same persona in public, without the protection and anonymity of the Forum, at your age of seventy five, and you've not been flogged as much as you're due; I find that absolutely extraordinary Sonny boy, I really do?

But of course, face to face you'd be far more measured and courteous, otherwise many of those with whom you share some personal reciprocity, would be anxiously lining up eagerly wishing to do a 'Mexican Hat Dance' upon your delicate countenance. And none of us would want that, now would we. No my delicate little 'snow flake' friend - TTBN. As you unhappily possess an emotional veneer and a frustration tolerance, slightly thinner & lower then that of a 'TallyHo' cigarette paper, we all must tread, ever so lightly, whenever we have a need to encounter you? Otherwise you'll get very grumpy, querulous and petulant for the next 24 hours, and that would never do TTBN.

Now you're moving on eh, well I'm sure that's very nice for you? You still haven't explained that extraordinary remark you made;

'...Solution; get rid of female police who can't defend themselves, and/or get rid of Muslims...' ? Can you defend yourself against all assailants, I think not? And how would 'you' get rid of Muslims? You're perfectly correct when you say, they don't like being seen, as inferior to a female, whether police or otherwise.

You possess a most elegant way of expressing yourself young fella? '...get rid of...'? By what method, shoot em' ?

What to do about the muslims ?
They are a major problem, some will never cause problems but the cost
of educating their children will become massive unless we do what
Islamic countries do and just say it is the will of Allah.
Everywhere they have been throughout history they have persecuted
Christians, Jews, Hindus and Buddists so why do we expect them to be different here ?

Get rid of them, yes well that is the problem.
Denmark has made some interesting steps.
They do not allow married cousins to enter Denmark.
Cousins cannot be brought in for marriage.
If anyone does marry a cousin they are deported.
With small numbers, as here the problem will get worse.

O Sung Wu, I don't know if there is a difference or not between
Alzheimers and Dementure.
Anyway as I said there are two different Alzheimers.
One version is genetic and inherited.
Couples with it in their family should be tested before marriage.
If you were tested positive what a disappointment that would be,
break off the engagement, decide not to have children or take the risk.

Bazz: Denmark has made some interesting steps. They do not allow married cousins to enter Denmark. Cousins cannot be brought in for marriage. If anyone does marry a cousin they are deported.

Australia should take good ideas from anywhere we can. Now that a good one. All mahommedeans in Australia must be Genetically Tested. Those found to be closely related must be deported immediately.

Dam good idea.

I mentioned the monthly reports of Germany's problems with muslims.
I have not seen it yet, but here is a report for the UK for the
whole of 2017.
It is not a report for everyday but for each month of 2017.

http://tinyurl.com/y8hxov8f

When the percentage here becomes the same level why won't we get the
same level of problems ?

Bazz,

An interesting link; have you read "Pope Patrick" by Peter De Rosa?

A good read.
https://www.publishersweekly.com/978-0-385-48548-7

HI BAZZ...

I've read the latest link (tinyuri.com) you've kindly provided us, and I tend to agree, what will happen here if the numbers increase? It's not a policing issue at this stage, then surely it must be of a political imperative?

The question is what can be done about it here in Oz? We can't just deport them if they're AU citizens, sure we can drastically curb any further Islamic entry. But you and I both know, Malcolm TURNBULL won't, or can't do it; and Labour's Bill SHORTIN will only encourage more Islamic immigration and refugee intakes, purely to bolster his numbers? I guess what we need is a truely Conservative Leader, to make those hard choices and do what's best for the Country as a whole? And who is such a person?

Mr DUTTON is doing a good job but he's still being hampered by those of the left of his party, and of course Malcolm TURNBULL himself. Tony ABBOTT was the only bloke who had the energy, the verve, and courage to do such a thing. But he and his ultra-conservative supporters, are so far out of favour, well I really don't know anymore BAZZ?

Oh Sung Wu, I understand your indecisiveness. I have it myself.
I recently wrote to my MHR and told him I won't be voting liberal
unless something is done about immigration.
Trouble is it is a blue ribbon Liberal seat.

It seems to be like talking to a brick wall. Shorten is the same as
he is determined to increase the amount of solar & wind and decrease
the amount of coal fired stations. He also does not seem convincing
that he would not bring in the boats.
Turnbull won't let the boats in but he won't reduce immigration and
will not support coal or nuclear power stations.

What we need is for Lucy and the other wives to issue the same
ultimatum that the women of Athens issued.

Is Nise, eeerrr no I have not read it.

"Is 'mental illness' too often the excuse?

I've just found an interesting article by
former Premier of Victoria - Jeff Kennett
in The Herald Sun, Friday, December 29, 2017.

In it Mr Kennett states:

"There is something seriously wrong when individuals
affected by drugs can commit a crime and then argue
mental illness as a ground for being unfit to stand
trial."

"There is something seriously wrong when senior police
say the perpetrator of a crime was suffering a mental
illness, as though that excuses the crime and putting
the idea in the mind of the magistrate before whom the
perpetrator first appears."

"There is something seriously wrong when a person on
drugs attacks a law-enforcement officer and is penalised
with 200 hours of community service."

"I am the first to admit our legal system is not perfect.
But I am sick to death of people who commit serious
offences claiming before the courts that they were not in a
fit mental condition."

"I am sick to death of the way the courts in too many cases,
impose what appear totally inappropriate punishments for
crimes."

"Imagine if the individual who attacked a police officer while
on ice were to commit another ice-related offence or any
offence before completing the 200 hours community service.
The judicial officer who handed down that sentence had better
pray that does not happen".

"I do not accept that having a mental illness results in a
person committing a crime."

"Mental illness has become a defence used by some for
their unacceptable behaviour."

"Of course, there are many shades of mental illness - from
stress and anxiety, through to the most serious conditions
that are, to date, incurable."

"But with correct medication, a person can lead a
productive and successful life. Almost all of those people
who suffer from a mental illness would never even consider
committing a crime."

Mr Kennett goes on to say that we should stop making
excuses for those who commit serious offences. It sends
the wrong message, and discourages those whom we expect to
protect us.

to be continued...

cont'd ...

Mr Kennett tells us that the law in Victoria should be
changed to remove the clause that excuses people from
standing trial if they are judged to be mentally unfit
to do so.

"Everyone who commits a crime
that is serious enough to be brought before a court
should be held responsible for their actions - regardless
of their so-called mental condition."

He says that it is too easy to get medical advice supporting
mental incapacity. Certainly, use of drugs be it ice of
any other illegal substance is no excuse for committing a
crime.

"I hate retrospective laws because
you cannot plan if politicians change the laws for law-abiding
citizens retrospectively."

"But today, I am going to make an exception. The Victorian
parliament should make changes to the law relating to
competency to stand trial for a criminal action retrospective
to January 1, 2016."

"That might affect those accused of the Bourke St and
Flinders St atrocities, who are currently before our courts."

"Let the courts first decide on guilt or innocence of a crime
and an appropriate sentence, and then - and only then-
where that sentence should be served."

"Victoria is becoming a laughing stock."

"Increasingly, you can commit horrendous crimes, including
home invasions, knowing you can find an excuse to avoid the
penalty you would normally expect to suffer for such a
crime."

"Not only are we less safe than we were previously but our
emergency services, who on many occasions put their lives
on the line, are having the rug pulled from under their
feet by a government that fails to act, and by a judicial
system applying laws that in many cases are no longer
appropriate."

"Forget being recognised as The Most Liveable City in
the forseeable future."

"We are on our way to being the Crime Capital of Australia."

"If we, as Victorians, are serious about our safety,
we can make Victoria a safe place to live."

"That must start by
ensuring we have laws in place that cannot be avoided
by those who commit crimes."

"Have a safer day."

Hi there FOXY...

There's much in what Mr KENNETT says. However there used to exist defences to criminal capacity justly enshrined (precedence) in common law defences, in most States of Australia, when it comes to mounting a Defence whilst under the influence of drugs and alcohol.

The reason why most of these types of Defences aren't mounted in Court, the Crown, in collaboration with medico's, are far more adroit at shooting massive holes through them now, than previously. Though in instances of Murder 'with malice aforethought' where insanity is mounted as a defence, I recently mentioned such a defence, just a day or two ago, by citing the; 1843 Judgement in Scotland, leading to the famous; 'McNaghten Rule'?

Sadly FOXY precise details, of the many Defences one may mount to Criminal Capacity, are becoming more foggy in my mind, these days unfortunately? Take care.

Foxy,
In Europe "mental illness" is frequently used to excuse Islamic inspired attacks.
The big problem is to sort out those that are really mentally ill and
those who are of lower intelligence and have been conned into committing a terrorist act.
The conning could be said to have been instigated by Immans telling
the offender that he would go to paradise because he would be a martire.

How would you separate these offenders ?
O sung wu perhaps you could give a legal police prosecutor of view ?

Dear O Sung Wu,

I shall bow to your knowledge in this matter.
As I am not familiar with the courts or our
judicial system.

Dear Bazz,

The best that I can suggest is agree with
what Mr Kennett has stated and that is that
the Victorian parliament should make changes
to the law relating to competency to stand
trial for a criminal action retrospective
to January 1, 2016. This, as Mr Kennett
pointed out might affect those accused of the
Bourke St and Flinders St atrocities, who
are currently before our courts.

He suggests that - let the courts first
decide on guilt or innocence of a crime and
an appropriate sentence, and then - and
only then - where that sentence should be
served.

cont'd ...

What Mr Kennett is stressing is:

"If we, as Victorians, are serious about
our safety, we can make Victoria a safe
place to live. That must start by ensuring
we have laws in place that cannot be avoided
by those who commit crimes."

Another mental problem?

http://www.9news.com.au/national/2018/01/03/18/30/young-women-get-into-brawl-in-supermarket

Might there be some growing evidence of the importation of political and cultural traditions that are anathema to Australian law and culture?

Should the 'diversity' tail always be allowed to wag the immigration policy dog?

What should be the goals of immigration: to benefit prospective migrants, there are teeming millions of them, or to meet identified skills deficiencies in Australia?

Les Twentyman wrote an opinion piece in
The Herald Sun, Friday, December 29, 2017
entitled - "Put the boot into Romper
Stomper."

He talks about the connection between movies
and television programs and crime. A connection
that has been made time and again throughout
the history of the entertainment media.

He tells us that now, as our societal standards
have fallen, the level of violence on our
screens has ramped up as has its impact on the
impressionable and the mentally ill.

Mr Twentyman tells us that some who view violence
based programs, from "A Clockwork Orange," through
to "Fight Club," "Dexter," and "Sons of Anarchy"
find a need to re-enact the dark work of their
favourite characters.

He questions the upcoming Australian series,
"Romper Stomper," a remake of the '90s film that
launched Russell Crowe's career.

Mr Twentyman reminds us that in 1992 the original
film caused some serious problems on the streets
of Melbourne, inciting a wave of gang violence and,
in his view, driving the weapons culture that still
exists in the city today.

He claims that the film made violence in the name of
"race" seem cool. Like the upcoming TV series, it is
nothing more than violence masquerading as entertainment.

Mr Twentyman states that "Given some of the problems
many of our youth face today, such as high
unemployment rates, poverty, and a growing disassociation
from society, releasing a series based in this city, that
glorifies gangs and violence is akin to throwing a lit
cigarette out of the window while driving through the
forest on a 40C' day.

He claims that while stories of youths running amok from
one side of the city to the other are seemingly a regular
occurrence, this series is the last thing this city needs.

Mr Twentyman ends by saying that "while I respect art in all
forms, in this instance I cannot support what I believe to be
social vandalism. And I hope that the streaming service
planning to air the show has a rethink, and bins the program
altogether."

Is Australia knowingly importing people with Mental Illness? Yes we are & pushed by all the Do Gooders. Now recently a little girl was sent back to where she came from because she had Downs Syndrome. Oh, she was from Britain, did I mention that?. Yet, these Do-Gooders openly push for people, they even claim have mental illness to be allowed into Australia. Weather these people acquired the mental illness in Nauru, etc, or had a mental Illness before leaving their own Country is neither here or there. They have a Mental Illness, therefore they must be refused. Otherwise they are free to commit as many violent crimes as they wish & get away with them under the guise of Mental Illness. Let keep them in Victoria, at least.

We ask for what we get.

People with Mental Illnesses must the treated the same as any others that are refused for being a burden on the Health Care, not to mention the Courts.

Same paper, Foxy, huge importation of Khat. But not relevant according to you? Are you blind?

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/huge-seizure-of-druglike-plant-at-melbourne-airport-20151112-gkxcc4.html

Women seem to disagree with you,
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khat

"Melbourne's East African Women's Foundation had pushed for it to be banned back in 2009. The group claimed the plant brought on mood swings, predominantly in male users, which was contributing to domestic violence."

As for this patronising politician statement, "That must start by ensuring
we have laws in place that cannot be avoided by those who commit crimes", isn't it clear from the behaviour of the gangs in Melbourne that they laugh at arrest?

As per usual you are blame-shifting and making Australia, its police and citizens (and failing that,the film industry!) responsible for the toxic behaviour, traditions, political systems that have been imported with migrants.

Of course the Victorian government needs to lift its game. But the question arises how did the problem develop in the first place and why are those who reject out laws and way of life still here?

Hi there BAZZ...

In criminal jurisprudence there's a world of difference between mental illness, and the classic definition of insanity, as defined by the McNAGHTEN judgement...and absolutely 'NO' difference at all, which sounds like a contradiction?

It's my understanding every adult human, has at one time or other, suffered from some form of mental illness to a greater or lessor degree. As opposed to an episode of insanity. The term mental illness is a nice way of saying you suffer from some (usually temporary) non-organic illness like; depression, anxiety, abnormal fear, eating disorder etc etc. BAZZ I'm only a low ranking plod, not a Forensic Psychiatrist, so I stand to be corrected, absolutely!

Usually a crime where insanity is claimed as a defence, involves violence or death. In every crime (except those classed as 'strict and absolute'), there must exist two vital elements:

(i) Actus reus - The criminal act;

(ii) Mens rea - The criminal intent;

The Actus reus is part of that Latin maxim meaning; 'an act does not make a person guilty - unless his mind is guilty'.

When a defence of Insanity is mounted, there's usually an absence of the 'mens rea' (the criminal intent). In other words, '...because of a disease of the mind, he doesn't realise, that what he is doing, is wrong...' - an element of the McNagahten Rule of 1834. I'm sorry BAZZ, I've not explained it very well unfortunately. I do hope it helps a little in any event?

leoj,

I cited two articles written by two different
commentators in the Herald Sun that I thought
would add something to the discussion that you started.
Nowhere in these articles does it mention me or my views.
And I was not aware that I needed your permission as to
what articles I could/should cite from.

If you don't like the views expressed by either of the
parties - you only have to say so. And tell us why.

Also

cont'd ...

As for the accusation of "blame-shifting?"

Now that is something that you excel at.
As is obvious from your posting record on
this forum. Do try sticking to what is actually
being said and by whom. It might give you some
credibility.

Tks O Sung Wu, well it does help a bit.
As I see it anyone who decides to blow up a train full of passengers
or a football stand of people who he has never met because most or
all of them do not follow his religion and as a reward expects to gain
entry to heaven and have 72 virgins made available to him has GOT to be insane !
Should he be committed for the term of his natural life ?

Should the person who told him of these rewards also be charged, and
the scriptures on which it is based be destroyed, burnt and removed from the internet ?
Is it a crime to incite someone to commit a crime and to publish
a document that incites a crime.

These are questions that politicians are running away from as fast
as their legs will go.
Are there laws already in place that cover these situations ?

Dear Bazz,

As Jeff Kennett has pointed out - "The law in
Victoria should be changed to remove the clause
that excuses people from standing trial if they
are judged to be mentally unfit to do so."

"Everyone who commits a crime that is serious
enough to be brought before a court should be
held responsible for their actions, regarding
of their so-called mental condition."

As Mr Kennett explains - "it is too easy to get
mental advice supporting mental incapacity."

And - "Certainly, use of drugs, be it ice or any
other illegal substance, is no excuse for committing
a crime."

"The Victorian parliament should make changes to
the law relating to competency to stand trial for
a criminal action..."

Mr Kennett makes it clear that when he says -
"we have to stop making excuses for those who commit
serious offences. It sends the wrong messange, and
discourages those whom we expect to protect us."

He explains that " Not only are we less safe than we were
previously, but our emergency services, who on many
occasions put their lives on the line, are having the
rug pulled from under their feet by a government that fails
to act, and by a judicial system applying laws that in many
cases are no longer appropriate."

"If we,as Victorians, are serious about our safety, we can
make Victoria a safe place to live. That must start by
ensuring we have laws in place that cannot be avoided by those
who commit crimes."

And that is the opinion of a former Premier of Victoria.

You do not invite a person into your home and then advise him of the rules
You tell him before hand so he can make an informed decision as to whether to enter.
If he agrees, enters and misbehaves it is up to you to eject him
If, for whatever reason you do not eject him, you are accepting the new order.

SD,

"If, for whatever reason you do not eject him, you are accepting the new order."

Even if he has a knife at your throat?

silly you for letting it get that far

OSW: an element of the McNagahten Rule of 1834.

Should modern Law Accept rulings from an entirely different Time & Place in History. One could put up a defence like. It was good enough for Brutus & Cassius & their Co-conspirators therefore that is an excuse. I think not. A lot of Precedence's go back far in History as to be meaningless in todays world. Yet they are still dragged up as defences. I think "The MCNagahten Rule of 1834" is one that needs to be dropped.

Maybe AC & Phil S can add some light on that subject.

Bazz: as a reward expects to gain entry to heaven and have 72 virgins made available to him has GOT to be insane !

I don't think they are insane. Brainwashed, Yes. You could say that Christians who believe that the World is only 6000 years old would have to be in the same category.

Jayb the facts bear out that those believing the evolution fantasy will murder their unborn children at much higher rates than those rational enough to see design needing a Designer and laws requiring a Lawmaker. Dont let your hatred lead you to stupidity and to being irrational. Open your eyes and stop denying the obvious. At least be honest enough to face the fact that something does not come from nothing.

Jayb, Brainwashed ?
Is it possible to brainwash someone so they think the obviously absurd
is indeed possible ?
Was it Einstine who said someone doing the same thing over and over
again and expecting something different is insane.

Surely therefore expecting an illogical result is a measure of insanity.

Of course the real action should be to remove the person doing the
brainwashing and the books he is using to reinforce his inhuman project.

Hi there JAYB...

Precedence in common law as opposed to that of codified statute do surprisingly compliment each other rather well. Whenever we speak of making 'excuses' for our behaviour, and that behaviour has had a deleterious impact upon others, and it's done with a 'knowledge' and 'intent'; knowing it will cause a 'corporal hurt' to the victim, then it's clearly a crime under the common law. Though in an adjoining State it may be cited within their 'criminal code' as 'Malicious Injury' or a 'wounding'? In other words - 'A bird by any other name is still a bird'?

Such staid and courtly language is found right throughout the common law JAYB. And many of the Law Lords in those lofty positions of power and influence within the upper echelons of the Judiciary, find it's elegance and appeal compelling. I'm retired now, so much of my opinion may well be dated but most police prefer to work under a criminal code.

However defences to capital charges, need to possess great gravitas, given they're a 'Defence' mechanism to a capital charge. And in the day, they carried the possibility of the Death Penalty. I agree with you 100% JAYB; the McNaghton Judgement is out of date and old hat.

The passages quoted therein, that have been cited as being part of the 'ratio decidendi' - to me at least, they don't make (grammatic) sense? However, as far as I know - remembering I'm only a retired copper, not an academic 'Silk', the McNaghten Rule remains. And is still used, by Counsel for the Accused, in order to mount a Defence of Insanity to a charge of murder

M'Naghten's Rule is fine, under it the accused stands trial and it is up to the Court to decide if the Rule applies.

".... that insanity was a defense to criminal charges only if

at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from a disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or, if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong. (Queen v. M'Naghten, 8 Eng. Rep. 718 [1843])"

The modern problems lie with the expanded versions/interpretations. of the Rule used today.

Hi IS MISE...

You're spot on my friend. I did McNAGHTEN for my sergeants examination. Accompanying that oddly worded paragraph you teased from the law reports of the day, there is around five or so chapters of the 'why's & wherefores' dissecting every word and phrase associated with the rule.

Butterworths 'Criminal Law in NSW' 2nd ed. thoroughly analysed 'the Rule; As did Allen & ors in 'Criminal Law' 10th ed. The eminent 'Cross and ors' wasn't to be left out either, in their 'Criminal Law' 18th ed. In fact IS MISE I've not known another issue so discussed, argued or disputed by law academics for ages.

As you carefully examine that part of the 'ratio decidendi' the language is confusing as is the punctuation, so how are we to extract the precise import of the ratio? I provided a direct quote of the Rule - @ p5 on this Topic, on Sat 30 Dec last. You'll notice there's a variation in our two extracts, nevertheless it has the essential same wording? I'm very glad someone has gone to the trouble to pull out the Rule. Trust the Army to do things right!

Oh just one last consideration - It's up to the Defence to 'prove' their client was insane, pursuant to the Rule. Whereas in normal criminal trials, it's the Crown who must prove their case to 'a point beyond that of a reasonable doubt'. Whereas it's been argued 'up hill 'n down dale' that the accused was insane at the time he committed the act, on the lesser burden of proof, that is; 'on the balance of probabilities'. Mate, I'm buggered - so I'm off to bed!

Bazz: Of course the real action should be to remove the person doing the brainwashing and the books he is using to reinforce his inhuman project.

& those who have been or are on their way to being brainwashed.

OSW: that the accused was insane at the time he committed the act, on the lesser burden of proof, that is; 'on the balance of probabilities'

& The Magistrate doesn't want his ruling to be challenged so he gives in to the Criminal & we have another Mentally Ill person on the streets free to continue breaking the Law as they so want.

Ok, so the Rule is good to a point. The massive list of interpretations need to be looked at in great detail because those Precedence's associated with it have become squed (corrupted) over 184 years. Would you agree with that? In fact, I believe that the use of Precedence's is pure laziness on the part of Magistrates. The, "I'm too important to be bothered making my own Judgement, just give me the money."

Besides, a week or so before a Trial the Judge & the Barristers get together & decide which Precedence's to use. The Court Day is a farce to make it look good & the prior meeting saves time on the Court Day. It looks good for the people on Trial & the Public. (Information coming from an ex Magistrate Who was very pissed at a Vietnam Veterans Meeting at the time) I had to drive him home. He also said that's where they decide if the person Charged is going down, or not. How hard the Defendant Lawyer & the Prosecutor fight for their Case in the eyes of the Public. (Politics) That's why these big High Flyers get off lightly. (Bond)

Do the Precedence's need to be made Null & Void as they did with the Precedence's in the Family Law Courts in the 70's. (I was the first Case tried under the new Precedence Rules, also, I was the first Divorce under the new Divorce Laws in Australia.)

Let's cut to the chase: is it possible to be perfectly sane and yet to commit atrocities in the name of Allah ? Yes/no ?

Are terrorists motivated purely by Islam or more by the sweetener of 72 virgins ? Like many young people, do they have an assumption at the back of their minds that death is sort of reversible ? Or are they so frustrated by this life that eternal life with 72 virgins sounds a pretty good alternative ?

Perhaps I'm wrong by the way, but it seems that it is believed that the families of martyrs also go straight to Paradise when their time comes.

Are terrorists misinformed by their imams, but - usually - perfectly sane ?

Joe

Joe,

Yes, it has been understood by criminologists for some time now that Islamic terrorists are almost invariably sane people. I'm sure the 72 virgins (it was originally 72 raisins, but there was a mistranslation at some point) helps. But, essentially, these are people who truly believe what they believe and have been radicalised. People can become radicalised and remain perfectly sane.

As Sam Harris notes in his book, The End of Faith, these are people of perfect faith.

Joe Loudmouth
'Perhaps I'm wrong,'....
Stay with that thought, it will serve you well in years to come

Hi there A.J.PHILLIPS...

In the course of your studies, have you known many instances where the accused's Counsel has used 'the Rule' successfully and beaten the murder indictment? Of course the few I've encountered hasn't helped them too much. NSW's, Morisset Psychiatric Centre is tantamount to being in gaol anyway? The occasions I've been up there, I was most impressed with their (chemical) security measures employed by the male nurses. As adequate and effective as I've seen with most other institutions, where they've had armed Prison Officers guarding them.

Though it's my understanding former inmates (criminally insane) previously detained pursuant to 'Governor's Pleasure' at Morisset, all have been re-moved to Long Bay Gaol, where they've built a large modern Forensic Hospital Complex, complete with a high security psychiatric wing attached thereto.

I wonder, with all their manipulation, manoeuvring & mendaciousness; whether it would be best just to shut their months, and cop to 'wilful murder', do their 15 - 18 years in the 'go slow' and with a nice new Licence, say a final 'ta ta' to gaol?

Virtually, all they gain by 'getting up' on an insanity plea,p instead of being convicted of murder, and copping life in gaol, they're found Not Guilty of murder by virtue of Insanity but are detained for an indeterminable period at the 'Governor's Pleasure'. Which can lead to years and years of being locked up, and arbitrarily receiving month after month, year in, year out, of these 'heavy mind altering drugs'. And who knows how long, the GP may be, not even the Governor I suspect?

Anyway we're now into 2018 - Surely there's been some scientific advances since the McNAGHTEN Judgement? After all 1834 is a few years ago, when the practice of psychiatry was still very much in it's infancy. Though I'm not sure what stage criminal jurisprudence had reached in terms of it's development and/or modernisation? Do you have any thoughts on this A.J. PHILLIPS? "All the best to you and yours for 2018".

OSW, Joe & A J Phillips,
It all leaves me with a frustrated confused feeling.
These Islamic terrorists who are mostly, Arab, Pakistani & Afghans
are all the children of a long line of cousins.
They can probably claim some mental disfunction but even the lower IQ
should not prevent them from knowing right from wrong.
The question I have is the instruction on the Koran by Immans enough
to transfer their guilt to the Immans and the Koran ?
Does it give the offender a get out of gaol free card ?
Are they jointly guilty ?

SD,

Thanks, I hope I will always have such doubts about the limits to my knowledge. You should try it when (or if) you grow up.

Nah, it's easier knowing everything now ?

Joe

Hi there BAZZ...

I think you can relax on that point old friend. These terrorists, can 'bleat and scream' 'til they're blue in the friggin' face they're Insane - within the meaning of the McNAGHTEN Rule. I'd almost be prepared to put up my police pension, they'd *never get over the line with Insanity* These people are religious fanatics - have no doubt, they know what it is they're doing is wrong, and it's a crime! But NOT in the Islamic faith (apparently)?

In my 32 years of experience, very few 'get up' on Insanity! Imagine if they did? Let's suppose they kill half dozen innocent souls with an AK47 or similar. Charged with 6 x counts of wilful murder. Found innocent by virtue of Insanity (McNAGHTEN Rule). Do they release them into the community?

No bloody way! They are confined in a high security Psychiatric Hospital for a period known as 'Governor's Pleasure' - an 'indeterminable' period of time! Longest GP I've heard of, was 44 years. BAZZ while they're in there, they are 'dosed-up' with all manner of heavy 'mind altering psychotropic drugs', thus they're walking about like quiet little lambs, in some perpetual daze.

Believe me BAZZ, I've seen inside several of these high security wings for the Criminally Insane. They're all quite stupefied, wandering about in a drugged daze. To do otherwise, would render it far too dangerous both for the Male Nursing Staff and other's therein.

If I had to do gaol for murder. I'd much rather be 'in gaol' with all my faculties, then confined in one of these Psycho wards, drugged into insensibility, believe me.

I would like to thank OSW for his informed advice about the law. However, many criminals were careless, rather than malicious. Someone who drives negligently and causes a crash didn't have the intent to harm anyone, but can still be held to account. Someone suffering psychosis still needs to have a deterrent to unwanted behaviour.

Pete6's language was inflamatory, but he made a valid point about undersized or female police officers. Police Forces need to adapt their training to allow for small officers, dealing with large criminals and this might encourage them to train officers to use the taser more than would otherwise be necessary. I would rather big male officers, who should be able to use only the force that is necessary.

Hi there Folks...

After the coppers have dragged me away kicking and screaming for belting the 'bejesus' out of - (i) the NBN Tech; (ii) the Optus Tech; & (iii) anyone else remotely connected to this damn NBN change-over. I'll definitely avail myself to accepting some help from my ol' mate 'McNAGHTEN' & his Rule, to set me right. I'm well of topic, but has anybody else herein suffered through this diabolical NBN fiasco?

I hope this simple explanation of the 'Insanity Defence' has been helpful to most herein? For those who try it, few succeed. And for what, indeterminable number of years incarcerated (GP) in a high security Psych. Hospital. Together with masses of injections of mind altering drugs? Thus being rendered very much an 'automaton', shuffling about the high walled security yards of the Hospital, hardly being aware of who you are, or what you're there for.

benk,

It doesn't matter what the gender (fluid or otherwise) of the police officer or their size, most of them have a Glock these days and if they are in fear of their lives then they should use it.

A seven stone female officer confronted by a twelve stone youth with a lump of brick in his hand should be in fear of her life.

BANG!! and for good measure BANG again.

Hi there IS MISE...

I thought I've got it wrong for all those years? First sequence; double tap, centre mass - second sequence; fire your warning shot!

The instructions I was given at the International T.E.A.L. Conference at Canungra in 65 were;

1. Halt! Halt, Halt or I'll fire!
if they don't stop
2. Fire one round in the Ground.
If they don't stop.
3. Fire one round in the air.
If they don't stop.
4. Fire one round in the Centre of Mass.
5. Call out the Guard.

Hi o sung wu,

Yes, both medical and social scientists have definitely acquired a far better understanding of insanity since the M'Naghten Rule. Nowhere do I think this is more glaring than in the fact that the presiding judge in the M'Naghten case referred to insanity as a “disease of the mind” (terminology which, as you are probably aware, is still used in the legal world), which, by today's standards, is considered an unscientific and inaccurate way of putting it.

Complicating matters, however, is the various degrees to which an accused can be incapable knowing what they were doing, and that it was morally wrong. So, to that extent, M'Naghten’s Rule is becoming considered an increasingly inadequate common law standard by which to determine the level of guilt that an accused must bear. Unfortunately for us in Queensland, our Criminal Code still relies heavily on the black-and-white standard of M'Naghten’s Rule.

I can’t remember reading or hearing of many instances where an accused’s Counsel tried to beat a murder indictment with The Rule, but it does not surprise me one bit that, in your experience, such cases were rare. It’s a hard defence to mount. In fact, from my understanding, it is far more likely that an insane person will be convicted as a sane person than the other way around.

Anyway, all the best to you and yours, too, and thanks for sharing your experiences. They’re always interesting to read and useful to take note of.

Hi there A.J.PHILIPS...

Your first paragraph was indeed interesting, given how 'worn and torn' poor ol' McNAGHTEN has now become. As I mentioned earlier, I thought with time, judicial scholars would've looked at modifying or revising, the Insanity test in collaboration with our learned Psychiatric scholars. Yet for some reason they appear somewhat reticent in tackling this old fashioned, 1834 Judgement, that's prompted so many argument, in and outside Courts of law?

Like your State of Queensland, NSW is also quite intransigent, in shifting from this position as well. In my 32 years, one particular homicide matter, of which I had substantial responsible for; was; Archibald Beattie McCAFFERTY - three counts of wilful Murder. Long and short of it - police & DPP agreed, notwithstanding Archie was clearly a very disturbed individual, at the time of the murder, he knew precisely what he was doing, was wrong.

I will freely admit to you A.J.P., though I never actually feared many individuals in my time in the job; I did fear Archie, if ever he managed to get behind me, I was in trouble. I was bigger, he was only of medium build and height (5ft 10" or 5ft 11"). He somehow managed to project this aura, of sheer malevolence. Which tended to unsettle all those around him, including other detectives. As it was me, who spoke with him mostly, nevertheless others became watchful and guarded in his presence.

It was my humble opinion he was attempting to project himself, as a 'Charles MANSON' figure, which of course we couldn't or wouldn't condone. I was amazed he didn't manage to have his charges dealt with pursuant to McNAGHTEN? Everyone who had anything to do with him described him as being mad! There you go eh. Last info. I had, he's back in Scotland having been deported at the expiration of his sentence - what price three lives I wonder?

Thank you very much for your most kind sentiments, they're greatly appreciated indeed.

Oh Steelie with African American jobless at an All time low i thought you regressives would concede just a little. Like i said hatred really blinds you lot.

runner: Oh Steelie

Steelie? Steelie! I didn't see a post from me ol' mate Steelie. I thought Steelie must have copped one in Syria we haven't heard from her for so long.

Sudanese woman on ACA says The Centrelink money is not enough one of her kids in in jail she has 6 of them in total.

Here is the worst part of her interview.
Quote "Ms Awur said she still relies on her mother for extra money, and can empathise with those who have turned to crime to get by."

She has empathy for the criminals nothing for the victims, just deport the son and tell her she will be next if any more of her kids turn to crime.

Total sponge on society, in Sudan she and others get nothing from the government so why aren't ALL the kids in Sudan criminals?
Sorry you are a bad parent.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5245937/Sudanese-mother-blames-Melbourne-crime-unemployment.html#readerCommentsCommand-message-field

This women is unbelievable now she is blaming "She also says there are 'too many laws' in Australia, and kids find it 'confusing'"

A few of the common crimes by Africans.
Theft
breaking and entry
violent assaults
rape
stealing cars
So in Sudan these are not criminal offenses, if they are what is the confusion?

Quote "She claims she occasionally has to deprive them of entertainment, which she believes may have led her son to crime."
Would anyone believe her son stole things and bought the money home to give to his brothers and sisters to entertain them? BS.

Quote "they can't make money, so they end up in drugs, smoke and drink,' she said. Someone should tell her if they did not smoke, drink and take drugs they would have enough money.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5246857/Sudanese-mum-says-laws-Australia.html

And we get back to the fact, that wars in Sudan, and these other poverty
ridden countries are not the fault of Western countries.

6 or more kids is the norm in Sudan and so they have overpopulation and as a result poverty and war.

Why do the do gooders in the West think this is their fault.
It is the way theses countries are run, and the non disciplined behaviour of the boys and men.

CHERFUL - One of the reasons these countries have such large families is the kids are the parents pension because all of them (being the countries) have no social security net.

Just in today;
https://www.9news.com.au/national/2018/01/10/18/34/mental-impairment-defence-attacked-by-former-premier

I'm with him.

Has anyone blamed gw for these crimes yet?

No runner not that I have seen.
Go ahead be the first.
No one has blamed the train troubles on it yet as well.