I wouldn't trust a judge as far as I could throw one.

Dear mhaze,

Jeff Kennett has shown a remarkable ability to assess peoples character in the past, most notably that of John Howard but here he is just shooting from the hip.

It was noted in the Court of Appeal judgement that;

“In the past, in cases of alleged sexual abuse, juries were warned, in strong terms, of the dangers of convicting in the absence of corroboration. The law has changed in that regard. That makes the task of intermediate appellate courts charged with having to review the safety of convictions in such cases a particularly important and onerous one.”

That is Victorian Law which has changed, not Federal.

Will this mean we will see more conflicts between the two in the future? More than likely I feel.

Opinion,

"I wouldn't trust a judge as far as I could throw one."

But then you don't know any Judges, do you?

All the ones that I've known I would trust implicitly; they have all been hardworking decent people and not known for claiming dubious degrees.

SR

"Jeff Kennett has shown a remarkable ability to assess peoples character in the past"

OK...I didn't mention Kennett, but thanks for the insight anyway.

"That is Victorian Law which has changed, not Federal."

OK...so?

I think you'll find that the HC evaluated the case as regards Victorian Law, not Federal Law. Is there even a Federal Law as regards sexual assault in non-Federal jurisdictions?

Is Mise,

"In fact, Judges of the High Court can be removed from office."

Theoretically true. But its never happened.
Anyway we were talking about removal of judges further down the totem pole. Again, theoretically they can be removed, but its so rare as to effectively non-existent.

But then you don't know any Judges, do you?
Is Mise,
I met a former High Court Judge a few years back who by then was involved in other do-gooder schemes.
I found him to be exceedingly ignorant in matters everyday !

mhaze,

No, you didn't mention Kennett, but SR, who claims not to read my posts,and has historically hated my guts, lies in wait so that he can attack other posters who might agree with me and, even if they don't agree with me, disagree with his ultra left views and his unpleasant, combative manner.

As you say, the removal of judges is theoretical. I'm beginning to think that our Constitution is just theoretical, too. At least in the eyes of politicians. It would be good to have articles from David Flint, one of the very few constitutional lawyers prepared to share his knowledge, gratis, for the benefit of society. Not that society is always interested of course. Ignorance is bliss applies quite a lot in Australia.