Search

Woman charged after NT Chief Minister hit in the face with crepe

A 56-year-old woman is facing charges in connection with an alleged assault on Northern Territory Chief Minister Natasha Fyles, following an incident that occurred in her local electorate. The incident unfolded at Nightcliff Markets in Darwin at approximately 11:40am on Sunday September 24. According to law enforcement authorities, a member of the public reportedly thrust a crepe covered in cream into Fyles' face during the incident. Police confirmed on Monday morning September 25 that a 56-year-old woman has been charged with aggravated assault in relation to the incident. The accused has been granted bail and is scheduled to appear in court on October 10. It has since come to light that Chief Minister Fyles is a regular visitor to the Nightcliff Markets, often attending on Sundays. Nightcliff Markets manager, Ross Dudgeon, <a href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/northern-territory-news-chief-minister-natasha-fyles-allegedly-assaulted-at-nightcliff-markets/122ad004-153f-48e6-85d2-5cf66261dc0a" target="_blank" rel="noopener">spoke highly of her to 9News</a>, describing her as approachable and friendly. Dudgeon recounted that one of the stallholders had witnessed the incident, stating, "I had a report from one of the stallholders that they saw a woman pour something over Natasha Fyles' head." He mentioned that the incident occurred shortly after Ms Fyles had participated in an event celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Bendigo Bank. Dudgeon emphasised the friendly and welcoming atmosphere of the market, where Ms Fyles often enjoyed breakfast or a smoothie with her family on Sunday mornings. He has overseen the market for two decades, and said that it has always been community-oriented in nature. Darwin Lord Mayor Kon Vatskalis was also present at the event with Ms Fyles but had departed before the alleged assault took place. Reacting to the incident, Mayor Vatskalis expressed his shock, describing it as "disgusting". He further remarked that, in his 30 years in Darwin, he had never witnessed anything of this nature. "I just saw the very confronting video and I think this is disgusting," he said. "I have never seen anything like that in Darwin in the 30 years I've been here." This incident follows a previous incident in May of this year, during which Ms Fyles was reportedly followed and harassed by anti-fracking protesters while participating in a running competition in Central Australia. Images: 9News / Tiktok

Legal

Qantas chief executive issues second apology

Qantas chief executive Vanessa Hudson has issued a second apology, as the airline continues to try and fix its reputation and win back customers' trust amid recent controversy over its <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/jubilant-scenes-as-high-court-hands-down-judgment-against-qantas" target="_blank" rel="noopener">unlawful mass firing</a>. In a video message released on Friday, Hudson, who replaced chief executive Alan Joyce earlier this month, said she understood customer’s frustration and apologised for the airline’s recent track record. “I know that we have let you down in many ways and for that, I am sorry,” she said. “We haven't delivered the way we should have. And we’ve often been hard to deal with.” This apology comes just weeks after the new chief executive apologised to their staff and said that the new management will be more focused on their customers. Hudson has also promised to rectify the airline's problems. “We understand we need to earn back your trust not with what we say, but with what we do and how we behave,” she said. She added that customers can expect more frequent flyer seats, improved resources for call centres, and a review of customer policies, assuring customers that their frontline teams will be granted more flexibility “to better help you when things don't go to plan”. “This has been a humbling period,” she said. Images: Qantas/ news.com.au

Travel Trouble

Kathleen Folbigg pardoned after 20 years behind bars

Jailed in 2003 and considered at the time to be Australia’s most prolific female serial killer, Kathleen Folbigg has now been pardoned over the death of her four children and will be released without delay. Folbigg, 55, was convicted of killing her three children Patrick, Sarah and Laura, and was also found guilty of the manslaughter of her firstborn Caleb between 1989 to 1999. Her babies were aged between 19 days and 19 months. The historic convictions have not been quashed as that can only be done through the Court of Criminal Appeal. Folbigg has always maintained her innocence, insisting that her children had each died of natural causes, and as a result she has served 20 years of a minimum 25-year prison sentence. NSW Attorney General Michael Daley announced the pardon, saying Folbigg had endured “a terrible ordeal” and there was a possibility she could sue the government if the convictions were quashed, a legal step which goes beyond a pardon. "What is the difference between today and what has transpired in the past? New evidence has come to light," he said, referring to new scientific evidence submitted in an inquiry into the death of the babies. Former NSW Chief Justice Tom Bathurst KC is leading the inquiry and is now writing up a final report for the NSW governor. Daley said he had received a phone from Chief Justice Bathurst last week that "he had come to a firm view" about what the outcome of his report would be. Prosecutors argued Folbigg smothered her children during periods of frustration and insisted that some of her diary entries were admissions of guilt. New scientific evidence has now cast sufficient doubt on her guilt. Folbigg and her two daughters were found to carry a rare genetic variant, CALM2-G114R, which can cause cardiac arrhythmia and sudden death. According to cardiology and genetic experts, the genetic verity was a “reasonably possible cause” of Sarah and Laura’s death. The variant was not found in Caleb or Patrick. Images: Facebook

News

Can juries still deliver justice in high-profile cases in the age of social media?

The recent <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-was-the-lehrmann-trial-aborted-and-what-happens-next-193382" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sudden end</a> to the Bruce Lehrmann trial last month raises again whether the jury is fit for purpose in a 21st century hyper-connected world. That jury’s service in the Lehrmann case ended peremptorily after it was revealed to the judge that material downloaded from the internet (which was highly relevant to the case and not introduced as evidence) had been found in the jury room. A retrial has been <a href="https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/courts-law/bruce-lehrmann-retrial-confirmed-for-2023-says-act-director-of-public-prosecutions-shane-drumgold/news-story/6012323f3d863985ce5a001f10a3a7eb" target="_blank" rel="noopener">set for late February</a>. Lehrmann had been accused of raping former Liberal Party staffer Brittany Higgins, to which he pleaded not guilty. The costs so far (to both parties and the court) could well exceed a million dollars. With easy access to the internet available to any juror who owns a mobile phone, is it conceivable that all jurors will abide by the strict instructions of a judge admonishing them to pay attention only to the evidence adduced in the trial? Are instructions to jurors to avoid media sources meaningless given the accessibility of the internet? These aren’t new questions. In 2005, <a href="https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/researchpapers/Documents/trial-by-jury-recent-developments/jury%20and%20index.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">a report</a> prepared for the NSW Parliamentary Library Research Service observed: <blockquote> Prominent cases in recent years […] have illustrated the legal problems that can occur when jurors, despite judicial instructions to confine their deliberations to the evidence before them, undertake their own research, discuss the case with non-jurors, or visit a place connected with the offence. The increasing amount of legal information available on the internet is a cause for particular concern. The Jury Amendment Act 2004 […] prohibits jurors from making inquiries about the accused or issues in the trial, except in the proper exercise of juror functions. </blockquote> But for all the warnings and threats of consequences, a juror may still stray down <a href="http://www.lawfoundation.net.au/ljf/site/templates/grants/$file/UNSW_Jury_Study_Hunter_2013.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the path of private sleuth</a>. It’s easy to do and Australians have a voracious appetite for social media. In 2018 <a href="https://www.yellow.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Yellow-Social-Media-Report-2018-Consumer.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">a survey reported</a> 62% of Australian adults use social media sites every day, and 34% use them more than five times a day. This becomes particularly problematic when the eyes of the world are fixed on cases such as these. The sudden and unexpected end to the Lehrmann trial prompts a more fundamental question: should we continue to persist with juries at all? <h2>Two sides</h2> There are two sides to the argument regarding retention of the jury. On the one hand, juries have stood the test of time. The idea of being tried by one’s peers was entrenched by the <a href="https://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/articles/magna-carta-and-jury-trial" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Magna Carta of 1215</a>. Even though the jury as we know it didn’t crystallise until about 350 years ago and has been through a number of permutations since then, there would be few people who could argue against its symbolic legitimacy given its staying power. Over that time, juries have been given sustained examination in Australia by the <a href="https://www.lawreform.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/Publications/Reports/Report-48.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">New South Wales Law Reform Commission</a>, the Queensland <a href="https://www.ccc.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/Docs/Publications/CJC/The-jury-system-in-criminal-trials-in-qld-Issues-paper-1991.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Criminal Justice Commission</a>, the <a href="https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/committees/lawrefrom/jury_service/report_volume_1.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Victorian Law Reform Committee</a>, and most recently by academics at <a href="https://cdn.csu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/3452182/Jury-Reasoning-v2-NEW-BRANDING.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Charles Sturt University</a>, to name a few. Juries have survived largely intact throughout this exercise. On the other hand, there are doubts about their efficiency. Juries took a hit after the High Court decision <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-jury-may-be-out-on-the-jury-system-after-george-pells-successful-appeal-135814" target="_blank" rel="noopener">in the George Pell appeal</a> where the judges, in allowing the appeal, ruled that no jury, properly instructed, could have reached a guilty verdict in his trial. What’s more, it’s overstated to say that trial by jury is a fundamental bulwark of fairness in the criminal justice system. Indeed, 92% of criminal matters in Australia are dealt with in the <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/crime-and-justice/criminal-courts-australia/latest-release" target="_blank" rel="noopener">magistrates courts</a>, where there are no juries. Of the remaining 8% referred to the “superior” criminal courts (Supreme, District and County), more and more defendants are choosing “judge alone” trials (in jurisdictions where that option is available). For example, in NSW, <a href="https://theconversation.com/jury-is-out-why-shifting-to-judge-alone-trials-is-a-flawed-approach-to-criminal-justice-137397" target="_blank" rel="noopener">up to a quarter of accused persons</a> are now electing to be tried without a jury. Other studies have highlighted how jurors <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0194659507000470" target="_blank" rel="noopener">overrate DNA evidence</a> despite judicial directions, which may lead to <a href="https://researchdirect.westernsydney.edu.au/islandora/object/uws:10533" target="_blank" rel="noopener">far more jury convictions</a> than are warranted, and how jurors’ perceptions of guilt and innocence can be affected by the <a href="https://researchdirect.westernsydney.edu.au/islandora/object/uws:44141" target="_blank" rel="noopener">positioning of defendants</a> in the courtroom. <a href="https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:331175" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Another study</a> found that although jurors report they understand directions, they often don’t appear to use those directions in arriving at a decision. And finally, as the Lehrmann trial has illustrated, it’s not unusual for jurors to ignore or misunderstand the instructions that have been given to them. But, what about the ability of juries to apply some of their own “commonsense” justice? True, there are examples of juries wielding their own commonsense stick. For example, a verdict that <a href="https://www.coursehero.com/file/p7dtm6g/R-v-R-1981-28-SASR-321-South-Australian-Supreme-Court-King-CJ-Jacobs-Zelling-JJ/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">occurred in 1981</a> when a South Australian jury returned a verdict of not guilty for a woman who had been charged with the murder of her husband. The jury decided that the defence of provocation (only available to reduce murder to manslaughter) exonerated her, figuring that, in the time before the victim’s death, his severe and persistent abuse of his family had pushed his wife to breaking point. There is, however, a contrary argument. Research has revealed that “commonsense” <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lapo.12181" target="_blank" rel="noopener">comes with coded biases</a>, such that telling jurors to use their commonsense is futile, given it’s difficult (if not impossible) to erode such biases. <h2>Are there other options?</h2> One alternative to the jury is mixed judiciaries used in some European countries, where one may find a panel of judges or <a href="https://academic.oup.com/book/32863/chapter/275978049?login=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener">a combination of judges and lay people</a>. But the common law world has never looked like following that lead. Another alternative in use in Australia is a judge alone trial, although <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/RP9697/97rp11" target="_blank" rel="noopener">that option</a> isn’t always available, and by virtue of <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/RP9697/97rp11" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Section 80 of the Constitution</a> isn’t available in a trial of a serious federal offence. Indeed, there’s no guarantee that judges themselves are immune from social media influences. While there’s a widespread belief that judges are more capable than juries of putting <a href="https://chelmsfordlegal.com.au/trial-by-judge-alone-is-it-possible-and-if-so-is-it-preferable/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">to one side their own prejudices</a>, the rules regarding sub judice contempt (discussing publicly a matter that is before a court in a manner that may influence the outcome) applies equally to judge alone and jury trials. Adding to the policy confusion, there’s some evidence trials by judge alone do make a difference to the outcome. The NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics <a href="https://stacklaw.com.au/news/criminal-law/trial-by-jury-vs-trial-by-judge-alone-whats-the-difference/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">examined NSW trials between 1993 and 2011</a> and found defendants were acquitted 55.4% of the time in a judge alone trial, compared to 29% in a jury trial. Another reform idea is to allow jurors to <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=dMsPrLwAAAAJ&citation_for_view=dMsPrLwAAAAJ:7PzlFSSx8tAC" target="_blank" rel="noopener">raise questions with the judge</a> during breaks in the trial, including asking about things they may have “accidentally” come across on social media. A judge could send the jury out while the lawyers present to the judge how they think the questions should be handled and answered. However, this idea has yet to excite policymakers. In the end, we must accept there are flaws in jury process. But finding acceptable alternatives has proved difficult, hence the reluctance of governments to abandon the status quo. Judges will continue to warn against private sleuthing, but one suspects that it will, from time to time, continue regardless. One can only hope the disaster that befell the Lehrmann trial sends a salutary lesson to prospective jurors henceforth: listen to what the judge tells you, and during the course of the trial leave your favourite search engine alone. This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/can-juries-still-deliver-justice-in-high-profile-cases-in-the-age-of-social-media-193843" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>. Image: ABC

Legal

“Have a second phone”: Aussie spy chief’s warning on social media use

MPs have been urged to use a second phone if they want to access social media apps such as TikTok, after one of Australia’s top spy bosses spoke about how these apps use our personal information. Rachel Noble, the Director-General of the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD), recommended that politicians and their staff should adopt the practice during a Senate estimates hearing. She also said that having a phone without access to social media was the only way to have “absolute certainty” of data privacy. “Our advice was, frankly, for people who are members of parliament who might be particularly targets of espionage … that if you wanted absolute certainty that your social media app couldn’t have access to those things … would be to have a second phone which you exclusively use for that,” Ms Noble said. The warning comes after it was reported earlier this year that the ASD had confidential meetings with politicians and their staff to warn them that some apps undertake excessive data collection and request access to contact lists, location data and photos. Last year, the Department of Home Affairs restricted TikTok use on work phones, joining the Department of Defence in doing so. During the hearing, Ms Noble said that in some cases social media apps were collecting additional information extending “beyond the content of messages, videos and voice recordings”. “Social media apps are monetising what you do on your phone, what you access, what you look at for how long, who your friends are – they will seek to get demographics of your friends in order to push you the information and get you to buy things,” she said. With some apps headquartered outside Australia, such as China, Ms Noble said the information collected could be accessed legally or be subject to covert collection. Sectors of the Australian public service aren’t the only ones restricting use of social media apps on work phones, with parliaments in the United States and New Zealand warning against using TikTok on government devices. Image: Getty Images

Technology

The High Court of Australia has a majority of women justices for the first time

In appointing Justice Jayne Jagot to the High Court, the Albanese government has made history: for the first time, the court will have a majority of women on its bench. We have come a long way. At the turn of the 20th century, women were not permitted to practise law in any Australian jurisdiction. And even when those formal barriers to admission were eventually removed, informal barriers meant the law remained a man’s world. For more than 80 years after its establishment in 1903, the High Court of Australia remained the exclusive preserve of men. It was not until 1987 that Mary Gaudron, became the first woman to serve on the court. Women have been appointed to the High Court with some regularity over the past decade. Yet only seven women have been appointed of a total of 56 justices. The first woman to serve as Chief Justice of the High Court, Susan Kiefel, was sworn-in in 2017. Justice Jayne Jagot will replace Justice Patrick Keane on the High Court, which means four of the seven justices will be women. In <a href="https://ministers.pmc.gov.au/dreyfus/2022/appointment-high-court-australia" target="_blank" rel="noopener">announcing</a> the appointment, Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus explicitly acknowledged the historical significance of the appointment, noting “this is the first time since Federation that a majority of Justices on the High Court will be women”. He described the new judge as an “outstanding lawyer and an eminent judge”. The government is largely unrestrained in making their appointments beyond a <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2004A02147" target="_blank" rel="noopener">requirement</a> they consult with state attorneys-general and the appointee meets the minimum qualifications of admission as a legal practitioner. Certainly, there is nothing that compels the government to consider the value of diversity in making its appointments. Moreover, there is little transparency and accountability in the process – the government is not required to shortlist against publicly available selection criteria or to account for its decision-making. <h2>Australia needs greater transparency in appointing judges</h2> Calls to reform High Court appointment practice to improve diversity, transparency and accountability are not new. Importantly, these criticisms have very rarely been personal (about the suitability of individual appointees). However, these calls were renewed in 2020 in response to allegations that Dyson Heydon had sexually harassed legal associates during his time as a Justice on the High Court of Australia. In an <a href="https://theconversation.com/deep-cultural-shifts-required-open-letter-from-500-legal-women-calls-for-reform-of-way-judges-are-appointed-and-disciplined-142042" target="_blank" rel="noopener">open letter</a> to then Attorney-General Christian Porter, more than 500 legal women called for reforms to how Australia appoints and disciplines its judges. It called for shortlisting against publicly available criteria, including legal knowledge, skill and expertise, as well as essential personal qualities (such as integrity and good character). It was further proposed that the value of diversity in judicial appointments should also be respected in formulating criteria. More recently, the Australian Law Reform Commission’s new <a href="https://www.alrc.gov.au/news/without-fear-or-favour/#:%7E:text=The%20ALRC%20concluded%20that%2C%20given,public%20confidence%20in%20the%20judiciary." target="_blank" rel="noopener">report</a> on judicial impartiality outlined a series of recommendations. One of those recommendations was for a more transparent process for the appointment of federal judicial officers. Historically, there has been little appetite for formal reforms to High Court appointment practices. Successive governments have often <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1037969X1504000305" target="_blank" rel="noopener">avoided explicitly</a> commenting on the value of a more diverse judiciary. It remains to be seen whether the government will seek to implement formal reforms. However, Dreyfus is <a href="https://www.auspublaw.org/blog/2022/08/the-alrc-on-judicial-impartiality-and-the-momentum-towards-judicial-appointments-reform" target="_blank" rel="noopener">understood</a> to be sympathetic to a more open and transparent appointment process. In announcing the most recent appointment, he explained the extensive consultation undertaken by the government, which was certainly more far-reaching than we have seen in recent years. It consulted with all state and territory attorneys-general, the heads of the federal courts, and state and territory supreme courts. It also spoke with state and territory bar associations and law societies, National Legal Aid, Australian Women Lawyers, the National Association of Community Legal Centres and deans of law schools. Justice Jagot’s appointment has been <a href="https://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/wig-chamber/35635-lawyers-laud-historic-appointment-of-jayne-jagot-to-high-court" target="_blank" rel="noopener">widely praised</a> within the legal profession. Although legal commentators emphasised that it was a welcome milestone for women, it was nonetheless <a href="https://www.afr.com/politics/labor-gets-it-right-with-latest-high-court-pick-20220929-p5blyq" target="_blank" rel="noopener">framed</a> as something of a happy (if politically expedient) coincidence given her eminence as a jurist. <h2>Why do women judges matter?</h2> In answering this, it is worth remembering the classic quote from Ruth Bader Ginsburg in response to questions about when there will be “enough” women judges on the United States Supreme Court. Ginsburg replied there would enough <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/nov/30/justice-ginsburg-all-female-supreme-court" target="_blank" rel="noopener">when there were nine</a> (that is, all of them). Acknowledging that people were shocked by this response, Ginsburg famously countered <blockquote> there’s been nine men, and nobody’s ever raised a question about that. </blockquote> This exchange demonstrates how accustomed we are to the idea that judging is the domain of men. This very notion is reminiscent of the question posed by American lawyer Carrie Menkel-Meadow: “what would our legal system look like if women had not been excluded from its creation?” We can never know the answer to this question. Nor can these institutions necessarily be remade in a way that escapes their masculinist origins. And yet, a majority of women judges sitting on an apex court is still significant, both nationally and internationally. The process of “letting women in” has chipped away at these foundations and opened up possibilities for transformation. This is not because there is a distinctive women’s judicial voice (there isn’t). It is because a majority of women judges sitting on the High Court makes an important symbolic statement about women’s admission to legal authority in Australia. When an institution once occupied only by men admits women into its space, the <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Law-Women-Judges-and-the-Gender-Order-Lessons-from-the-High-Court-of-Australia/McLoughlin/p/book/9780367230357#:%7E:text=Resources%20Support%20Material-,Book%20Description,Court's%20historically%20masculinist%20gender%20regime." target="_blank" rel="noopener">existing gender</a> relations and gender norms cannot remain unaffected. We saw this in 2020 with the revelations about sexual harassment on the High Court and Chief Justice Susan Kiefel’s decisive response, which was widely praised. The admission of women to historically masculine domains does have the potential to disrupt institutional norms. Australia is certainly not the first apex court to have a majority of women justices. For example, the Federal Court of Malaysia has a <a href="https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/node/224" target="_blank" rel="noopener">majority</a>(8/14) of women. But compared with other Western democracies, Australia has been progressive on this issue. In the UK, there is currently one woman on a bench of 12; in the US 4/9, New Zealand 3/6 and Canada 4/9. Of course, there will always be those who say gender shouldn’t matter. But gender has always mattered. It mattered for the first 80 years when only men were permitted to exercise legal authority at the peak of our legal system. And it still matters in 2022, when the High Court has a majority women justices for the first time. This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-high-court-of-australia-has-a-majority-of-women-justices-for-the-first-time-heres-why-that-matters-191675" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>. Image: Shutterstock

Legal

Lynette Dawson's family responds to guilty verdict

Lynette Dawson’s family have called for one final request from Chris Dawson after he was <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/news/news/stunning-chris-dawson-verdict-handed-down" target="_blank" rel="noopener">found guilty of murdering his wife</a> after she “disappeared” 40 years ago. Justice Ian Harrison found Chris Dawson guilty of Lynette’s murder - 40 years after she went missing from the family home in Sydney's Northern Beaches in January 1982. The trial, which gained worldwide traction thanks to the podcast Teacher’s Pet, saw the incredible decision handed down following a seven week trial and a marathon four hour ruling. Lynette’s brother, Greg Simms has said justice has finally been served after she was murdered by someone who loved her. “I’m a little emotional - after 40 years, my sister has been vindicated,” he said. “This verdict is for Lyn. Today her name has been cleared. “The court has found what we believed to be true for so many years: Chris Dawson took the life of our beloved Lyn back in 1982.” Unfortunately, Lynette’s parents and other brother passed away in the years following her murder, not knowing what would come out of the case. Mr Simms has since called on Dawson to do the right thing and reveal where he buried Lynette so she can finally rest in peace. “We would also love to remember those who loved Lyn who are not here to see this judgement,” he said. “She is still missing, we still need to bring her home. “We would ask Chris Dawson to find it in himself to finally do the decent thing and allow us to bring Lyn home to a peaceful rest, finally show her the dignity she deserves.” When the case reopened, Dawson requested a judge-only trial due to the popularity of the Teacher’s Pet podcast, stating that the jury would have their decisions impacted by it. This required Justice Harrison to outline the reasons behind his decision also saying that the prosecution had to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Lynette was dead, that Dawson had killed her with the possible involvement of assistance of others, and that he disposed of her body. The Supreme Court justice shared several findings to support his decision and weighed in on evidence presented during the trial, including ruling that Lynette had died on the date alleged by the prosecution and dismissing claims from Dawson that he contacted his wife as “lies”. Justice Harrison said it was “simply absurd” and defied “common sense” that Lynette would be in contact with the person “who was the reason for her departure” from her home. He also ruled that Lynette didn’t leave home voluntarily, with the prosecution providing multiple reasons that were “strongly persuasive” when considered together, including that she adored her children, hadn’t taken any clothing or personal items with her, was mentally stable, and was dependent on her husband to drive her everywhere. “Lynette Dawson is dead … she died on or about 8 January 1982 and she did not voluntarily abandon her home,” he told the court. Justice Harrison dismissed claims from the defence that Lynette was spotted after January 8. He found that Dawson told JC, “Lyn’s gone, she’s not coming back, come back to Sydney and help look after the kids and live with me”, when he picked her up from a camping trip at South West Rocks with friends between January 10 and 12. However, he said that he disagreed with claims that Dawson was motivated to kill his wife because of financial reasons, nor that he had in his mind that he would kill her when he left with JC. “That decision was made following their return and after the teen had left for South-West Rocks,” Justice Harrison said. He said that he was “satisfied” that Dawson resolved to kill Lynette while JC was camping. Following the verdict, Dawson was taken into custody, with his lawyer, Greg Walsh, telling Justice Harrison that Dawson would likely apply for bail before his sentencing hearing, a date for which hasn’t been set yet.

News

“Absolutely despicable”: Teens attack off-duty chief inspector with pole

A Sydney mayor has condemned an alleged attack against an off-duty police officer, describing the act as “absolutely despicable”. Chief Inspector Bob Fitzgerald, who also serves as a councillor with Blacktown City Council, was on his way to work on Monday morning when he intervened when three teenagers were seen harassing other passengers and railway staff at Rooty Hill station, per <a href="https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-nsw/senior-cop-allegedly-assaulted-by-three-teens-at-rooty-hill-train-station/news-story/de5e5f399ce968fc04a2a1b6800f2849" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Daily Telegraph</a>. Police said Inspector Fitzgerald approached the teens, aged 14, 13, and 12, at about 4.30 am and asked them to stop what they were doing, informing them he was a police officer. When he went to arrest the 14-year-old with the help of a member of the public, the boy resisted before verbally abusing and assaulting Inspector Fitzgerald, police allege. It’s alleged Inspector Fitzgerald was struck multiple times to the head with a bike seat pole. He was taken to hospital for head injuries that required stitches and was later released. The member of the public was also allegedly assaulted but didn’t require medical attention. More police rushed to the station, arresting all three boys and taking them to Mount Druitt police station. Tony Bleasdable, the mayor of Blacktown City, said on Tuesday that he condemned the attack on Inspector Fitzgerald, who he described as “one of our city’s finest”. “Cr Fitzgerald is a pillar of our community who has earned widespread respect over many years,” Mr Bleasdale said. “Not only is he a dedicated police officer, he is a community volunteer, and a passionate Blacktown City Councillor who has given so much to his community for so long. “As mayor, I condemn this alleged attack on one of our city’s finest and denounce violence in all its forms.” Mr Bleasdale said the council wanted to promote a culture of nonviolence through their work with NSW Police, the PCYC and other organisations, and encouraged residents to call out violence before wishing Inspector Fitzgerald a speedy recovery. “Council is committed to creating a safe community for our residents to live, work and play,” he said. “We pursue this through our crime prevention plan and work with our local police in particular. “Council encourages residents to call out violence in any shape or form and report any acts of violence to police. “I wish Bob a speedy recovery.” All three boys were charged with affray, with the 14-year-old facing another charge for resisting an officer in execution of duty, and the 13-year-old facing charges for causing grievous bodily harm to a police officer on duty reckless as to actual bodily harm and common assault. The 12-year-old was also charged with causing grievous bodily harm to a police officer on duty reckless to actual bodily harm. They were refused bail and faced children’s court on Tuesday. As police inquiries continue, anyone who witnessed the attack or who have footage from the incident, are urged to contact Mt Druitt Police Station or Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000. Image: The Daily Telegraph

News

George Floyd deserved a better life

George Perry Floyd, Jr. was murdered when Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin sank his knee into Floyd’s neck for nine minutes and 29 seconds. Video footage went viral within hours, helping to inspire protests against racism and police violence that lasted all the American summer of 2020. But while the size of the protests was unprecedented, the activism of that summer had <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-fury-in-us-cities-is-rooted-in-a-long-history-of-racist-policing-violence-and-inequality-139752" target="_blank" rel="noopener">deep roots</a>. Journalists across the United States and indeed the world, focused attention on that history of protest, as they had done during the 2014 police killings of Eric Garner, choked to death in New York, and Michael Brown, shot in Ferguson, Missouri. At the Washington Post, reporters and researchers devoted significant resources to a six-part series, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/10/12/george-floyd-america/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">George Floyd’s America</a>. Now, two of those journalists, Robert Samuels and Toluse Olorunnipa, have expanded the work into a book: <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/703358/his-name-is-george-floyd-by-robert-samuels-and-toluse-olorunnipa/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">His Name Is George Floyd: One Man’s Life and the Struggle for Racial Justice</a>. When Floyd was born in 1973, 200,000 people were incarcerated in the US. By the time of his death, as Samuels and Olorunnipa point out, that number exceeded 2 million. The proportionate rate of growth of that number in <a href="https://usafacts.org/data/topics/security-safety/crime-and-justice/jail-and-prisons/prisoners/?utm_source=usnews&utm_medium=partnership&utm_campaign=fellowship&utm_content=bracketed_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Texas</a>, where Floyd grew up, is even worse. <a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2021-10-13/report-highlights-staggering-racial-disparities-in-us-incarceration-rates" target="_blank" rel="noopener">African Americans are locked up at 4.75 times the rate of white Americans; Latinos at 1.3 times the rate</a>. This <a href="https://www.sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/intl-rates.png" target="_blank" rel="noopener">extraordinary rate of incarceration</a> is a political choice rather than a reflection of more violent criminals being locked up. Rates of incarceration <a href="https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=ED19CF648065ABC51FE1605ED5D77E32?doi=10.1.1.462.6544&rep=rep1&type=pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">increase</a> with political conservatism and the increased rates of poverty, income inequality and unemployment that accompany that conservatism. Extensive investment in prisons, jails and police forces has created a self-perpetuating system that evolves by producing the very criminals it locks up. This life-and-times biography poignantly depicts the mechanisms by which African Americans, especially male children and adults, become disproportionately the fodder for that system. A long history of racism, it might be said, funnelled George Floyd to prison. <h2>The grandson of sharecroppers</h2> Floyd’s two parents were both born to <a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sharecropper" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sharecroppers</a> in North Carolina. The cycle of poverty in which they were trapped was not of their own making. Black Americans have been prevented from building wealth from the moment slavery ended. Floyd’s great-great-grandfather, for example, who was born into slavery in 1857, amassed land worth $US30,000 in 1920, but his white neighbours stole it from him by a mixture of fraud underpinned by the threat of violence. That tale is absolutely typical for a majority of Black families in the US South. The knock-on effects have been intensified by government policies that meant for generations, Black Americans had <a href="https://theconversation.com/to-see-the-legacy-of-slavery-look-at-present-day-school-systems-43896" target="_blank" rel="noopener">fewer opportunities for education</a>; <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/25/opinion/sunday/race-wage-gap.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">earned</a> <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/06/04/economic-divide-black-households/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">less</a> even for the same work; and were <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/11/17/1049052531/racial-covenants-housing-discrimination" target="_blank" rel="noopener">prevented</a> <a href="https://aas.princeton.edu/news/2020-pulitzer-prize-finalist-history-race-profit-how-banks-and-real-estate-industry-undermined" target="_blank" rel="noopener">from buying property</a> that would <a href="https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/12/4/20953282/racism-housing-discrimination-keeanga-yamahtta-taylor" target="_blank" rel="noopener">build wealth over generations</a>. Desperate for a better life for her three children, Floyd’s mother uprooted them to Houston, Texas, when Floyd was four. There, they lived in public housing in the segregated <a href="https://www.gpb.org/news/2020/07/20/george-floyds-third-ward-reflections-on-the-neighborhood-made-him" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Third Ward</a>. Government policies that requisitioned homes from Black residents elsewhere in Houston had forced them into this section of the city. In the Cuney Homes development, known as “the Bricks,” even today the median income is <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/george-floyd-neighborhood-stimulus/2021/04/09/59f57e7c-9623-11eb-962b-78c1d8228819_story.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">US$15,538</a>, well under half the <a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N" target="_blank" rel="noopener">national average</a>. Floyd attended the local Jack Yates Senior High School, opened in 1926 when education was segregated by race and never the equal of other Houston schools catering to white children. As Floyd grew to 193 centimetres tall, he learned to offset the alarm that his size and colour induced in people. He became self-deprecating and deliberately easy-going, charming people across generations everywhere he went. Excelling at football, he secured entry to college. But Floyd’s dreams of playing pro football were stymied by his academic achievements. Never good at tests, Floyd fell behind by middle school and struggled to graduate high school. There were just not the resources in the schools to make up for living in poverty in an overcrowded flat with the responsibilities of caring for relatives. After four years at two colleges, Floyd dropped out and returned to Houston. Not long after, he was arrested for the first time for selling drugs. Samuels and Olorunnipa do an extremely good job of showing that at every node along the passage toward being turned into fodder for the prison-industrial complex, Floyd’s chance of escape was significantly less than that of a white man of the same age. Reading how Floyd’s options narrowed, it was impossible not to share his frustration and despair. <h2>Forensic exposé of injustice</h2> Quotas for arrests meant police sought the “low-hanging fruit” of petty drug dealing done on the streets. Misconduct charges for these police officers are common: the cop who arrested Floyd in 1997 for selling drugs was sacked in 2002 after being charged with theft and hampering arrest. The officer who arrested Floyd in 2004 was “later accused of falsifying charges in hundreds of drug cases, including the one involving Floyd.” Chauvin himself had faced <a href="http://complaints.cuapb.org/police_archive/officer/2377/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">29 charges</a> of misconduct and internal investigations prior to murdering Floyd. (Only 18 appear on the city’s police internal affairs records.) But because <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/state-policing-reforms-george-floyds-murder" target="_blank" rel="noopener">records of “decertification” are patchy</a>, such “wandering” officers can often get themselves <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/wandering-cops-moving-from-department-to-department-is-a-roadblock-to-police-accountability" target="_blank" rel="noopener">rehired</a>. The officers can stay unaccountable by targeting impoverished men who, unable to afford lawyers, are more likely to accept plea deals. Floyd was never tried by jury; he rather accepted eight plea deals. He knew that even if he got to court, the decision was unlikely to be positive because the state of Texas does not provide public defenders. Rather, the court pays for a private lawyer to defend those who can’t afford their own representation. Judges in Harris County, where Houston is located, more often than not will appoint lawyers who had donated to their election campaigns. In 2007, police arrested Floyd for a violent assault on evidence provided by a dubious photo ID process. (It has since been improved.) Facing up to 40 years of prison, a reluctant Floyd accepted a plea deal for five. Claustrophobia made Floyd’s time in prison difficult, and yet he discovered that none of the mental health, drug addiction, or education programs included in legislation such as the notorious <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/1994-crime-bill-and-beyond-how-federal-funding-shapes-criminal-justice" target="_blank" rel="noopener">1994 Crime Bill</a>, which sloshed billions of dollars into prison building, were available. As the authors point out, it was only after the <a href="https://www.communitycatalyst.org/blog/how-structural-racism-fuels-the-response-to-the-opioid-crisis#.YtX8puxBxqs" target="_blank" rel="noopener">opioid crisis</a> hit white communities that such funds were expended. In short, whereas policymakers declared crack cocaine a crime problem, they saw opiate addictions, more commonly associated with white people, as an epidemic or public health emergency. The man responsible for prosecuting the case against Derek Chauvin, Jerry Blackwell, knew well the racism inherent at every level of what we uncritically call “the criminal justice system.” Blackwell anticipated the defence would claim that Floyd’s drug use or some physical anomaly was the reason he had died. He therefore required an independent medical examiner review the coronial findings into Floyd’s death. That person, and the examiner who worked for the Floyd family in the civil case against the city of Minneapolis (which the city settled before trial for a <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/03/13/976785212/minneapolis-agrees-to-pay-27-million-to-family-of-george-floyd" target="_blank" rel="noopener">record $US27 million</a>), both questioned whether the autopsy had been conducted correctly. Specifically, they doubted whether the incisions made on Floyd’s body were sufficient to ascertain the cause of death. And, indeed, the defence claimed that Floyd’s drug use and a supposedly enlarged heart had contributed to his death. This was not unique; as the authors report, in 2021 researchers found evidence that medical examiners “had misclassified or covered up nearly 17,000 deaths that involved police between 1980 and 2018”. All this detail might make the book sound dull, but the research is woven lightly through the account of Floyd’s life so as to maintain momentum. We learn too about Floyd’s family, friends, girlfriends, and his young daughter Gianna. The authors bring to life Floyd’s ability to take people as he found them, underpinned by a deep Christian faith in God. <h2>Activism</h2> The final third of the book, which focuses on events after Floyd’s death, is also gripping. Even as we know the outcome, the twists and turns in the criminal case against Chauvin make for heart-in-the-mouth reading. Chauvin was <a href="https://theconversation.com/relief-at-derek-chauvin-conviction-a-sign-of-long-history-of-police-brutality-159212" target="_blank" rel="noopener">convicted of murder and manslaughter</a> and is serving a 22-and-a-half year sentence. And in <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/07/derek-chauvin-sentenced-violating-george-floyd-civil-rights" target="_blank" rel="noopener">early July</a> a federal judge sentenced Chauvin to 21 years in prison for violating George Floyd’s civil rights – the sentence will be served concurrently.) Even more striking is the depiction of the bravery of protestors in Minneapolis and of Floyd’s family members, especially his brother, Philonise Floyd, as they seized an opportunity they never wanted – as spokespeople for justice. Joined by the civil rights veterans, the Reverends Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, Philonise campaigned hard for federal legislation to reform policing. Republican opposition to the hardest-hitting sections of the <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1280" target="_blank" rel="noopener">George Floyd Justice in Policing Act</a>, introduced to Congress in February 2021 by Rep. Karen Bass, meant the bill foundered – and has still not been passed. Unlike all the earlier sections of the book, the activism around police and legislative reform is not given quite the context it deserves. Although Samuels and Olorunnipa interviewed 400 people for their book, activists who have long campaigned against police brutality and for the <a href="https://www.versobooks.com/books/2426-the-end-of-policing" target="_blank" rel="noopener">dismantling</a> of the entire criminal justice system in favour of a society built on <a href="https://www.teenvogue.com/story/what-is-prison-abolition-movement" target="_blank" rel="noopener">equal distribution of resources</a>, such as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVjMNMG6Mxo" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Angela Davis</a> and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/17/magazine/prison-abolition-ruth-wilson-gilmore.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Ruthie Wilson Gilmore</a>, do not appear. Nor is there much comment on the <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/state-policing-reforms-george-floyds-murder" target="_blank" rel="noopener">efficacy of prior efforts</a> to reform the criminal justice system via legislation. Banning choke-holds, for instance, will not end police murders when Black lives are still not regarded as mattering as much as those of white people. This criticism aside, His Name is George Floyd is a monumental achievement – a work of activism in itself. Bringing Floyd vividly to life, it makes an impassioned and persuasive plea for the dignity and preciousness of life. The book’s cover deliberately evokes the <a href="https://www.torranceartmuseum.com/staffpicks/2021/1/7/i-am-a-man-written-by-hope-ezcurra" target="_blank" rel="noopener">posters held aloft during the 1968 workers’ strike in Memphis, Tennessee</a> (when Martin Luther King, Jr. was killed), that proclaimed “I Am a Man.” George Floyd was a man, too, who deserved a better life. This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/george-floyd-deserved-a-better-life-a-new-book-charts-his-trajectory-from-poverty-to-the-us-prison-industrial-complex-and-the-impact-of-his-death-182947" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>. Images: Penguin

Books

“May justice be done”: Ben Roberts-Smith’s trial comes to an end

The defamation trial launched by Ben Roberts-Smith against Nine newspapers has come to an end after four years, with Justice Anthony Besanko left with the final task of condemning or clearing the war veteran’s name. Mr Roberts-Smith’s lawyers are hoping that finding in their client’s favour will see his name cleared and result in the largest defamation payout in history, while a finding in favour of his journalist opponents could validate their claims he committed “the most heinous acts of criminality” while serving in the SAS. The lengthy case drew to a close on Wednesday after over 100 days of evidence, more than $25 million in legal fees and two weeks of closing speeches. Arthur Moses SC, Mr Roberts-Smith’s barrister, used his closing statement to push the fact that Nine had the burden of proof to prove their claims the Victoria Cross recipient had murdered unarmed prisoners, “(Nine) published allegations and stories as fact that condemned Mr Roberts-Smith as being guilty of the most heinous acts of criminality that could be made against a member of the Australian Defence Force, and indeed any citizen,” Mr Moses said. “It depends upon recollection of events that occurred during missions more than 10 years ago… Recollections which are contradicted either by their own witnesses, our witnesses and Defence Force documents.” “They have urged upon the court a case which is one of mere suspicion, surmise and guesswork to condemn a man, who served his nation with great distinction, as a war criminal.” Mr Moses called on Justice Besanko to reject Nine’s case “in all forms”. Meanwhile, Nicholas Owens SC, representing Nine, closed his case by returning to the claims and counterclaims, including the question of Mr Roberts-Smith’s motive in killing six detained Afghans when he had transported hundreds of others safely back to Australia bases, which Mr Roberts-Smith said Nine had left unanswered. When he opened his case in June 2021, Mr Owens said that even “the most brutal, vile member of the Taliban imaginable” can’t be killed once detained and “to do so is murder”. On Wednesday, he returned to this point and said Mr Roberts-Smith killed the detainees simply because they were “enemy combatants”. “We say that was a powerful motive that operated in relation to all of these incidents… it was a motive to kill Taliban insurgents regardless of the lawfulness of doing so,” Mr Owens told the court. Justice Besanko thanked lawyers on both sides, as well as the legal team for the Commonwealth government who had been on-hand every single day in court to keep highly classified material out of the public sphere. With the trial conducting itself in a combination of open and closed court, with sensitive information and testimonies being held in closed court, the full scope of evidence Justice Besanko must consider isn’t well-known. It is also unknown just how long it will take Justice Besanko to reach a verdict, given the sheer volume of evidence and documents, but it is expected to take many months. Nick McKenzie, one of the journalists Mr Roberts-Smith launched his case against, took to social media following the trial’s conclusion to summarise the claims made against Mr Roberts-Smith and call for justice to be done. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Roberts-Smith trial is now over, save for judgment. 4 years ago RS launched it. Such stress for all involved: SAS eye witnesses who accuse RS of murders/cliffkicking of innocent Afghan father, Afghans who witnessed the same, brave woman who spoke up about DV. May justice be done. — Nick McKenzie (@Ageinvestigates) <a href="https://twitter.com/Ageinvestigates/status/1552124223669149696?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 27, 2022</a></blockquote> “Roberts-Smith trial is now over, save for judgement,” the Age journalist wrote. “4 years ago RS (Roberts-Smith) launched it. Such stress for all involved: SAS eye witnesses who accuse RS of murders/kicking of innocent Afghan father, Afghans who witnessed the same, brave woman who spoke up about (domestic violence). “May justice be done.” Image: Getty Images

Legal

"Deeply saddened" Prince William demands "swift justice" for tragic death

Prince William has sent out a heartfelt message following the tragic death of a senior wildlife ranger in Africa that he met recently – while also pleading for “swift justice” in retaliation for the murder. "I'm deeply saddened to learn of the killing of Anton Mzimba who I spoke to in November," the Duke of Cambridge wrote in a tweet. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> I’m deeply saddened to learn of the killing of Anton Mzimba who I spoke to in November. Committed and brave, rangers like Anton are central to the conservation of Africa’s fantastic wildlife. Those responsible must swiftly be brought to justice. My thoughts are with his family. W — The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge (@KensingtonRoyal) <a href="https://twitter.com/KensingtonRoyal/status/1552313081367257089?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 27, 2022</a></blockquote> The head ranger at Timbavati had been the subject of ongoing death threats for quite a while, the non-profit organisation “Helping Rhinos” revealed when confirming news of his passing. "Anton Mzimba, was shot and killed outside of his home last night," the organisation tweeted on Wednesday July 26. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Head of Ranger at Timbavati, Anton Mzimba, was shot and killed outside of his home last night. This follows recent death threats and highlights the daily threat facing Rangers. Our deepest condolences to Anton’s loved ones and co-workers at this difficult time <a href="https://t.co/fRayloiFjB">pic.twitter.com/fRayloiFjB</a> — Helping Rhinos 🦏 (@HelpingRhinos) <a href="https://twitter.com/HelpingRhinos/status/1552240245088964608?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 27, 2022</a></blockquote> "This follows recent death threats and highlights the daily threat facing rangers. Our deepest condolences to Anton's loved ones and co-workers at this difficult time." Prince William spoke with Mzimba in a conference call in November 2021 during a visit to Microsoft headquarters, to learn more about how technology was being used to disrupt the illegal wildlife trade. The Duke of Cambridge, through the Royal Foundation, founded United for Wildlife in 2014 and is passionate about stopping the trade. "Like so many others, I am deeply saddened by the numbers of elephant, rhino and pangolin who have been illegally slaughtered for their tusks, horns and scales," the Duke, who is also patron of the Royal African Society, said ahead of a visit to Africa, a few years ago in 2018. "But the illegal wildlife trade also has a devastating human impact. Too many brave rangers are tragically killed each year by poachers. Communities see their tourist livelihoods threatened. This is why I am committed to doing what I can to help end this terrible, global crime." Image: Getty

News

“There are different paths to justice”: Former choirboy’s father takes George Pell to court

Content warning: This article includes mentions of child sexual abuse (CSA). The father of a former choirboy allegedly abused by George Pell has launched a civil case against the cardinal and the Catholic Church. After being convicted of abusing two choirboys during his time as archbishop of Melbourne in the 1990s, Cardinal Pell was acquitted by the High Court in 2020, having served 13 months in prison before gaining his freedom. The father of one of the victims, who died of a drug overdose in 2014, was told about the alleged abuse by police a year after his son’s death, according to the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07-14/george-pell-father-former-choirboy-civil-action-cardinal-church/101236968" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ABC</a>. He has now launched legal action against Cardinal Pell and the Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne in the Supreme Court of Victoria for “damages for nervous shock” that were related to finding out about the allegations, according to the statement of claim lodged in court. The father, who cannot legally be named and has been given the pseudonym RWQ, and his solicitors from Shine Lawyers claim Cardinal Pell and the Archdiocese were negligent. They allege the cardinal is liable for RWQ’s mental injury because it would have been reasonably foreseeable that he would suffer from nervous shock after learning of the alleged abuse, and that the Archdiocese breached a duty of care to him. RWQ is claiming general damages, and special damages, and seeking compensation for “past loss of earning capacity and past and future medical and like expenses”, though the sum he is seeking will only be revealed if the matter goes to trial. Lisa Flynn, the Chief Legal Officer for Shine Lawyers, said the separate criminal case and High Court proceedings involving the cardinal won’t affect the civil case. “The High Court made some decisions in relation to the criminal prosecution against [George] Pell, our case is a civil case against George Pell and the Catholic Archdiocese,” she explained. “There are different paths to justice.” If you are in need of support you can contact Lifeline on 13 11 14, or Bravehearts on 1800 272 831 or Blue Knot on 1300 657 380 for support relating to sexual abuse. Image: Getty Images

Legal

Qantas chief Alan Joyce’s home egged by unknown vandals

A harbourside property belonging to Qantas boss Alan Joyce has been the target of egg and toilet-paper-wielding vandals. The property, purchased by Joyce and his partner Shane Lloyd for $19 million earlier this year, is believed to have been struck on Monday night, after splattered eggs and toilet paper were spotted littering the roof on Tuesday, per <a href="https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/vandals-toilet-paper-and-egg-qantas-boss-19m-harbourside-mansion/news-story/c67d2637924a3ee0c7723feb99a686a8" target="_blank" rel="noopener">news.com.au</a>. Police are yet to reveal any leads on the culprits. <img src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/2022/07/alan-joyce-vandals.jpg" alt="" width="1280" height="720" /> Alan Joyce’s home was seen covered in toilet paper and smashed eggs. Image: Nine News It comes as Qantas faces public backlash for its treatment of workers and the decline in the quality of its service since flights resumed. Unions have slammed the national airline’s approach to saving money during the pandemic, which saw the company pocket $855 million in jobkeeper payments while two thirds of its 30,000-person workforce were stood down, as well as the outsourcing of 1,683 ground crew jobs - a move deemed illegal by the Federal Court. “Qantas has led a years-long war on workers to control the decline in wages and conditions in aviation,” Transport Workers Union national secretary recently said of the company’s behaviour under Joyce’s leadership. Though cost-saving measures have impacted Joyce’s salary, which was revealed to be $24 million in 2018, he still brings in a hefty $2 million a year post-pandemic. The couple have relocated to the harbourside six-bedroom home from their apartment in The Rocks, neighbours say they have spent little time there since. Images: Nine News / Getty Images

Real Estate

Child actor becomes police chief in town he filmed in

The child actor who starred in Jaws has become the police chief of the same town the movie was filmed. Jonathan Searle played a small role in the popular movie in 1974 and almost 50 years later has funnily enough been named the police chief of Oak Bluffs, a town on Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts. Having been a member of the town’s police force since 1985, Searle was promoted as chief on May 16 following a 3-1 with two other candidates. “I’m finding the whole thing quite funny myself!” “I’m clearly elated and I’m humbled and honored to have been offered the position,” he told Vineyard Gazette. “It’s something I’ve been working toward my whole career.” Image: Universal

Movies

"No interest in justice!" Andrew O'Keefe's courtroom explosion

Disgraced TV host Andrew O'Keefe has screamed at a magistrate in his latest court appearance, claiming he had “no interest in justice” and was threatened with contempt of court after he was again denied bail. As O'Keefe fronted Sydney’s Central Local Court on Wednesday afternoon, he appeared visibly distressed and frustrated. The 50-year-old was hit with six charges in January after police alleged that he grabbed a woman by the throat, punched her and pushed her to the ground, to which he pled not guilty to all charges. Mr O’Keefe has been remanded in custody since his arrest and lost his last bid for bail in the NSW Supreme Court in March. Defence lawyer Sharon Ramsden presented a fresh application for bail on Wednesday, in which she argued that more evidence had been served on Mr O’Keefe that outlined the “lack of injury” on the complainant. Over the bail hearing that lasted almost two-hours, Mr O’Keefe was audibly frustrated over what was being said in court. A prosecutor opposed the bail application and said there was “no new information” to warrant the request, “There’s not fresh circumstances in what has been put before the court … he has been in rehab nine times,” he said. Mr O’Keefe spoke over the prosecutor to deny the allegations as magistrate Daniel Reiss warned him he would be “going backwards by speaking up”. “That’s simply not true Your Honour,” Mr O’Keefe said, raising his voice. “I’m just getting the truth out there.” Mr O’Keefe continued to interrupt and shake his head in frustration as magistrate Daniel Reiss told the court of the 50-year-old’s mental health and drug issues. The magistrate warned that Mr O’Keefe was bordering on being in contempt of court. “I’ve dealt with many defendants, some are psychotic and are not as hard to deal with as you. Someone with legal qualifications and 10 warnings should know how to deal with it,” Mr Reiss said. Mr Reiss denied bail, saying he was not willing to allow the “unacceptable risk” of letting Mr O’Keefe leave custody. Mr O’Keefe gathered his papers and stood up before saying, “The transcript will say I was not arguing, I was trying to help you Your Honour.” “You have no interest in justice,” Mr O’Keefe continued before storming out. Mr O’Keefe will return to court for a hearing in June. Image credits: A Current Affair

News

The International Court of Justice has ordered Russia to stop the war

The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the top court of the United Nations, has <a href="https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/182/182-20220316-ORD-01-00-EN.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ordered Russia to “immediately suspend” its military operations in Ukraine</a>. What does the decision mean, and what happens next? We already knew Russia’s invasion was illegal in international law. But the ICJ decision now makes it virtually impossible for anyone, including Russia, to deny that illegality. It is also impressive because Ukraine used a creative strategy to get the ICJ to hear the case, based on the <a href="https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.1_Convention%20on%20the%20Prevention%20and%20Punishment%20of%20the%20Crime%20of%20Genocide.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Genocide Convention of 1948</a>. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> READ HERE: a summary of the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ICJ?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ICJ</a> Order indicating provisional measures in the case concerning Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Ukraine?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Ukraine</a> v. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Russia?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Russia</a>) <a href="https://t.co/joZ3kWkfiQ">https://t.co/joZ3kWkfiQ</a> <a href="https://t.co/D6YsHmVHOH">pic.twitter.com/D6YsHmVHOH</a> — CIJ_ICJ (@CIJ_ICJ) <a href="https://twitter.com/CIJ_ICJ/status/1504137139625279492?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 16, 2022</a></blockquote> Russia’s legal arguments about the war Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, gave <a href="https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/full-text-putin-s-declaration-of-war-on-ukraine" target="_blank" rel="noopener">several justifications for invading Ukraine</a>. Some had little to do with the law, such as his complaints about NATO. But two were legal arguments. First, he claimed Russia was acting in “self-defence”. Self-defence is <a href="https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/chapter-7" target="_blank" rel="noopener">an established reason to use military force</a> in international law. But Putin suggested Russia was defending the two breakaway parts of eastern Ukraine it recognises as sovereign states: Donetsk and Luhansk. Legally, these are <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-russias-recognition-of-breakaway-parts-of-ukraine-breached-international-law-and-set-the-stage-for-invasion-177623" target="_blank" rel="noopener">still parts of Ukraine’s own territory, not independent states</a>, which makes nonsense of this argument. Second, Putin claimed Ukraine was committing genocide against ethnic Russians (where “genocide” means certain acts committed with “<a href="https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/unts/volume%2078/volume-78-i-1021-english.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">intent to destroy</a>” an ethnic group or another defined group). This is just as factually and legally flimsy as the self-defence argument. If both arguments are weak, why did Ukraine focus on genocide in the case before the ICJ? To understand, we have to look at the court’s jurisdiction: that is, its power to decide some legal issues but not others. The jurisdiction of the ICJ The ICJ hears disputes solely between sovereign states (in contrast to the separate International Criminal Court, which tries individuals for committing things like war crimes). The ICJ does not automatically have jurisdiction over every state and every issue. There is no global government that could give it that power. Like many other aspects of international law, <a href="https://www.icj-cij.org/en/basis-of-jurisdiction" target="_blank" rel="noopener">its jurisdiction relies on states giving consent</a> – agreement – either directly or indirectly. Some states have given consent by making general declarations. Other states have consented to particular treaties that give the ICJ the power to decide disputes related specifically to those treaties. Since Russia has not made a general declaration, Ukraine could not ask the ICJ to rule on its self-defence argument. But Russia is a party to a relevant treaty, the <a href="https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/unts/volume%2078/volume-78-i-1021-english.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Genocide Convention</a>. Ukraine’s creative strategy was to try to bring the case within the ICJ’s jurisdiction by arguing that Russia was making a false allegation of genocide to justify its illegal invasion. The order made by the ICJ Russia did not turn up to the courtroom in The Hague for the initial hearing in early March (though it did write the ICJ a letter outlining its view). That is a change in its behaviour. After Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, Georgia similarly brought a case to the ICJ and tried to use <a href="https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20660/volume-660-I-9464-English.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">a different treaty</a> to bring it within the court’s jurisdiction. Russia participated in the case and actually had <a href="https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/140" target="_blank" rel="noopener">significant success</a>. Its failure to turn up this time signals its disengagement from international institutions. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> International Court of Justice is ruling on Ukraine's appeal for an order for Russia to halt its invasion. Russian officials and lawyers have not turned up for the session. <a href="https://t.co/oucPjgQ5Hp">pic.twitter.com/oucPjgQ5Hp</a> — Julian Borger (@julianborger) <a href="https://twitter.com/julianborger/status/1504111254205521926?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 16, 2022</a></blockquote> Of the 15 judges, almost all agreed to <a href="https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/182/182-20220316-ORD-01-00-EN.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">order Russia to “immediately suspend” its military operations</a>. There were two dissenters: the judges of Russian and Chinese nationality. This was what is called a “provisional measures” order – an emergency ruling made before the court hears the whole case. Provisional measures are binding. That is important. It means even if Russia maintains incorrectly that the invasion is legal, it is now breaching international law anyway by failing to comply with the ICJ’s order. However, a binding ruling is not the same as an enforceable one. Just as there is no global government to give the ICJ more power, there are no global police to enforce its decisions. For example, in 1999, the ICJ <a href="https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/104" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ordered the United States to delay executing a German man on death row</a>. Although the court confirmed such a provisional measure was binding, it could not actually stop the execution. But ICJ decisions can play a more subtle role. They shape the narrative for law-abiding states and within the United Nations. This ruling might help to embolden other states, including some that until now have been sitting on the fence, to contribute to actions like suffocating Russia’s economy with sanctions and arming Ukraine. What happens next? All the ICJ has done so far is to order provisional measures. It has not even found conclusively that it has jurisdiction in the case. It might be a long time before it decides the case as a whole. But it has hinted it is receptive to Ukraine’s arguments. It has noted that it “<a href="https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/182/182-20220316-ORD-01-00-EN.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">is not in possession of evidence</a>” to support Russia’s allegation that Ukraine has committed genocide. Another strength of Ukraine’s case is that there is, in any event, no rule in international law automatically giving one state a right to invade another state to stop a genocide. One reason is that a cynical aggressor could manipulate or abuse such a rule. That is basically what this case is all about.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/179466/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rowan-nicholson-945547" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Rowan Nicholson</a>, Lecturer in Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/flinders-university-972" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Flinders University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-international-court-of-justice-has-ordered-russia-to-stop-the-war-what-does-this-ruling-mean-179466" target="_blank" rel="noopener">original article</a>. Image: Getty Images

Legal

Outrage over French Open chief's threat of expelling Naomi Osaka

<div class="post_body_wrapper"> <div class="post-body-container"> <div class="post_body"> <div class="body_text redactor-styles redactor-in"> Naomi Osaka's decision to withdraw from the French Open has drawn criticism from the boss of the French Open who threatened her with expulsion. However, he did not take any questions from the media after making this statement. Osaka, 23, opened up about her mental health struggles and announced she would be pulling out of the grand slam due to the media frenzy surrounding her boycott of media duties. “Hey everyone, this isn’t a situation I ever imagined or intended when I posted a few days ago,” she wrote on Twitter. “I think now the best thing for the tournament, the other players and my well-being is that I withdraw so that everyone can get back to focusing on the tennis going on in Paris.” Osaka made the decision after a $20,000 fine from French Open organisers and threats of expulsion in a signed statement by the chairs of all four grand slams. “First and foremost, we are sorry and sad for Naomi Osaka,” Moretton said. “The outcome of Naomi withdrawing from Roland Garros is unfortunate. We wish her the best and the quickest possible recovery and we look forward to having her at our tournament next year.” Serena Williams has commented on the decision, saying that she did "many" press conferences and that "it made me stronger". “The only thing I feel is that I feel for Naomi,” Williams said of Osaka’s boycott and subsequent reveal. “I feel like I wish I could give her a hug because I know what it’s like. Like I said, I’ve been in those positions. “We have different personalities, and people are different. Not everyone is the same. I’m thick. Other people are thin. Everyone is different and everyone handles things differently. “You just have to let her handle it the way she wants to, in the best way she thinks she can, and that’s the only thing I can say. i think she’s doing the best that she can.” </div> </div> </div> </div>

News

"What about justice?" Tempers flare on Q&A over Christian Porter debate

A Liberal senator and a Labor MP clashed on ABC's Q&A on Thursday night over a question around the historical rape allegation against Attorney-General Christian Porter. On Wednesday, Porter revealed himself as the minister at the centre of a rape claim involving a 16-year-old girl in Sydney in 1988. He has never been charged and police confirmed there was "insufficient evidence" to proceed with an investigation and labelled the matter "closed". The question was asked by an audience member and immediately caused tension on the panel. The question that was asked was whether the panel thought Prime Minister Scott Morrison should launch an independent inquiry into the allegations against Mr Porter. Queensland National Party Senator Susan McDonald threw her support behind Mr Porter, saying she felt “deeply” for the woman and her family but that the justice system must be adhered to. “We do have a system of justice in this country. We do have a police service that is well resourced and the most capable of understanding whether or not evidence needs to go to trial. And they have closed the matter,” Senator McDonald said. “I don’t think that this is an easy subject but we can’t have a situation where allegations equate to guilt. And I think that the minister has made a full statement and I think that we need to some justice in the law and the rules of the land, because otherwise, you know, do we back a kangaroo court and a court of public opinion?” <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Should the Prime Minister launch an independent inquiry into the rape allegation against Christian Porter? <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/QandA?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#QandA</a> <a href="https://t.co/24SVvJVM14">pic.twitter.com/24SVvJVM14</a> — QandA (@QandA) <a href="https://twitter.com/QandA/status/1367413261134483457?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 4, 2021</a></blockquote> Western Australia Labor MP Anne Aly cut in, asking: "What about justice for the victim?" “We keep talking about justice for the accused. What about justice for the victim?” she said, to a round of cheering from the audience. “I am infuriated by this because I’m sick and tired of the lip service that we hear in parliament about hearing victims’ voice, about listening to women, about respect for women, and right now is a moment.” Aly also said it was time for the Prime Minister to show leadership and launch an independent inquiry. “What did he do? He came out and he said, ‘Well, I have asked him if he did it and he said no, and that’s enough for me.’ And then suddenly you’ve got all of these men invoking justice, justice, justice,” she said. “That inquiry will either exonerate Christian Porter and prove his innocence, as he is — as he is saying, that he is innocent, or it will prove otherwise. Either way, this is a serious, serious allegation. It needs to be treated seriously,” she said.

"Justice for Chloe": Unbearable choice for grandfather accused of cruise ship fatal fall

<div class="post_body_wrapper"> <div class="post_body"> <div class="body_text redactor-styles redactor-in"> A grandfather accused in the fatal fall of his granddaughter Chloe from an 11th storey window of a cruise ship pleaded guilty on Thursday to negligent homicide. Salvatore "Sam" Anello said that he wanted to help end "this nightmare" for his family. His 18-month-old granddaughter Chloe slipped from his grip and fell 46 metres from an open window on a Royal Caribbean Cruises' Freedom of the Seas ship in July 2019 as the ship docked in Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico prosecutor Laura Hernandez said Anello would be sentenced on December 10th. “We have found justice for Chloe,” she said. A representative for Anello’s attorney, Michael Winkleman, said in a statement to America’s NBC TODAY that Anello will not serve any jail time and will serve his probation in Indiana. “This decision was an incredibly difficult one for Sam and the family, but because the plea agreement includes no jail time and no admission of facts, it was decided the plea deal is in the best interests of the family so that they can close this horrible chapter and turn their focus to mourning Chloe and fighting for cruise passenger safety by raising awareness about the need for all common carriers to adhere to window fall prevention laws designed to protect children from falling from windows,” Winkleman said in a statement. Winkleman also added that the family would continue its civil suit against Royal Caribbean with the goal of discovering why the window was allowed to be open. Anello, 51, said that he did not know that the window in the children's play area was open. “I wasn’t drinking and I wasn’t dangling her out of a window,” he said in a previous statement. He said he is colourblind and might not have realized the tinted window was open. “We will continue the fight for justice for Chloe and to hold Royal Caribbean accountable for its brazen failure to follow the standards designed precisely to prevent children from falling out of windows,” Winkleman said in his statement. </div> </div> </div>

Legal

Mum who took on road tolls in court loses “faith in the justice system”

Heidi Jackel says she has lost “faith in the justice system” after being hit with a massive bill for unpaid road tolls that could force her to sell her home. The mother of two has taken on the might of toll road giant Transurban and lost. "I've always believed there is some justice in the justice system," she says. Ms Jackel maintains she honestly thought she paid $14,500 in administration fees that were sprung on her after she did not pay tolls. "I would not wish this on my worst enemy," she said back in August to A Current Affair. "No one should have to go through this... no one." Ms Jackel had been hit with a $22,000 bill for unpaid tolls which includes over $14,700 in administration fees. Ms Jackel was unaware her etag had stopped working but accepted that it had and paid the $7000 in unpaid tolls. But she thought the $10 and $20 administration fees were exorbitant, so she took it to court. "It was so hard," Ms Jackel said. "I'm really sorry." Westlink M7 told Ms Jackel the administration fees were charged by Roads and Maritime Services, which she disputed. "They (Westlink M7) know as well as I do that... that charge is, is… it's a rort… it's ripping people off," she said. Unfortunately, a court has backed the road toll company and ordered Ms Jackel to pay the admin fees. "It's very disappointing," she admitted outside of court. "Because it means that anyone can charge an admin fee and not prove that that's the actual, real admin cost. “The rich people and the big companies, they just get away with doing whatever they like. Ms Jackel has revealed she is scared for what her future holds. "I don't know... will I lose my house? I don't know, I have no idea," she said. "I don't have $15,000. I don't even have $5000... all I have is the house." She says she has found “the silver lining in this dark, dark cloud,” which is that she will not have to pay Westlink M7's legal costs.

Legal

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Woman charged after NT Chief Minister hit in the face with crepe

Qantas chief executive issues second apology

Kathleen Folbigg pardoned after 20 years behind bars

Can juries still deliver justice in high-profile cases in the age of social media?

“Have a second phone”: Aussie spy chief’s warning on social media use

The High Court of Australia has a majority of women justices for the first time

Lynette Dawson's family responds to guilty verdict

“Absolutely despicable”: Teens attack off-duty chief inspector with pole

George Floyd deserved a better life

“May justice be done”: Ben Roberts-Smith’s trial comes to an end

"Deeply saddened" Prince William demands "swift justice" for tragic death

“There are different paths to justice”: Former choirboy’s father takes George Pell to court

Qantas chief Alan Joyce’s home egged by unknown vandals

Child actor becomes police chief in town he filmed in

"No interest in justice!" Andrew O'Keefe's courtroom explosion

The International Court of Justice has ordered Russia to stop the war

Outrage over French Open chief's threat of expelling Naomi Osaka

"What about justice?" Tempers flare on Q&A over Christian Porter debate

"Justice for Chloe": Unbearable choice for grandfather accused of cruise ship fatal fall

Mum who took on road tolls in court loses “faith in the justice system”

Our Partners

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Woman charged after NT Chief Minister hit in the face with crepe

Qantas chief executive issues second apology

Kathleen Folbigg pardoned after 20 years behind bars

Can juries still deliver justice in high-profile cases in the age of social media?

“Have a second phone”: Aussie spy chief’s warning on social media use

The High Court of Australia has a majority of women justices for the first time

Lynette Dawson's family responds to guilty verdict

“Absolutely despicable”: Teens attack off-duty chief inspector with pole

George Floyd deserved a better life

“May justice be done”: Ben Roberts-Smith’s trial comes to an end

"Deeply saddened" Prince William demands "swift justice" for tragic death

“There are different paths to justice”: Former choirboy’s father takes George Pell to court

Qantas chief Alan Joyce’s home egged by unknown vandals

Child actor becomes police chief in town he filmed in

"No interest in justice!" Andrew O'Keefe's courtroom explosion

The International Court of Justice has ordered Russia to stop the war

Outrage over French Open chief's threat of expelling Naomi Osaka

"What about justice?" Tempers flare on Q&A over Christian Porter debate

"Justice for Chloe": Unbearable choice for grandfather accused of cruise ship fatal fall

Mum who took on road tolls in court loses “faith in the justice system”

Our Partners

Join Over60