Search

Lawyer warns drivers over little-known road rule with $2200 penalty

While some say it's just "the Aussie way", one lawyer has warned against this common act that could cost you up to $2200. Speaking to 7NEWS Astor Legal principal lawyer Avinash Singh, said that there has been a spike in motorists caught flashing their high beams on the road, to alert other drivers of police. “I’ve received an increased number of inquiries from people who have been caught flashing their high beams, warning oncoming drivers of police,” he said. “Most of my clients have been caught doing this by a mobile speed camera or an RBT, which they don’t realise can catch them out on this offence.” Drivers caught in the act could get an on-the-spot fine of $112 and one demerit point, and a maximum penalty of $2200. According to the Australian Road Rules, it is considered an unlawful use of headlights on high-beam. “It is an offence to drive on a road with high-beam headlights on if there is another vehicle in front, travelling in the same direction within 200m; or if there is another oncoming vehicle within 200m,” Singh said. “Similarly, road rules state that a driver must not use any light fitted to their vehicle to dazzle, or in a way that is likely to dazzle, another road user.” “It is arguable that flashing your headlights to warn of police would fall into the definition of ‘hindering police’ in the execution of their duty “ Motorists on Reddit have described headlight flashing as representing “a camaraderie between motorists” and one even called it “the Aussie way”. But others have argued that the act could impact the safety of other drivers. “Traffic laws are meant to act as a deterrent for dangerous driving, flashing a fellow motorist has the same effect the ticket is meant to but with more immediate results. It should be widely encouraged,” one commenter wrote. “I feel it only changes the driver’s behaviour for a few seconds, but removes the deterrent of getting a fine. So it probably makes traffic, in general, more dangerous,” another said. Image: Shutterstock

Legal

"Find that car": Mother of fallen young lawyer speaks out

Mitch East, a vibrant 28-year-old lawyer from New Zealand, lost his life on Sunday in an alleged hit-and-run accident that has sparked a desperate plea from his grieving mother and a heartfelt outcry from those who knew him. Debra East, now in Sydney to grapple with the unimaginable loss of her only child, stood on the roadside where Mitch's life was abruptly taken away. In an emotional <a href="https://7news.com.au/news/find-that-car-mother-of-lawyer-mitch-east-killed-in-sydney-hit-and-run-shares-desperate-plea-as-tributes-flow-c-14013341" target="_blank" rel="noopener">interview with 7NEWS</a>, she expressed her shattered state, saying, "I'm broken. He was my only child... I died too, on Sunday, with him." The pain of a mother losing her child in such a sudden and senseless manner is unfathomable, and her plea to find the perpetrator echoes through the community. Mitch's untimely demise occurred as he stepped out of an Uber onto Fletcher St, just metres away from his home, in the early hours of the morning. It is believed that he was <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/police-investigate-after-young-lawyer-killed-in-cowardly-act" target="_blank" rel="noopener">struck by a car</a>, leaving him with critical injuries that tragically proved fatal. Despite the efforts of emergency responders, Mitch passed away at the scene. The circumstances surrounding Mitch's death point to a hit-and-run incident, with CCTV footage capturing <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/police-investigate-after-young-lawyer-killed-in-cowardly-act" target="_blank" rel="noopener">a white Subaru</a> driving on the street shortly after the accident. Debra East, grappling with grief and disbelief, voiced her anguish, questioning how the driver could have failed to see her son and pleading for assistance in locating the vehicle. “I got up early hours of the morning today and stood on the side of the road to try to understand how they couldn’t have seen him as they were driving up," she said. “I just need you to help the police find that car. Not that it will bring him back to me.” NSW Police Inspector Josh Hogan condemned the act as cowardly, urging the driver to come forward and take responsibility for their actions. Anyone with information about the death is urged to contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000. Images: GoFundMe | NSW Police

Family & Pets

Police investigate after young lawyer killed in "cowardly act"

The tranquility of a Sunday morning was shattered for residents of Tamarama in Sydney's eastern suburbs, as news emerged of a tragic incident involving a young lawyer. Mitch East, a 28-year-old legal professional, was discovered critically injured on a street just metres away from his home, only to succumb to his injuries shortly after. What makes this loss even more devastating is the suspicion that his death was a result of a hit and run. The details of the incident paint a picture of a night that turned fatal in the early hours of February 17. Mitch East had been enjoying a night out and had opted for a responsible choice by catching an Uber home. However, he was allegedly struck by a passing car on Fletcher St, leaving him with fatal injuries. Detectives from the Crash Investigation Unit are now leading inquiries into the circumstances surrounding Mr East's untimely demise, with their focus on locating the driver of a white Subaru Outback, believed to have been in the vicinity at the time of the incident. As friends and loved ones grapple with the shock and grief of losing Mitch, tributes pour in, reflecting the impact he had on those around him. Described as having a "hilarious yet kind nature" and an uncanny ability to befriend everyone he met, Mitch's presence left an indelible mark on those fortunate enough to have known him. A testament to his character, a <a href="https://www.gofundme.com/f/in-memory-of-mitch-and-in-support-of-loved-ones" target="_blank" rel="noopener">GoFundMe page</a> initiated by Kane Dunkley has garnered significant support, surpassing $80,000, aimed at alleviating the financial burden on his family and partner. In professional circles, Mitch East was regarded as a highly talented lawyer whose potential was yet to be fully realised. His journey in the legal field saw him achieve remarkable milestones, from graduating with first-class honours from the University of Otago to pursuing further studies at Harvard Law School on a prestigious scholarship. His career trajectory was promising, with roles at esteemed institutions such as the New Zealand Supreme Court and the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch Terrorist Attack before joining Sydney law firm Arnold Bloch Leibler in 2022. As investigations continue, NSW Police Detective Inspector Jason Hogan issued a plea for accountability, urging anyone with information regarding the incident to come forward “before we knock on their door”. “It is a cowardly act to drive away after colliding with another human,” he said. Images: GoFundMe | NSW Police

Legal

New details revealed as Daylesford driver's lawyer speaks out

Important information about the 66-year-old man who crashed into the Royal Hotel in Daylesford has been released. According to the man's lawyer, he required immediate treatment at the scene, as the elderly man is an insulin-dependent diabetic. Detectives <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/health/caring/daylesford-crash-victims-family-speaks-out" target="_blank" rel="noopener">interviewed</a> the man, a Mount Macedon local, for the first time on Tuesday, but was not arrested or charged. Solicitor Martin Amad, who is representing the driver, said his client returned a negative alcohol breath test after the crash, and has no previous criminal history. "It was a terrible tragedy," Amad said. "My client has been interviewed by Victoria Police. He has not been charged with any offence. It's anticipated the investigation will take some time." "He is deeply distressed and feels great empathy for the families and friends of the victims and wider Daylesford community." The driver remains in the hospital and is undergoing medical treatment. <span style="font-size: 16px; caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; background-color: #ffffff;">“At this time the driver has not been charged, with inquiries to continue after his eventual release from care,” a police statement provided to the<em style="font-size: 16px; box-sizing: border-box; caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji';"> Herald Sun<span style="font-size: 16px; caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; background-color: #ffffff;"> said. <p style="font-size: 16px; box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji';">Just days after the <a style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #258440; text-decoration: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;" href="https://oversixty.com.au/news/news/there-were-bodies-everywhere-five-people-dead-in-horror-pub-crash" target="_blank" rel="noopener">devastating car crash, t</a>he town of Daylesford is in mourning after five people died in the car crash. <p style="font-size: 16px; box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji';">Pratibha Sharma, her husband Jatin Chugh, and her daughter Anvi were enjoying the last of the weekend at the Royal Hotel in Daylesford when a white BMW SUV crashed into the beer garden on Sunday evening. <p style="font-size: 16px; box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji';">Sharma and Chugh died at the scene, while nine-year-old Anvi was flown to hospital but did not survive her injuries and was later pronounced dead. <p style="font-size: 16px; box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji';">The family were joined by their friends, Vivek Bhatia, 38, his wife, and their two kids at the pub. <p style="font-size: 16px; box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji';">Vivek and his 11-year-old son Vihaan were both killed in the crash, while the 36-year-old woman, and a second son, aged six, were taken to hospital for their injuries. <p style="font-size: 16px; box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji';">Image credits: Nine

Legal

Expert reveals why working parents are really parting ways

Dennis R Vetrano Jr, a divorce lawyer who regularly provides insight into the secrets of his industry on social media, has revealed the major theme he has identified when it comes to working parents ending their relationships. In one of his TikTok videos, which has been viewed over 4.7 million times since its release, the US-based lawyer opens by asking, “do you want to know the major theme that I’m seeing in the divorce industry, as a divorce lawyer, as I do consults these days?" The answer, it turns out, is quite simple: “women are tired”. “I am seeing working mums do it all, and I am seeing the husbands step back and say ‘huh, I don’t gotta do a thing!’,” Dennis explained. “She’s got the kids, she’s got the groceries, she’s got the laundry, she’s got the meals, she’s got the work. And by the way, she’s making all the money and she’s paying for the house, and doing everything else. “‘I’m going to go to the firehouse, I’m going to go play this, I’m going to go hang out with my friends.’ That’s the theme. “And women are tired.” Dennis’ video drew in over 10,000 comments, many from women who couldn’t agree more with what he’d said, sharing their own stories and experiences with each other. “And the younger generation of women are choosing not to marry, they have grown up watching their mums struggle and refuse to let that happen to them,” one wrote. “This is why I got divorced,” another shared, to over 15.3 likes. “He then accused me of cheating! When would I have time? I don’t even sit on the couch”. “WAY less stressed since divorce. And I get nights to myself!!!” one woman said. “We aren’t just tired. We are sick and tired,” one corrected. “We get sick of the mental load,” another viewer agreed. “Having to give instructions on everything. It's exhausting.” “I'm a stay at home mom to 5 and my husband legit told me today ‘I don't go to his job and help him’. It changed something in me tonight,” one revealed. Another had something else to add to the discussion, noting that while she agreed “100%”, Dennis had forgotten “to say that the husband’s ‘super power’ was his ability to critique meals, housework, fashion, body image etc!” Images: TikTok

Relationships

Lawyer sued for ‘quiet quitting’

A legal firm in New York have sued one of its own lawyers, accusing her of using remote work as a way to “quiet quit” while she started a new venture. Quiet quitting is a relatively new term that refers to employees who do nothing above the bare minimum in their role, often leading them to end up on the chopping board. Defendant Heather Palmore then filed a countersuit against Napoli Solnik accusing the firm of mistreating minority employees, “brazen bullying” and seeking to “intimate people who stand up to them”. The lawsuit, which was filed in late February 2023 in a state court, accused Palmore of “breach of fiduciary duty of loyalty, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty of loyalty, injurious falsehood, unjust enrichment, declaratory judgement and constructive trust”. According to the firm’s lawsuit, Palmore “misrepresented her skill set, experience, and book of business to obtain a position with Napoli Shkolnik, where she took advantage of the new remote work environment to ‘quiet quit’ her job, and simultaneously worked for two law firms at once,” The firm also accused her of “performing little to no work for Napoli Shkolnik while directly competing with the firm by simultaneously running Defendant Palmore Law Group”. Palmore said in her counterclaim that partner Paul Napoli recruited her to be the firm’s chief trial counsel in October 2021. “Ms Palmore has been subjected to and witnessed egregious race and disability discrimination by senior management as part of their standard operating procedures,” she said in a lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court. Palmore said she agreed to engage in mediation to settle her claims but claimed the firm used the time to “fabricate its own bogus lawsuit to file before Palmore could file her lawsuit — and gain some ill-conceived strategic advantage by filing first”. The firm claims Palmore was never committed to her job and that she established her own company almost as soon as she was hired. “Further, not even one month after defendant Palmore was hired by the plaintiff, defendant Palmore established her own separate law firm, The Palmore Group, PC, which she was operating and marketing while claiming to work on a full-time, attention, and energy basis for the plaintiff,” it said. Image credit: Instagram

Legal

The 5 things you must do if you’re in a car accident

While you may be safe on the road, car accidents are an all too common part of life for many motorists. Organising police reports, insurance claims, and getting compensation for any injuries are by no means simple tasks – they can be expensive, stressful and time consuming. Greg Masselos, principal lawyer at Masselos & Co in Sydney, says that motor accident compensation law is a complex and highly specialised area of law. “To make sure you get the best possible outcome for your case, you need to consult an expert personal injury lawyer, preferably a specialist accredited by the NSW Law Society, ” he advises. Here Mr Masselos shares his top five tips around the things you must do if you ever find yourself in a car accident. 1. Report the accident to police If either party in the accident is injured, it’s your legal duty to notify the police. The best way to do this is to pop into a nearby police station to report the incident or call the Police Assistance Line (131 444). When you do this you will be given a COPS Event Number as confirmation that the accident was reported, so make sure you write this down and keep it somewhere safe. 2. Submit an Accident Notification Form If you were injured in the accident you may be entitled to compensation, irrespective of which party was at fault. You have 28 days to submit an Accident Notification Form which may entitle you to claim up to $5,000 to cover treatment expenses and economic losses incurred in the six months after the accident. You will need a Medical Certificate completed by your doctor. 3. Consult your doctor Even if you’ve been lucky enough to escape with minor injuries, it’s still important to report all your symptoms to a doctor. Not only does this ensure your treatment progresses without unnecessary delays, as Mr Masselos notes, “It will also avoid disputes with the insurance company should an injury that you considered minor at the time of the accident become more of a problem as time goes by. A good paper trail in your doctor’s records can save a lot of arguments down the track.” 4. Lodge a Personal Injury Claim Form If you’ve sustained an injury in an accident that wasn’t your fault, you’re required to lodge a Personal Injury Claim Form within six months of the accident with the compulsory third party (CTP) insurer of the vehicle at fault. For accidents with multiple vehicles where responsibility may be a bit more contentious, forms may have to be submitted to the CTP insurers of each car. Forms are required to be submitted with Medical Certificates and as Mr Masselos notes, “The claim form is a lengthy document and you should consider obtaining legal advice before you lodge it.” Late claims with satisfactory explanations can be considered, but these applications are often considerably more difficult and time consuming. It does seem like a lot of work during what is often a period of great stress, but Mr Masselos advises that it is worth the extra effort to cover yourself: “Lodging a Personal Injury Claim Form and Medical Certificate within six months of the accident does not oblige you to proceed with your claim, however it protects your ability to claim damages in the future, and for that reason it is prudent to lodge the form in most, if not all, circumstances. It also ensures that your treatment expenses will be paid up front by the insurer.” 5. Find out if you have other rights to compensation Lodging a motor accident compensation claim does not stop you from claiming additional benefits from other insurers. An example of this would be claiming workers compensation benefits for a car accident that occurred in the course of your work, or benefits claimed under a private insurance policy. While this doesn’t stop you from lodging a claim, in certain circumstances money paid under those policies will need to be refunded should you recover damages from the CTP insurer. As Mr Masselos explains: “Medicare and private health insurers will usually pay for treatment expenses following a motor vehicle accident, but they will usually be entitled to recover those benefits when you ultimately receive your damages.” Image: Shutterstock

Legal

Kate Langbroek apologises to Waleed Aly over insult

Australian broadcaster Kate Langbroek has apologised to Waleed Aly after a joke went wrong. The Project host appeared on Langbroek’s KIIS Network radio show 3pm Pick-Up with co-host Monty Dimond when she tried a joke on him. Langbroek explained that she wanted to tell Aly a joke that she shared earlier with her son Jannie which she then revealed “didn’t seem to go over so well”. She thought the pair were “having a high-spirited, fun conversation”, but the joke insulted the TV host. “As a lawyer, your personality is an asset. If you weren’t a lawyer, your personality would be a liability,” is what Langbroek told Aly. Aly had in fact trained and worked as a lawyer before his career in the media which has since seen him step aside from the law. He claimed that the incident occurred while he was in the make-up chair which Langbroek disputed saying he would “tease out the details”. “You know what he’s like with his ‘fine mind’, he’s always got to tease out details and find the hole in the colander!” she continued. “Waleed and I were having a conversation about something I had not quite thought through, and he was acting intrigued by my train of thought. “He was asking me so many questions, and I said – ‘I’m going to say to you what I said to Jannie’.” Langbroek confessed that she thought her joke was an “adorable thing to say” but didn’t realise that Aly would be offended by it. “I remember immediately conveying that I was offended because I just thought, hang on, you are saying that in most contexts that people live and the context in which I currently live, my personality is a liability,” Aly said. He also reminded Langbroek that he hadn’t practised law in years to which she responded, “Well mate, I’ve got some bad news for your personality”. This led to Langbroek offering a full apology to Aly on air, reiterating her respect for him. “I’d be devastated if you thought I had anything other than a very hard-won respect and love for you. I am extremely sorry,” she said. “The obvious meaning to be attributed to your words was offensive. There was no mental gymnastics to get to that point,” he told her. “Anyway, the love is entirely mutual and I want you to know, I would not regard your personality as a liability under any circumstance.” Image: KIIS

Lisa’s lawyer’s hefty daily charge

Lisa Wilkinson is being charged an eye-watering $11,000 a day for a high-profile lawyer following her speech at the Logies. Channel 10 has hired Australian Bar Association president Dr Matthew Collins QC for The Project host after her speech caused significant delays to the Brittany Higgins case, which was due to start this week.The case has now been postponed to October. Dr Collins is famous for winning high-profile cases - one of them being Rebel Wilson’s against Bauer Media, as well as YouTuber Jordan Shanks against former NSW deputy premier John Barilaro. The lawyer says it’s possible that Wilkinson could be charged with contempt of court, and admitted she should have known better. “It's certainly possible that the authorities will be looking at the speech that she made to the Logies and assessing that speech against the standard which applies in this branch of the law,” he said on Sunrise. “That standard is, did anything that she do have a tendency to interfere with the administration of justice? “You would hope that whenever the media is contemplating running a story about a serious criminal trial which is about to begin, they would be attune to the potential risks. “The mainstream media understands the risk inhering with talking about cases which are about to go to trial, particularly serious high-profile cases.” Wilkinson was already slammed for her comments last week by Chief Justice Lucy McCallum after rescheduling the case. It comes as Channel 10 warns publications of their criticism of Wilkinson and are not ruling out legal action for any harm that is caused. “This reporting is now causing significant harm and we ask these organisations to cease this harassment to allow Lisa the best opportunity to give her evidence in court and to enable the trial to go ahead in a fair and timely manner,” a spokesperson for the network said. “We are closely monitoring all coverage of this issue and Lisa and Network 10 reserve their rights in respect of any future defamation claims.” Images: Nine/Seven

Legal

Lisa Wilkinson lawyers up

Lisa Wilkinson has called in top lawyer Matthew Collins after he called her Logies speech "ill-advised", in which she discussed the high-profile case of Brittany Higgins. Matthew Collins, president of the Australian Bar Association, told Seven’s Sunrise on Wednesday morning that The Project host may be in serious trouble following scathing comments made by ACT Chief Justice Lucy McCallum, who made the decision to <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/serious-legal-fallout-of-lisa-wilkinson-s-logies-speech" target="_blank" rel="noopener">delay the trial</a>. “It’s certainly possible that the authorities will be looking at speech she made to the Logies and assessing that speech went against the standard which applies in this branch of the law,” Dr Collins said. “That standard is, did anything that she did have a tendency to interfere with the administration of justice?” <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=TAWEB_WRE170_a&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fbusiness%2Fmedia%2Flisa-wilkinson-hires-barrister-matthew-collins-after-he-labelled-her-logies-speech-illadvised%2Fnews-story%2F721bab3f1373c77706d4ac393cbcb740&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium&v21=dynamic-warm-test-score&V21spcbehaviour=append" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Australian</a> claims that just hours after Collins made these comments, he was contacted by Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson. Ten confirmed that Dr Collins had been called upon to represent the network and Wilkinson, adding that Ten “fully supports Lisa Wilkinson”. “Both Network 10 and Lisa Wilkinson take their legal obligations very seriously, including in the preparation and delivery of her speech given at the Logies event,” a spokeswoman said. “In light of the continuing proceedings, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.” While on Sunrise, Collins added that journalists in the mainstream media “understand the risk inherent in talking about cases which are about to go to trial before courts, particularly serious, high-profile cases”. “So clearly this was ill-advised,” he said. “The whole point is that everybody in our community facing a serious charge like this is entitled to the presumption of innocence, and that means that going into the courtroom there should be no preconceptions one way or the other, so that the jury just sits and focuses really keenly on the evidence as it unfolds in the witness box, and puts out of their mind anything which they might have seen in the media, or God forbid and often far worse, in social media.” Due to the high-profile speech, ACT Chief Justice Lucy McCallum called for the trial of Bruce Lerhmann, who is accused of sexually assaulting Brittany Higgins in 2019, to be delayed. Image credits: Getty Images

News

Why men should always pay on the first date

A break-up lawyer has sparked debate by saying men should always pay for the first date. Justin Lee took to <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@jleejd/video/7085515338791587078?is_copy_url=1&is_from_webapp=v1&lang=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener">TikTok</a> to explain why men should always pay on the first date - as that person could be the person you are going to marry. He explained that the amount of money the date costs is not the problem, but rather that the person sitting in front of them is blindly allowing a stranger to pay for them without offering. “The issue is when we end up with someone who has this real sense of entitlement, like this expectation that we will pay. That’s why we must always pay,” he begins. “Your date, whoever that is, may very well be the person you end up marrying. And trust me when I say, as a divorce lawyer, who you end up marrying is so, so important. “So let’s say at the end of the date you pull out your wallet and offer your pay and your date just sits there expecting you to pay as if that is the obvious course of action “At that moment, what did you just learn? You learned that the person in front of you is entitled and has the audacity to expect a near stranger to pay for them. “Then imagine how that person could end up treating their significant other, their spouse for a low cost of $20/30 or $40. “You learned that the person in front of you does not have the basic courtesy to pretend to offer to pay and therefore you should never go on another date with them.” The video, which has raked in more than 540,000 views, sparked a debate in the comment section with many saying the men should pay for the first date regardless. “If that man lets you pay on the first date.. ladies…. Imagine what being married to him for the rest of your life will be,” one comment read. “Ladies should really be selective when dating. If he is crying over a $30 date then he isn’t financially stable and shouldn’t be dating,” another person wrote. “That’s fine - someone who invites me out and expects me to offer on *their* invite has zero manners and probably wouldn’t make a great husband,” someone else commented. Justin however had to reiterate his position in the comment section, explaining that many people misunderstood the video and was not gender based. He explained that “The issue is when women perceive the payment as an obligation as opposed to a kind gesture. Entitled vs Appreciative. No one owes anybody anything!” Images: TikTok

Relationships

Prince Charles “calls in lawyers”

Prince Charles has reportedly “called in lawyers” over allegations that he questioned what colour skin baby Archie would have. The claim comes from the newly released book, Brothers and Wives: Inside the Private Lives of William, Kate and Meghan by US author Christopher Anderson, and is one of several reported on by Page Six over the weekend. The book <a rel="noopener" href="https://7news.com.au/entertainment/royal-family/prince-charles-calls-in-lawyers-as-hes-named-as-royal-who-made-skin-colour-comment-in-book-brothers-and-wives-inside-the-private-lives-of-william-kate-and-meghan-c-4738910" target="_blank">alleges</a> that Prince Charles asked his wife Camilla, “I wonder what the children will look like?” in reference to his son Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s then-unborn child. Anderson goes on to claim that a “somewhat taken aback” Camilla replied: “Well, absolutely gorgeous, I’m certain.” Prince Charles is alleged to have then said, in a “lowered voice”, “I mean, what do you think their children’s complexion might be?” Clarence House has slammed the allegations, telling British tabloid The Sun that Anderson’s account “is fiction and not worth further comment”. The <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16879170/prince-charles-racist-claims-fiction/" target="_blank">publication reported</a> that the book’s claims had only been seen by Clarence House several days before the book's publication, and that royal lawyers had been alerted. “The claims are utterly ridiculous,” an insider told the newspaper. “There is more of a concern that commenting on it will simply sell more books than actually damage Charles’ reputation.” The allegations come months after Meghan and Harry’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, where Meghan claimed there were “several conversations” with Harry about “how dark Archie’s skin might be when he was born”. Though she declined to say who Harry had the conversations with, it was later revealed that he told Oprah it didn’t involve the Queen or her late husband, Prince Philip. Image: Getty Images

Legal

Lawyers for Rust armourer claim ‘sabotage’

Lawyers for Hannah Gutierrez Reed, the <a rel="noopener" href="https://oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/she-s-a-rookie-rust-s-armourer-comes-under-fire" target="_blank">24-year-old armourer</a> at the centre of the investigation into the tragedy on the set of Alec Baldwin’s film Rust, are now <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2021-11-03/rust-shooting-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed-lawyers" target="_blank">claiming</a> their client was the victim of sabotage, and that the accident was ultimately the fault of someone else. Her lawyers have suggested that someone intentionally smuggled live rounds of ammunition into a box of dummy rounds before the <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/news/news/alec-baldwin-allegedly-shot-and-killed-cinematographer" target="_blank">fatal on-set shooting</a> that killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins. Lawyer Jason Bowles made the suggestion while appearing on numerous morning news programs on Wednesday morning. On Good Morning America, he asked, “Why do you place that in the box labeled ‘dummies’ that the armorer is going to be pulling from? Why would you do that other than to try to cause some incident on the set? “Now, we’re not saying anybody had any intent there was going to be a tragedy — a homicide — but they wanted to do something to cause a safety incident on set. That’s what we believe happened.” When GMA anchor Michael Strahan pressed him for evidence to support this serious allegation, Bowles simply asserted that his client did not place the live round that was ultimately responsible for Hutchins’ death in the ammunition box. “We know the live rounds shouldn’t have been in that box, but they were,” he said. “So there can be very, very few explanations for why live rounds end up in a box of dummy prop ammunition on a movie set. And one of them is that somebody wants that to go into a firearm and then wants there to be an incident on the set. There’s no other reason to mix a live round with the dummies. There’s just none.” After presenting the same argument on Today and being asked by host Savannah Guthrie why anyone would “have the motive and opportunity” to sabotage the ammunition in this way, Bowles said, “I believe that somebody who would do that would want to ... prove a point, want to say that they’re disgruntled. “And we know that people had already walked off the set the day before. ... And the reason they were unhappy is they’re working 12- to 14-hour days. They were not given hotel rooms in and around the area. So they had to drive back and forth an hour to Albuquerque, and they’re unhappy.” This is a reference to the fact that the camera crew had staged a walkout before the incident, fed up with unreasonable working conditions and amidst a push within Hollywood to improve working conditions for film and television crews. Guthrie then asked Bowles if he was accusing the crew members who had walked out of planting the live ammunition, to which he said, “You can’t rule anybody out at this point. We know there was a live round in a box of dummy rounds that shouldn’t have been there… there was opportunity to tamper with the scene. And yes, we’re looking at that possibility.” Image: Instagram

Legal

Craig McLachlan’s lawyer accuses co-stars of showing “slutty” behaviour

Aussie actor Craig McLachlan’s lawyer has claimed in court that the four women who have accused the performer of indecent assault displayed “slutty” behaviour. The Gold Logie winner is being faced with 13 charges against four women during a run of the Rocky Horror Show. These charges include seven counts of indecent assault and six counts of common law assault. While a decision on these charges will be handed down to the 55-year-old next month, his lawyers have refused to rest their defence. It has been more than a year since he first appeared in court to fight the allegations. As part of the 160-page written defence submission, there were pictures of the alleged victims in “slutty” positions and a “lesbian pose”. Defence barrister Stuart Littlemore QC explained his use of the word “slutty” in the documents. <img style="width: 500px; height: 281.25px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7838713/craig-mclachlan-1.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/d3e2075f869b492a80ed2f5c6b8cc72a" /> Craig McLachlan in The Rocky Horror Show. “I’m going to call a spade a spade,” the lawyer said. “The photos do depict people in slutty poses and deliberately so. It’s not to be sanitised, it’s not be diluted, this is part of the culture of permissiveness.” The former soap star has been accused of touching a woman’s genitalia over her costume on stage, sticking his tongue into one woman’s mouth and feeling up a woman’s thigh. He also allegedly thrust his groin at a woman while partially aroused. The former Neighbours and Home and Away star has categorically denied all the charges against him. Prosecutor Matt Fisher has slammed the “slut” remarks as inflammatory and inappropriate. He also said using the photos as an “excuse” for McLachlan’s alleged behaviour towards the women was “impermissible” in this day and age. Magistrate Belinda Wallington said the term was unfortunate. “Some of the terms used … are most unfortunate. Phrases like sluts, slutty poses are most unfortunate,” she said. The magistrate went on to say that the court “doesn’t necessarily approve” of some of the language in the submissions on Monday. Mr Littlemore wrote one of the co-stars adopted a “lesbian pose”. <img style="width: 500px; height: 281.25px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7838712/craig-mclachlan-2.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/a14633996d9d4b04a3164fb481bd2b4f" /> Craig McLachlan with his TV sister Kylie Minogue during his stint on Neighbours in 1988. The lawyer also went on to describe an alleged victim’s appearance as “artfully dishevelled” when she was giving evidence at an earlier hearing. He said her testimony was a “skilful application of the craft of acting”. “That’s an old school submission … with no basis, it belongs in the dark ages,” the prosecutor responded. The magistrate told the lawyers that she would be ignoring any submission in relation to the complaints about clothing. The prosecution argued that McLachlan used his celebrity status and position of power to take advantage and assault the women. He also went on to claim that the “power imbalance” made them feel they were unable to speak up until the show’s run was over. In explaining why the women came forward, he said: “They were concerned what the accused had done to them and concerned about what he might do to others.” Mr Fisher also went on to tell the court about allegations McLachlan allegedly said. He is accused of telling co-stars he would “end them” and that they “don’t know who you’re dealing with”. They were also worried about their employment prospects if they spoke up, he said. The actor was questioned about the allegations over three days of evidence and denied the claims. He even went on to burst into song to show how it was “impossible” for him to have stuck his tongue into a co-star’s mouth on stage. “If I am late in that … because I fancy a snog, I miss the next lighting cue,” Mr McLachlan told the court after he finished a few lines from the song. Mr McLachlan also labelled one of his accuser’s as the “most vulgar woman” he knew or ever encountered during his questioning. However when videos were aired of the award-winning performer sitting on the toilet and pulling faces, he denied that his behaviour was equally vulgar. Another video aired in court showed Mr McLachlan pretending to pleasure himself. McLachlan said the videos were meant in a “comedic” sense. Ms Wallington will hand down her decision in mid-December.

Legal

Trump lawyer's press conference mistake goes viral

<div class="post_body_wrapper"> <div class="post_body"> <div class="body_text redactor-styles redactor-in"> A weekend press conference by Donald Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani went viral over the weekend as a staffer mistakenly booked Four Season's Landscaping instead of the five-star hotel. Donald Trump tweeted "Lawyers Press Conference at Four Seasons, Philadelphia,' but quickly deleted it and replaced the tweet with Four Season's Landscaping". “Big press conference today in Philadelphia at Four Seasons Total Landscaping – 11.30am!” he tweeted. Four Seasons Total Landscaping is a small business located between a crematorium and an adult book store called Fantasy Island. People on Twitter were quick to make fun of the incident. "I could write jokes for 800 years and I'd never think of something funnier than Trump booking the Four Seasons for his big presser and it turning out to be the Four Seasons Total Landscaping parking lot between a dildo store and a crematorium," one person <a rel="noopener" href="https://twitter.com/ZackBornstein/status/1325274318218035201" target="_blank" class="editor-rtflink">wrote</a>. "I'm sorry, I can't let this go: The people who can't find the right Four Seasons want you to believe they uncovered 40,000 fraudulent ballots in Philadelphia?" another person <a rel="noopener" href="https://twitter.com/JeffLieber/status/1325298846705061888" target="_blank" class="editor-rtflink">pointed out</a>. According to The New York Times, Trump's team did intend to hold the press conference at the landscaping business but the president was a bit confused. “In reality, the mistake was not in the booking, but in a garbled game of telephone,” the <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/11/07/us/biden-trump?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur#which-four-seasons-oh-not-that-one" target="_blank" class="editor-rtflink">New York Times</a> wrote. “Mr. Giuliani and the Trump campaign adviser Corey Lewandowski told the president on Saturday morning their intended location for the news conference and he misunderstood, assuming it was an upscale hotel, according to multiple people familiar with the matter.” According to insiders, they told the landscaping business as it was in a more Republican-friendly part of town. PBS Senior Political Reporter Daniel Bush added a bit more info, <a rel="noopener" href="https://twitter.com/DanielBush/status/1325143314170048514?s=20" target="_blank" class="editor-rtflink">tweeting</a>: “An answer to the Four Seasons Total Landscaping mystery: the company told me the Trump campaign contacted them today out of the blue ahead of the Giuliani presser and said their location was close to an exit on I95, and was secure, and that’s why they wanted to use it.” </div> </div> </div>

News

Australian lawyer allegedly sacked for refusing to lie

A <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/legislation/corporations-act/">corporate lawyer</a> has commenced proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court after he was terminated from his position as a senior legal adviser with Meriton Property Services for allegedly refusing to lie in an affidavit. Sydney lawyer Joseph Callahan is claiming $556,500 in compensation and costs after being terminated from his $350,000 a year position in February 2020. He claims that during a meeting on 3 February 2020, his employer, billionaire property developer Harry Triguboff, demanded that he falsely state in an affidavit that Sydney Council had taken three years to approve a development application. According to his statement of claim, the lawyer responded by stating, “I’m a solicitor and can’t include something in an affidavit which I know isn’t true”. He says his employer then said, “Listen my friend, you write it my way or you can fuck off”, and “Fuck you. I pay you to win cases do you understand?”. Mr Callahan says he then told his employer, “I understand I am here to win cases, but it did not take three years to get the building approved, so I can’t give evidence to the Court that it did”, to which Mr Triguboff responded, “Enough crap from you. Write it my way or you are no good to me”. The lawyers says he stood his ground, telling his employer “Harry I won’t do it. It’s a lie”. He says his employer emailed him on 13 February 2020 to advise that his position had been terminated. Meriton Property Services refutes the allegations, filing a defence which states: “All allegations that suggest otherwise are strongly denied. Meriton disputes the sequence and nature of the events set out in the court filing”. The case is listed for hearing on 17 June 2020. The offence of swearing a false affidavit Swearing a False Affidavit is a crime under <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/legislation/oaths-act/swearing-falsely-in-affidavits/">Section 29 of the Oaths Act 1900</a>. The offence carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. For the offence to be established, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that: <ol> <li>The defendant swore or affirmed an affidavit,</li> <li>The affidavit was affirmed or sworn before a person authorised to do so,</li> <li>The affidavit was false in any respect, and</li> <li>The defendant knew the affidavit was false in that or those respects.</li> </ol> In addition to this, <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/legislation/oaths-act/false-statement/">section 33 of the Oaths Act 1900</a> prescribes a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison for the offence of making a false statement in an affidavit. To establish that offence, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant: <ol> <li>Swore or affirmed an affidavit,</li> <li>Made a false statement within that affidavit, and</li> <li>Knew the statement was false.</li> </ol> Swearing to false information in an affidavit may also amount to perverting the course of justice, which is an offence under <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/legislation/crimes-act/perverting-course-of-justice/">section 319 of the Crimes Act 1900</a> carrying a maximum penalty of 14 years in prison. To establish that offence, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant: <ol> <li>Engaged in an act or made an omission, and</li> <li>Did so with the intention of perverting the course of justice.</li> </ol> ‘Perverting the course of justice’ is defined as ‘obstructing, preventing, perverting or defeating the course of justice or the administration of law’. Defendants have been found guilty of the offence for the following conduct: <ol> <li>Falsely swearing or declaring that another person was responsible for an offence,</li> <li>Attempting to bribe a police or judicial officer to avoid being prosecuted or punished,</li> <li>Using a victim’s phone or email in an attempt to create a defence to a crime,</li> <li>Encouraging or bribing another person to plead guilty to an crime they did not commit, to provide a false alibi and to give false testimony in court.</li> </ol> Where it is alleged that a false affidavit was used in connection with judicial proceedings – such as court proceedings – a person can be charged of perjury, which is an offence under <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/legislation/crimes-act/perjury/">Section 327 of the Crimes Act 1900</a> carrying a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. To establish the offence, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that: <ol> <li>The defendant made a false statement under oath or affirmation,</li> <li>The statement was in, or in connection with, judicial proceedings,</li> <li>The statement concerned a matter that was material to those proceedings, and</li> <li>The defendant knew the statement was false or did not believe it was true.</li> </ol> The maximum penalty increases to 14 years in prison where the prosecution proves that the defendant intended to procure the conviction or acquittal of a person for a ‘serious indictable offence’, which is one that carries a maximum penalty of at least 5 years in prison. Defences to the charges In addition to prove each ‘element’ (or ingredient) the charges, the prosecution must disprove beyond reasonable doubt any legal defence which a defendant validly raise in court. <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/defences/">Legal defences</a> which apply to these offences include: <ol> <li>Duress</li> <li>Necessity, and</li> <li>Self-defence</li> </ol> Professional obligations In addition to obligations under the general law, a solicitor or barrister who falsely swears to information in a legal statement such as a statutory declaration or affidavit is liable to disciplinary action by the Law Society of New South Wales, including being <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/lawyers-struck-off-for-professional-misconduct/">‘struck off’ for professional misconduct</a>. Going to court for an offence against justice? If you have been charged with an offence against justice such as swearing a false affidavit, contempt of court, perverting the course of justice or perjury, call Sydney Criminal Lawyers anytime on (02) 9261 8881 to arrange a free first conference with an experienced criminal defence lawyer who will advise you of your options and the best way forward. Written by Ugur Nedim. Republished with permission of <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/lawyer-allegedly-sacked-for-refusing-to-lie/">Sydney Criminal Lawyers.</a>

Legal

Twin ordered to pay sister $170,000 over sneeze

A sneeze has cost an NSW woman more than $170,000 after her twin sister successfully sued her over a traffic accident. Caitlin Douglas, budding lawyer, was awarded a six-figure sum by the NSW District Court after she suffered lower back pain as a result of a crash in October 2016. Judge Leonard Levy found the 21-year-old’s future earning capacity had been reduced by $150,000 because she was unable to lift more than 10kgs and would be hindered in her ability to work long hours. “The regular or intermittent experience of pain and the need for tailored and defined working restrictions along with the practical need for ergonomic furniture, and the need to make provision for regular breaks, is likely to be seen by a prospective legal employer to be negative factors in a competitive employment market,” Judge Levy said. “Even if the plaintiff continues to do well academically. Rightly or wrongly, the reality is that often, without over-explanation, able-bodied candidates are preferred to those with a disability.” She was awarded a total of $172,500, including $10,000 for future domestic assistance, $7,500 for future treatment costs and $5,000 for out-of-pocket expenses. The court heard that Ms Douglas was injured when she was the front-seat passenger during a car accident in which her twin sister Brighid was the driver. Her sister sneezed and lost control of the car before hitting a tree, which caused Ms Douglas to experience whiplash-like injuries and experienced lower back pain. Judge Levy found that in the future, Douglas would be hindered in her chosen profession because she had difficulty sitting for long periods and carrying heavy objects. “If illustration of the lifting and carrying component of legal work was required, it would be sufficient to recognise that the weighty folders that were provided to the court, weighed several kilograms,” Judge Levy said. “It is well-recognised from observing litigation over a long period that trolleys laden with such materials are most commonly pulled and pushed by the most junior members of a legal practice.”

Legal

Grandmother found dead by son after paramedics visited then left her alone

A Hobart woman was found dead and decomposing by her son on the floor of her home but was last seen alive months earlier who left her alone in the house after a “bizarre” interaction. Findings were published on Tuesday and coroner Simon Cooper said it was difficult to understand why Kim Leonie Maree Szemes, 60, was left in the house that didn’t have hot water, lighting or power. Mrs Szemes, whose mental health was in a state of decline, died sometime between May 28th and October 8th 2018. Neighbours called police on May 28 after not seeing the mother-of-two in several weeks. Officers reportedly found Mrs Szemes underneath several blankets in bed wearing a beanie and noted she was incoherent and struggling to speak. An ambulance was called and officers left the house under the impression she would be taken to hospital. “However, the attending paramedics did not take Mrs Szemes to hospital,” Mr Cooper wrote. “Instead, because she asked them to leave, they left her in bed.” Ambulance Tasmania case records note Mrs Szemes was difficult to understand, had minimal fluid intake and was showing bizarre and irrational behaviour. Mr Cooper said it was “difficult to understand” why paramedics left, considering what was described in the case notes. Mrs Szemes had been living alone for four years and was not seen alive after paramedics left at 6:16pm. She was found dead on her bedroom floor by her adult son five months later, after he forced his way into her house. Mr Cooper said that there was no evidence of violence, assault or that Mrs Szemes’ death was due to suicide.

Caring

Outrage as Morrison continues inaction on violence towards women

The horrific quadruple murder of Hannah Clarke and her three young children by ex-partner Rowan Baxter <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-09/hannah-clarke-children-funeral-service/12024138">on 19 February</a>, drew national attention to the ongoing crisis of violence against women and their children, which annually takes the lives of many more than any local terror actions do. Following the recent killings, PM Scott Morrison <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/09/domestic-violence-womens-safety-advocates-say-coalition-is-ignoring-experts?fbclid=IwAR2MvkAJZvrPkfYPYzkKFMD80cjK05X3p1IVVrsvahcJwpbeSD5_WOvLLsM">said</a> all levels of government and the judiciary should reflect on them. And last Friday, women’s minister Marise Payne <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/payne-ruston-call-special-meeting-with-states-on-domestic-violence-20200228-p545dx.html">convened</a> a special pre-COAG meeting of state and territory women’s safety ministers, where no ideas were “off the table”. But, nothing happened. No new plans were forthcoming. Instead, social services minister Anne Ruston <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/government-to-put-20-million-into-loan-program-for-domestic-violence-survivors">announced</a> on International Women’s Day that the government is investing in a much criticised microloan scheme that was already launched <a href="https://ministers.pmc.gov.au/odwyer/2018/greater-financial-support-women-experiencing-family-and-domestic-violence">back in late 2018</a>. The loan scheme, and <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/pms-retrograde-domestic-violence-counselling-an-interview-with-wdvcas-hayley-foster/">a counselling program</a> announced last year, have been criticised for placing the onus on the victims of domestic violence. However, they’re probably in line with the views of a PM <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/a-pms-faith-shouldnt-be-steering-a-secular-nation/">who sees women’s empowerment</a> as tantamount to men losing their place at the table. And on Wednesday afternoon, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/womenssafetynsw/videos/420111632154330/?v=420111632154330">a video</a> started doing the social media rounds, which saw <a href="https://www.womenssafetynsw.org.au/">Women’s Safety NSW</a> chief executive Hayley Foster condemning the government for having ignored the advice of the experts and failing to commit to any “serious action in addressing domestic violence”. Serving up seconds “Governments already have expert recommendations before them, which have not been acted upon to address our country’s domestic violence crisis,” Foster made clear, “but have chosen not to proceed with these recommendations due to ‘competing priorities’.” “Women and children’s safety advocates across the country were hopeful that there would be meaningful commitments made at” the pre-COAG meeting,” she told <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/about/specialist-lawyer-guarantee/">Sydney Criminal Lawyers</a>. However, what the government served up was an old response. This involves $20 million in funding a interest free loan scheme that would provide women fleeing domestic violence situations with a one-off $2,000. Women’s Safety NSW is part of the <a href="https://awava.org.au/">Australian Women Against Violence Alliance (AWAVA)</a>, which is a collaboration of specialist women’s organisations funded by the government, which provided the women’s safety ministers’ pre-COAG meeting with five key recommendations to consider. “Not only were the recommendations of AWAVA ignored. Not only did the government commit to no new measures to tackle this urgent problem,” Ms Foster continued. “But, the key measure re-announced actually sent a very disturbing message about whose responsibility it is to address this.” Victim blaming The issue with the loan scheme, as Foster puts it, is it says to DV survivor-victims that “you got yourself into this mess, you can get yourself out of it.” It places extra financial hardship on the woman involved, and the advocate notes that the amount is hardly going to solve the problem. This follows on the Morrison government’s last big announcement regarding the prevention of violence against women, when it committed $10 million in funding <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/pms-retrograde-domestic-violence-counselling-an-interview-with-wdvcas-hayley-foster/">last April</a> to a counselling and dispute resolution program for couples dealing with domestic violence. Again, this sort of program places some of the responsibility as to why violence is occurring upon the victim on the receiving end, as it sees a couple discuss the reasons behind the male partner’s violence, in a manner that implies the female partner may have done something to lead to it. Foster explained last year that when it comes to domestic and family violence, society has long moved past the idea that the victims have done something to cause it, and therefore have to take “mutual responsibility for resolving it”. “Funding these programs is therefore extremely irresponsible,” Ms Foster went on. “It is also inconsistent with the government’s rhetoric around tackling gender inequality and disrespect towards women.” The ignored recommendations Following the recent murder of an entire Brisbane family, AWAVA consulted with its advisory body and came up with an approach to tackle gendered violence. It “went to the heart of what were apparent as failings in the system” in relation to the recent tragedy, Ms Foster explained. The five key recommendations made include fully funding specialist women’s safety services and holding violent men to account. Removing the “presumption of equal shared parental responsibility” from family law. And initiating a national screening, risk assessment and referral process. The alliance also recommends improving apprehended violence order (AVO) standards so as to ensure that women and children can rely on them, as well as making sure that all women reaching out for help can access assistance that’s suitable to her situation. On improving AVOs, Ms Foster emphasises that there needs to be a move away from the practice of relying on non-custodial penalties for men who breach them. The AWAVA is not calling for mandatory sentencing, but rather specialist DV magistrates and police prosecutors. And the other recommendation that Foster drew attention to was removing the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility in law, as she explains that at present regardless of how violent a partner is, a woman entering the system is warned that he will get some form of access. The real domestic threat According to Ms Foster, those working on the frontline in NSW are currently supporting over 50,000 women a year, who are accompanied by around 45,000 children. And as their services are stretched as it is, they can’t do anymore. Meanwhile, as the government constantly rolls out further legislation to curb the threat of terrorism, it consistently makes token attempts at dealing with the much greater threat to the community, which arises within many households, and is often dealt with by a glance in the other direction. “Why is the government preaching about gender equality and respecting women and yet completely dismissing women experts on women and children’s safety?” Ms Foster asked. “You’d really have to ask them that question,” she then remarked in conclusion. “We’d be interested in the answer.” Written by Paul Gregoire. Republished with permission of <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/outrage-as-morrison-continues-inaction-on-violence-towards-women/">Sydney Criminal Lawyers.</a>

Beauty & Style

Should I tell my lawyer the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

When engaging a criminal defence lawyer, clients are sometimes unsure about how much to say at the first meeting – concerned that telling their lawyers everything all at once could make it harder to achieve the best possible outcome. Indeed, in serious cases, lawyers may not obtain full instructions from their clients until they have received the statements and other materials upon which the prosecution relies, and until both they and their clients have gone through those materials. So, what are the rules that affect how a lawyer can deal with information from clients? Legal professional privilege The client/solicitor relationship is one of the most fundamental of our legal system. As such, principles have been established so that clients can provide full and frank disclosure to their lawyer without fear that this information will be used against them. Chief of these principles is ‘legal professional privilege’ also known as ‘client legal privilege’ which protects conversations between lawyers and clients. In the words of Dean J in Baker v Campbell (1983) 153 CLR 52: “That general principle represents some protection of the citizen – particularly the weak, the unintelligent and the ill-informed citizen – against the leviathan of the modern state. Without it, there can be no assurance that those in need of independent legal advice to cope with the demands and intricacies of modern law will be able to obtain it without the risk of prejudice and damage by subsequent compulsory disclosure on the demand of any administrative officer with some general statutory authority to obtain information or seize documents.” Legal professional privilege protects against the disclosure of communications between client and lawyer made for the dominant purpose of seeking or providing legal advice or for use in anticipated legal proceedings. This means your lawyer is generally prohibited from disclosing communications made for the purpose of your cases, subject to the exceptions outlined below. Privilege applies to both verbal and written communications between a lawyer and his or her client; whether in person, over the phone, by mail or over the internet – so it’s a broad protection which seeks to facilitate free communication between the parties. Exceptions to client legal privilege There are, however, a number of exceptions to client legal privilege that you need to be aware of. In NSW, sections 121 to 126 of the Evidence Act provide a number of situations where client legal privilege does not apply to the admissibility of evidence, which are: <a href="http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ea199580/s121.html">121</a> – Where the client has died or where disclosure is necessary to enforce a court order, <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ea199580/s122.html">122</a> – Where the client waives privilege, or consents to the lawyer disclosing information or producing materials, or where the client acts in a manner inconsistent with maintaining the privilege (eg discloses to others), <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ea199580/s123.html">123</a> – Where a defendant is giving evidence in criminal proceedings, unless it is a a confidential communication or document between an associated defendant and a lawyer acting for that person in connection with the prosecution of that person. <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ea199580/s124.html">124</a> – Where two or more clients have jointly retained a lawyer in civil proceeding and one or more of them wishes to disclose a confidential communication or contents of a confidential document, <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ea199580/s125.html">125</a> – Where a communication is made or document prepared in furtherance of a <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/offences/fraud-charges/">fraud</a>, an offence or an act which would render a party liable for a civil penalty, and <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ea199580/s126.html">126</a> – Certain information necessary to understand material to which privilege does not apply as a result of the preceding sections. What if I’m actually guilty but want to plead not-guilty? There are some circumstances where being too frank with your lawyer may limit how they can advocate for you inside the courtroom. And it should be said that if you are indeed guilty, pleading that way will entitle you to <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/what-is-a-guilty-plea-discount/">a guilty plea discount</a> – which could result in a less serious type of penalty than if your were to plead not guilty and be found guilty. For example, an early plea of guilty could result in a penalty such as an <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/penalties/nsw/intensive-correction-orders/">intensive correction order</a> or <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/penalties/nsw/community-correction-order/">community correction order</a> instead of a prison sentence. However, an experienced criminal defence lawyer will be able to ask you questions in a way that reduces the risk of future prejudice. If you do admit to the offence, but wish to plead not-guilty to it – your lawyer will be limited in how he or she can present your case in court. This is because all lawyers are required to abide by professional ethics and conduct rules which can limit the questions that can be asked in certain situations, and the way cases can be argued. The rules do not prohibit lawyers from representing clients who admit their guilt to their lawyer; however, lawyers are strictly prohibited from lying or knowingly misleading the court on behalf of their clients. A lawyer who knows their client is guilty can still ‘put the prosecution to proof’; which means they can ask questions of prosecution witnesses and make submissions to the court to the effect that the prosecution has failed to prove each of the ‘essential elements’ (or ingredients) of the charge case beyond a reasonable doubt, and that their client should therefore be acquitted. But again, the lawyer will not be able to elicit false or misleading evidence, or make false or misleading submissions to the court. For example, a lawyer to whom you admit your guilt can assist by questioning and challenging prosecution witnesses. But he or she cannot allow you or another person to tell lies on the witness stand. If this nevertheless occurs, the lawyer would be well advised to submit to the court that he or she is ‘embarrassed’ and withdraw from the case. Often honesty is preferable, as you may be guilty of a lesser offence than the one you have been charged with, in which case your lawyer can push for the charge to be downgraded, or tailor your defence to ensure you are found not guilty of the charged offence in court. So it’s a bit of a tricky area, but experienced defence lawyers are well-aware of the rules, the pitfalls and how to act in the best interests of their clients whilst abiding by their other ethical obligations. Changing lawyers If you don’t feel your lawyer can adequately represent you – whether this is because you have told them something you shouldn’t have, or you believe they are not suitably experienced, or for another reason – it may be in your interest to obtain new legal representation. Changing lawyers is a simple process, and when making that decision you should always bear in mind that choosing the right lawyer may be one of the most important decisions you ever make, and that you should always be looking out for your own best interests. If you want to change lawyers, you will normally need to sign an ‘authority to uplift’. Your new lawyer will be able to provide you with this document, and can send it to your previous lawyer on your behalf in order to obtain the materials they have. If you have unpaid fees with your previous lawyer, it is advisable that you pay these to enable a smooth transfer and ensure your previous lawyer doesn’t seek to exercise a ‘lien’ over your materials – which means to refuse to forward your materials on to your new lawyer. Going to Court? If you are going to court and require expert advice <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/about/lawyers/">from experienced, specialist criminal defence lawyers</a>, call Sydney Criminal Lawyers anytime on (02) 9261 8881 to arrange a free first conference. Written by Jarryd Bartle. Republished with permission of <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/should-i-tell-my-lawyer-the-truth-the-whole-truth-and-nothing-but-the-truth/">Sydney Criminal Lawyers.</a>

Legal

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Lawyer warns drivers over little-known road rule with $2200 penalty

"Find that car": Mother of fallen young lawyer speaks out

Police investigate after young lawyer killed in "cowardly act"

New details revealed as Daylesford driver's lawyer speaks out