Australian Politics Forum - At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out!

mothra

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 36384
Gender: female

Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out!
Reply #150 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 3:09pm

mariacostel wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 3:03pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 1:01pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 12:58pm:

ian wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 12:18pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 11:55am:

[
Not on the same charge they can't. Double jeopardy prevents being retried for the same crime twice. .

Wrong. Varies state by state. Some states have effectively abolished double jeopardy law for some crimes.

Care to prove that?

I heard something about QLD removing double jeopardy laws.

I would like some facts and it is really a terrible idea. Double Jeopardy protects the innocent so naturally QLD would think about removing it.

Can't you do your own research Maria?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_jeopardy#Australia

Back to top

If you can't be a good example, you have to be a horrible warning.

IP Logged

Lord Herbert

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 34441
Gender: male

Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out!
Reply #151 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 3:10pm

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 8:56am:

Very true, and that is one serious flaw in our legal system - we need findings of 'not proven' and 'innocent' - to do otherwise confuses the issue and no matter the proof, some will always screech 'guilty' unless absolutely told that 'innocent' is the correct term.

Exactly.

It's a no-brainer.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 7344 Sydney Gender:	Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out! Reply #152 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 3:26pm It seems that double jeopardy is not being removed, but simply having an 'exceptional circumstances' criteria. That I am happy with.
Back to top	IP Logged

red baron Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 10204 Blue Mountains Gender:	Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out! Reply #153 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 3:59pm Are you still banging on about a subject you know sweet fanny adams about? Plenty of sweet turf here where you can apply your substantial academic artillery to, without embarrassing yourself further on this subject. Your knowledge on this subject is microscopic.
Back to top	IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 150698
Gender: male

Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out!
Reply #154 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 4:11pm

red baron wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 3:59pm:

Are you still banging on about a subject you know sweet fanny adams about? Plenty of sweet turf here where you can apply your substantial academic artillery to, without embarrassing yourself further on this subject.

Your knowledge on this subject is microscopic.

Would you be so kind as to school us all on the finer details of double jeopardy law, as it applies to each state and territory?

Back to top

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles

IP Logged

ian Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 9451	Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out! Reply #155 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 4:24pm mariacostel wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 3:26pm: It seems that double jeopardy is not being removed, but simply having an 'exceptional circumstances' criteria. That I am happy with. Still wrong. why dont you just read the Wikipedia article on it?
Back to top	IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out!
Reply #156 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 4:29pm

red baron wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 3:59pm:

Are you still banging on about a subject you know sweet fanny adams about? Plenty of sweet turf here where you can apply your substantial academic artillery to, without embarrassing yourself further on this subject.

Your knowledge on this subject is microscopic.

You have already humiliated yourself PC Plod on so may topics - not the least the FEMA death camps. If you wish to school us in double jeopardy law then go ahead but since you are ignorant on the topic (and we DO know that), we can google just as well as you can - probably better, since the black helicopters aren't hovering overhead at the moment.

Back to top

IP Logged

red baron Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 10204 Blue Mountains Gender:	Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out! Reply #157 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 6:00pm All that gobbledegook coming out of your mouth maria, time to reach for the serviette. Hughes has been canned to serve out his sentence. Stop banging on about legalities, the show is over dumb, dumb.
Back to top	IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 150698 Gender:	Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out! Reply #158 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 6:25pm red baron wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 6:00pm: Stop banging on about legalities. Indeed. Why involve the law in a situation like this? Madness!
Back to top	GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out!
Reply #159 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 7:10pm

ian wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 4:24pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 3:26pm:

It seems that double jeopardy is not being removed, but simply having an 'exceptional circumstances' criteria. That I am happy with.

Still wrong. why dont you just read the Wikipedia article on it?

I always thought it only applied to murder... an new evidence...

anyway out of interest that link has a small side piece attached in blue criminal procedure...

and it lists the rights of the accused

but not the rights of the victim....

.just because the victim has been silenced.. why does that mean they have no rights???>.. Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39711
Gender: male

Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out!
Reply #160 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 7:18pm

cods wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 7:10pm:

ian wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 4:24pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 3:26pm:

It seems that double jeopardy is not being removed, but simply having an 'exceptional circumstances' criteria. That I am happy with.

Still wrong. why dont you just read the Wikipedia article on it?

I always thought it only applied to murder... an new evidence...

anyway out of interest that link has a small side piece attached in blue criminal procedure...

and it lists the rights of the accused

but not the rights of the victim....

.just because the victim has been silenced.. why does that mean they have no rights???>.. Roll Eyes

What rights would you like victims to have, cods?

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 89929
Proud Old White Australian Man
Gender: male

Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out!
Reply #161 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 7:33pm

The Rights of any victim only come into play once there is a proven situation of victimhood. The Law (if not the law and legislation and regulation)... DEMANDS that any person accused is innocent until proven guilty in accordance with Law (not law and legislation and regulation).. and therefore the adherence of the term victim can only arise once a genuine issue of Law has been established.

A simple complainant is not a victim, and there are many ways in which a complaint may be made without foundation.

That is why I have a serious unease about 'conviction' many years after the alleged events, and when and where there are often established psychological or psychiatric problems with the accuser.

There is NO 'merit' in determining that.... rather than there being an established psychological or psychiatric issue with a complainant before complaint.... the underlying condition is the result of the events alleged.

Without proof positive no such position may be attained under Law.

The two are equal.. a determination of a pre-existing condition or allegation that the condition is the result of the issue at hand of some form of abuse...in which case any benefit of any doubt must go, by Law, to the accused.

That is precisely where 'domestic violence orders' fail at the first hurdle...... no court in the land, as representative of Her Majesty, may find, in Law, that a sanction against any individual may be installed without proof of any wrongdoing.

Without proof positive... there is no victim in the case before the court, even if there may be, under different circumstances - a victim.

... Judge Grappler.

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39711
Gender: male

Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out!
Reply #162 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 7:40pm

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 7:33pm:

The Rights of any victim only come into play once there is a proven situation of victimhood. The Law (if not the law and legislation and regulation)... DEMANDS that any person accused is innocent until proven guilty in accordance with Law (not law and legislation and regulation).. and therefore the adherence of the term victim can only arise once a genuine issue of Law has been established.

A simple complainant is not a victim, and there are many ways in which a complaint may be made without foundation.

That is why I have a serious unease about 'conviction' many years after the alleged events, and when and where there are often established psychological or psychiatric problems with the accuser.

There is NO 'merit' in determining that.... rather than there being an established psychological or psychiatric issue with a complainant before complaint.... the underlying condition is the result of the events alleged.

Without proof positive no such position may be attained under Law.

The two are equal.. a determination of a pre-existing condition or allegation that the condition is the result of the issue at hand of some form of abuse...in which case any benefit of any doubt must go, by Law, to the accused.

That is precisely where 'domestic violence orders' fail at the first hurdle...... no court in the land, as representative of Her Majesty, may find, in Law, that a sanction against any individual may be installed without proof of any wrongdoing.

Without proof positive... there is no victim in the case before the court, even if there may be, under different circumstances - a victim.

... Judge Grappler.

Correct Yer Onor. However, I'd still like cods to explain what rights she wants victims (i.e.......a person against whom a proven offence has been committed) to have.

Back to top

IP Logged

President Elect, The Mechanic

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17501
Gender: male

Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out!
Reply #163 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 8:48pm

red baron wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 6:00pm:

All that gobbledegook coming out of your mouth maria, time to reach for the serviette.

Hughes has been canned to serve out his sentence. Stop banging on about legalities, the show is over dumb, dumb.

yes exactly..

let the poo showers continue to rain down upon Hughes

its all he deserves

Back to top

Q

The STORM has arrived
Every Dog Has Its Day...
Dark to Light.
Sheep no more.

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39711
Gender: male

Re: At last - Robert Hughes goes down and out!
Reply #164 - Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 8:58pm

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 8:48pm:

red baron wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2015 at 6:00pm:

All that gobbledegook coming out of your mouth maria, time to reach for the serviette.

Hughes has been canned to serve out his sentence. Stop banging on about legalities, the show is over dumb, dumb.

yes exactly..

let the poo showers continue to rain down upon Hughes

its all he deserves

I do understand that within prisons, there is a system of (in)justice, but I reckon we (Society) have an obligation to protect all prisoners from it.

People are sent to prison as punishment....they have their freedom taken away, nothing more than that. They are still entitled to the protection of the Rule of Law, and if there is a prisoner being abused beyond his sentence of loss of freedom, then that prisoner needs protection, and must be given it. If that means the said prisoner has to be kept in more comfortable protective conditions than they would otherwise experience, said prisoner is not to blame......the blame lies with others.

The Judge's comments in this matter were appropriate, and I trust will be acted upon.

Back to top

IP Logged