Quote:


LINK

So an elderly Aussie is living in a van near a river as shown in the accompanying video.  She's in poor health, bucketing water in winter

while a foul mouthed Aussie favourite has been living in and destroying her home for 2.5 years


Why hasn't the 'law' issued the damn order to authorise the police to kick the squatter's arrogant backside OUT ?

Wouldn't it be nice if a couple of burly types just went in and removed the ratbag? 

we are being taken over by the deadbeats.. the PC mob have a lot to answer for...

here is another case if our SO CALLED TRUSTED LAW SOCIETY.. working for us all...

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/judges-criticised-for-outrageous-leni...

A judge has been slammed for an “outrageous” morning of leniency in which he slashed prison terms for two high-range drink drivers — one of whom crashed his car on a booze run after consuming a bottle of scotch in two hours — and quashed the conviction of a wedding guest who blew mid-range.

The guest, Jane Clark, 60, was caught weaving across the centre line of the road near ­Orange Police Station after ­deciding to drive 200m to her motel because it was a warm evening, she was wearing heels and a wedding outfit, acting District Court Greg Hosking was told.

“I have seen worse,” the judge said on Tuesday after being told she had lengthy driving record mainly for speeding.


Jane Clarke (left) leaves Downing Centre Court with daughter Poppy. Picture: Dylan Robinson
Then there was tradie Jose Bustamente, 69, who had downed a morning bottle of Chivas Regal scotch before being jailed for his fifth drink-driving offence and already banned from driving until 2031. He had his non-parole period more than halved to four months.

The Centrelink pensioner will get out of jail next month.

Acting Judge Hosking said he would apply “special circumstances” because it was Bustamente’s first time in jail. Records show the furniture removalist had been sentenced to seven months behind bars in 2016 after being declared a habitual drink driving offender.

The third person to successfully appeal on Tuesday was the mother who created traffic chaos two weeks before Christmas on the Sydney Harbour Bridge with her two screaming children in the back of the car as she wove onto the wrong side of the road after downing an entire bottle of vodka.

Jailed for 11 months with a non-parole period of six months two weeks ago, Acting Judge Hosking freed the 41-year-old on the spot.

“I think full-time imprisonment … is too harsh,” he told her as she sobbed appearing in court via videolink. “It must have been a nightmare for you.”

‘SORBENT SOFT’

Pedestrian Council of Australia chief Harold Scruby said on Wednesday these kind of decisions “dumbed down” the seriousness of drink-driving.

“It is outrageous,” Mr ­Scruby said.

“These judges are Sorbent four-ply soft on drink driving. The police get terribly demoralised by these decisions.
Mr Scruby said the government’s recent clampdown on low-range drink drivers — with 280 losing their licences on the spot since the tough new penalties were introduced last month — signalled how the community viewed drivers who put others at risk through their behaviour.

The most recent court figures reveal that about a quarter of drink drivers overall who appeal both their conviction and sentence win.

Nineteen per cent of the 21 high-range drivers who appealed their convictions and sentence also had a win, according to the 2015 figures from the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research.

DEADLY TOLL

The most recent Office of Road Safety figures for 2017 show ­alcohol was involved in 51 out of 351 fatal crashes and 354 out of 5430 serious injury crashes. From these crashes there were 55 persons killed and 429 persons seriously injured — representing 14 per cent of all fatalities and 7 per cent of all serious injuries in 2017.

Provisional data for 2018 ­indicate there were 354 fatalities, of which 68 — or 19 per cent — were from alcohol-­related crashes. Of the 332 fatal crashes for that year, 58 of them — or 18 per cent — ­involved alcohol.

“We are taking a zero-tolerance approach to drink and drug driving,” said Transport minister Andrew Constance, who introduced the tough low-range measures last month.

“Drivers who have an illegal level of alcohol in their blood or have used illegal drugs have no place on the road.

“This is about saving lives. There are no more excuses.”



we seem to REWARD BADNESS>.

Call it trespass and get em turfed out. This could have been solved very easily from the beginning. Squatters rights dont exist in this instance.

rhino wrote on Jun 20^th, 2019 at 11:23am:


According to the news report, the police will do nothing without a court order

and for 2.5 years there's been no court order

If anyone, including police, so much as laid a hand on the squatter, you just know the media would be wailing in her defence, along with those who are paid to wail in her defence

she's laughing

in fact, she's threatening the owner with physical harm

and still the police do nought

Maybe now current affairs has brought this matter to public attention, a court order might suddenly authorise the police to remove the squatter

guess it would be too much to ask that the squatter pay for damage caused the property over the past two and half years

In any case, it's you and I who'd be paying

Back in the day, going back say fifty years, this would have ended differently and a lot swifter

the squatter would be missing a lot of teeth and hair and have a sore backside for six months, if she'd tried this on, for example, my mother.  And the townsfolk would have driven that squatter so far out into the bush ...

cods wrote on Jun 20^th, 2019 at 11:31am:



That poor family.  Loss of a loved one is very hard, harder on some than others.  To lose a loved one so early in her life and to have her dismissed by the system people trust to deliver justice, would remain an open sore

Phoebe's father was a psychiatrist, I think.  Hope he's been able to lessen the burden of grief and helplessness for his family

Phoebe's grandfather was apparently a senior investigator and he staged at least one re-enactment to show it was close to impossible for her to have put herself in the shute

Then there's the female janitor who discovered the body and encountered a man in the garbage system room

The coroner's verdict made it impossible for Phoebe's family to take it further, apparently

The primary suspect's father and step mother were/are members of the legal fraternity

The Age, I think, or maybe Sydney Morning Herald expended enormous time and effort in a podcast which has been watched by tens of  thousands worldwide, probably more. It was nominated as one of the premier podcasts that year and is still watched and the case discussed

I know, it's just one girl, an imperfect girl, who died in a bizarre manner some years ago.  People die every day.  But real humans have something in them which baulks at injustice.  It seems to be inherent.  We recognise injustice and we want it fixed, we want to see justice to be done, often when it has no direct bearing on us or our family

Life's short.  Those responsible for not only murdering Phoebe but also denying her and her family justice will one day face their own mortality, which is when, if not before, they wonder in earnest about where they'll go and what will happen to them next

all teh money in teh world won't matter to them then, nor prestige, influence, etc.  I'd hate to be in their shoes, knowing what they know and what they did.  They didn't even toss a crumb of respect to Phoebe or her family

Captain Caveman wrote on Jun 20^th, 2019 at 12:01pm:



I believe most sane people agree with you

and the owner, despite her health problems, is not a weak woman.  She's living in a caravan and hauling water from a river in a bucket

The squatter is brazen.  How she became this brazen and arrogant is open to conjecture

but she physically threatened the owner, via the media. And there's no reason to doubt she would bash the owner

the courts have let the owner down and they've dragged it out to benefit the squatter and disadvantage the owner.  There can be no other interpretation

we've seen before that it can be extremely difficult to remove determined squatters, but it can be done as we've seen on tv.  But it takes muscle and determination.  The owner seems to be on her own and may not have the money to pay a gang of strong removalists to strip the property bare of the squatters stuff.  And usually in cases where a squatter is removed by force, the police are there to remove the squatter

in the case in teh OP, the police are refusing to touch the squatter without the court order authorising them to do so

and I personally suspect a large part of the impasse is because the squatter is part aboriginal

and perhaps the courts are waiting for the owner to die in order they don't have to become embroiled in some sort of 'victim' beat up staged by the squatter and those who support that sort of person

Let's see if the current affairs report moves things along.  Hope it does.  But the owner will likely find her home trashed if she ever gets back in there without being bashed.  All because she left her cherished home to visit her sick father

and they say to opt for a tree-change

not likely

Captain Caveman wrote on Jun 20^th, 2019 at 12:21pm:


Agree with you 100% full post

Maybe someone should suggest it to the owner.  And maybe whomever's responsible for failing to protect the owner's rights by failing to issue the court order -- should be held to account publicly then sacked