Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Some court rulings just seem wrong

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by jd, Jul 14, 2005.

  1. Saw a link to this on another forum I frequent:

    Makes me wonder at what point does a motorcyclist become a pedestrian?

  2. I know some motorcyclists who are pretty pedestrian even when they are RIDING their motorcycles!
  3. Well, that's an American story too!!!

    In Australia, what is the comparable situation on cautioning a person who has been arrested?
  4. Actually, Alberta is part of Canada - loyal British subjects like ourselves...
  5. I seem to remember a story on one of those current affair shows on TV about a drink driver who was let off simply because the police officer simply held the breatho unit near him and never actually instructed him to breathe into it - therefore the reading they obtained could not be used in court.
  6. "Lawyers, damn thei oily hides." (Monty Burns)
  7. Wouldn't apply here in Victoria as our TAC no fault ctp covers even pedestrians.
    Non issue afaiac
  8. The article about the convictions being overturned because the accused folk weren't properly read their rights is interesting.

    It's a pretty important thing to leave out. And it's very suspicious that the bureaucrats decided not to fix the problem when it was brought to their attention. Gee, it's almost as if the Sheriff's office didn't want people to be aware of their rights... :roll:

    Re the "often damning statements to deputies" - people often confess to all sorts of things they didn't do. I imagine being locked in an interview room for a few hours with a couple of beefy cops might encourage that sort of thing.

    Because one is presumed innocent until proven guilty, both innocent and guilty folk are entitled to exercise their rights (such as a right to a lawyer when being questioned). Inconvenient perhaps, but the point is to prevent abuse of process by the state. Which does happen (Cornelia Rau and many others, for instance).

    In this case, it's probable that most of the people whose convictions were overturned committed the crimes of which they were accused. Blame the Sheriff's office for failing to fix their cock-up (and for trying to take advantage of it). Don't blame the lawyers who brought it into the light of day - they were just doing their job.

    Or would you prefer to "bend over and spread 'em" next time the government tries to get away with something at your expense?

    *Gromit prepares to have his oily hide damned* :LOL:
  9. Interesting article, gromit.
    If the law is flawed, you can't blame the lawyer from exploiting the flaw, can you?
  10. you're the one damning their oily hides all the time :LOL: :LOL:
  11. The law that says an accused person must be informed of their rights wasn't flawed. The prosecuting authority's failure to follow the law was what caused this debacle.

    Hopefully the end result will be that they follow the law in future.
  12. Actually, it was Monty Burns that did that, but I think we have a general disregard for lawyers when they seem to profit most from the misfortunes of others. This perhaps applies more in civil cases than it does in criminal ones.

    But, they have a job to do and as long as they do it honestly....
  13. Funny - I can't remember hearing anyone paying out on all the builders, plumbers, electricians and other tradespeople who benefit from others' misfortune whenever there's a disaster requiring new building work (eg Cyclone Tracy, earthquakes, tsunamis etc).

    But I guess they have a job to do and as long as they do it honestly... :LOL:
  14. Of course, you're right. I just think that there's a perception in the community that lawyers "drum up" a lot of business by encouraging litigation rather than getting warring factions to talk to each other and perhaps reach a compromise out of court. The example of the builders, etc, is not quite the same thing because they didn't actually CAUSE the disaster.

    Does that make it clearer?
  15. The Miranda Rights arise from Miranda V Arizona, in which the US Supreme Court held that Ernesto Miranda did not understand the right not to incriminate himself (a right provided under the Fifth Amendment) and the right to legal representation (guaranteed under the Sixth Amendment). Accordingly his confession was held to be unconstitutional and, as a result, the "Miranda Warning" was introduced to avoid future occurences.

    In Victoria, you have the right to remain silent (except in limited circumstances where you must supply name and address, and in more limited cases, date and place of birth). It is only when a police officers has decided to lay a charge that a caution is required under the Chief Commissioners Standing Orders:

    2) When any member of the Force has made up his mind to charge a person with a crime, he must first caution such person before asking any questions, or any further questions, as the case may be.
    (3) Persons in custody should not be questioned without the usual caution being first administered.
    (4) If the prisoner wishes to volunteer any statement the usual caution should be administered.
    (5) The caution to be administered to a prisoner when he is formally charged should be in the following words: - 'Do you wish to say anything in answer to the charge. You are not obliged to say anything unless you wish to do so but whatever you say may be taken down in writing and given in evidence." . . .

    However, the failure to caution you doesn't invalidate any confession or admission you might make. The High Court of Australia ( R. v. Lee , 1950) held that

    "With regard to the Chief Commissioner's Standing Orders, which correspond in Victoria to the Judges' Rules in England, they are not rules of law, and the mere fact that one or more of them have been broken does not of itself mean that the accused has been so treated that it would be unfair to admit his statement. "
  16. Chairman, you are a gold mine of useful information. Thank you.
  17. Yeah - R. v Lee - right up the top of the "must-have information list"! Some people have brains like factories - turning out well designed ideas. Others have minds like an artist's gallery - creative and colorful. I seem to have an op-shop, full of the stuff no-one else needed.

    But if it's trivial or obscure, I'm the man!
  18. Didn't Miranda get lost at Hanging Rock? :-k