Society & Culture Things in life you just don't understand - Part 5

[Chief]

No lollipop ladies at crossings, no speed bumps or 40kph zones.

The death rate more than halved between 2009 and 2018 (1.7 per 100,000 to 0.7). The decline in road accident deaths is most noticeable among children aged 0–4, which has decreased by 68% since 2009 (2.2 to 0.7).

Of children who died because of a road transport accident:

• 59% were passengers
• 29% were pedestrians
• 5.9% pedal cyclists
• 5.9% were drivers or other.

Australia's children, Injuries

Childhood is an important time for healthy development, learning, and establishing the foundations for future wellbeing. Most Australian children are healthy, safe and doing well. However...

www.aihw.gov.au

 

[Fossie 32]

There used to be a saying 'What do you have to do to get put in jail, kill somebody?'
Seems even that doesn't do it now.

Man who allegedly struck and killed Melbourne model faces court

The 23-year-old was allegedly drunk and high on drugs when he reversed into a group of people at speed in a carpark.

7news.com.au

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

There used to be a saying 'What do you have to do to get put in jail, kill somebody?'
Seems even that doesn't do it now.

Man who allegedly struck and killed Melbourne model faces court

The 23-year-old was allegedly drunk and high on drugs when he reversed into a group of people at speed in a carpark.

7news.com.au

You are far more likely to go to jail for White Collar Crime than killing someone whilst drink driving/speeding, esp if you try defraud centrelink or commit Tax Evasion.

Many courts and Magistrates have not really gone along with expected community values when it comes to punishment for a very long time.

our judicial system is broken. I don't know how to fix it either

 

[phantom13]

You are far more likely to go to jail for White Collar Crime than killing someone whilst drink driving/speeding, esp if you try defraud centrelink or commit Tax Evasion.

Many courts and Magistrates have not really gone along with expected community values when it comes to punishment for a very long time.

our judicial system is broken. I don't know how to fix it either

This is huge and its weird too given the broad profile of Judges would skew toward those more in favour of heavy punishments etc. It seems like just about EVERYTHING needs to be considered in sentencing now. If youre poor and were raised by shitty parents we have to reduce your sentence, if youre from a wealthy family we have to reduce your sentence, if youve had mental health issues and are a repeat offender we have to reduce your sentence, if you have a clean record and are an upstanding member of the public we have to reduce your sentence.

It seems ridiculous to me.

 

[Chief]

There used to be a saying 'What do you have to do to get put in jail, kill somebody?'
Seems even that doesn't do it now.

Man who allegedly struck and killed Melbourne model faces court

The 23-year-old was allegedly drunk and high on drugs when he reversed into a group of people at speed in a carpark.

7news.com.au

I get where you're coming from, but it's just bail. He hasn't been set free after a conviction.

Bail is presumed, and it is up to the prosecution to prove bail should be denied.

 

[phantom13]

I get where you're coming from, but it's just bail. He hasn't been set free after a conviction.

Bail is presumed, and it is up to the prosecution to prove bail should be denied.

current trends for sentencing especially for car accident deaths would suggest hes not going to see prison time and if he does itll be short

 

[Fossie 32]

I get where you're coming from, but it's just bail. He hasn't been set free after a conviction.

Bail is presumed, and it is up to the prosecution to prove bail should be denied.

But up to the judge to accept their argument?

 

[Chief]

But up to the judge to accept their argument?

They have rules and guidelines, and the decision can be appealed.

 

[phantom13]

Funny enough, i actually think bail in that particular instance makes sense.

Hes not really a flight risk and presumably with a suspended license he doesnt really pose much risk to the public.

Given the volume of violent repeat offenders who get bail, not granting bail here would have made absolutely no sense.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

This is huge and its weird too given the broad profile of Judges would skew toward those more in favour of heavy punishments etc. It seems like just about EVERYTHING needs to be considered in sentencing now. If youre poor and were raised by shitty parents we have to reduce your sentence, if youre from a wealthy family we have to reduce your sentence, if youve had mental health issues and are a repeat offender we have to reduce your sentence, if you have a clean record and are an upstanding member of the public we have to reduce your sentence.

It seems ridiculous to me.

Women and Children have really been let down by our legal system.


Jill Meagher's killer, scum bucket campaigner Adrian Bayley had a massive prior rap sheet of sexual assaults and stalking of women, and really should have been considered a menace to society and locked away years before he brutally r*ped and brutally poor Jill.

And how many other innocent young women have been murdered by scumbags here in recent times with previous records of violence against women ?

makes me so so angry..

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

Women and Children have really been let down by our legal system.


Jill Meagher's killer, scum bucket campaigner Adrian Bayley had a massive prior rap sheet of sexual assaults and stalking of women, and really should have been considered a menace to society and locked away years before he brutally r*ped and brutally poor Jill.

And how many other innocent young women have been murdered by scumbags here in recent times with previous records of violence against women ?

makes me so so angry..

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

 

[JackOutback]

'Judges are soft on crime' is one of the easiest, and laziest, claims to make, imo. I've recently been witness to a sentencing for a fairly minor incident, the judge's reasoning took more than half a day to read out, he outlined every mitigating factor in painstaking detail, why he disregarded some, not others etc. For serious cases, it can take days. But most people don't see the process, they just see the headline of that one case in the thousands a judge might see that went bad. That doesn't make it better, mistakes are made, but it's a difficult balancing act and the idea that courts are a revolving door is a myth. But that's why Queensland can vote in a party promising to act on a 'youth crime crisis' when all the evidence is that youth crime is declining. If the average person had their way, the prisons would be overflowing, but then they would complain when people come out of prison worse than when they went in.

 

[gaskin]

I've recently been witness to a sentencing for a fairly minor incident, the judge's reasoning took more than half a day to read out, he outlined every mitigating factor in painstaking detail, why he disregarded some, not others etc. For serious cases, it can take days.

Pretty much. When I did jury duty it was a simple case of grievous bodily harm. Before we went to deliberate the judge spent a good nearly 2 hours going over the law and what applies and what doesn't and why. The law is a lot more complicated than most people realise.

 

[phantom13]

Pretty much. When I did jury duty it was a simple case of grievous bodily harm. Before we went to deliberate the judge spent a good nearly 2 hours going over the law and what applies and what doesn't and why. The law is a lot more complicated than most people realise.

No, most people are well aware the law is complex, i dont think we all see 6 years of uni to be a paralegal as something required for a simple industry.

That doesnt preclude that there are more than enough cases of extreme violence and repeat offenders copping very light sentences to make the news pretty much nightly.

It can be complex and still be wrong.

Id also note that i expect absolutely nothing to change with regards to crime in QLD, the issue itself is far more complex than just saying lock people up more and for longer. In some instances however that should have been the case and by some i mean alot more than we should have had.

My brother in law is a lawyer and hes noted to me that one of the rules of law is its better to see 100 guilty men free than 1 innocent man incarcerated. We dont extend that to one less victim for the sake of keeping a piece of shit like Adrian Bayley behind bars.

 

[JackOutback]

People might understand the law is complex, but they are still basing their opinions off of headlines and short stories rather than the complete sentencing details, of one case among thousands, without an understanding that rehabilitation is a driving force, and yes, the principle that guilty men go free rather than jailing innocent people because if you fundamentally break that principle, society is much more damaged, as harsh as that might sound.

Mistakes are made, of course, but the entire system is subjective and ultimately at the whims of individual criminals... one lighter sentence may turn a life around, another might lead to a worse outcome. I wouldn't want a judge's responsibility for love nor money.

 

[phantom13]

People might understand the law is complex, but they are still basing their opinions off of headlines and short stories rather than the complete sentencing details, of one case among thousands, without an understanding that rehabilitation is a driving force, and yes, the principle that guilty men go free rather than jailing innocent people because if you fundamentally break that principle, society is much more damaged, as harsh as that might sound.

Mistakes are made, of course, but the entire system is subjective and ultimately at the whims of individual criminals... one lighter sentence may turn a life around, another might lead to a worse outcome. I wouldn't want a judge's responsibility for love nor money.

Im sure some base their opinions off a headline without reading, i certainly dont, i also dont think i know better than a judge or a lawyer.

Im also very comfortable in saying Adrian Bayley should have never been let out. The (very clearly) mentally unstable person who murdered the young pharmacist in Doncaster (i think) last week also shouldnt have been out and about. There are countless other examples from just this year, let alone the last decade.

Im not advoacting for locking everyone up forever and i absolutely understand that rehabilitation should be the driving factor, ive worked in corrections and had quite a bit do to with prison design reform to assist in rehabilitation over custodial. I also understand the principle behind let 100 guilty men go free and agree with it however, looking at it that ONLY judges can possibly have influence on sentencing essentially removes altogether other experts advice (which is often ignored or overlooked) and removed community safety and expectation from the sentencing process.

As it stands all of those things have taken the shitty 7th seat in a "7 seat Navara" over process and legalese and IMO that has come at the expense of many a life (either taken or irrepairably damaged).

Now maybe they are just mistakes but they are ones we should be trying to fix not just shrugging shoulders and saying "well its complex and pretty hard isnt it".

 

[Frank Bunn]

Funny enough, i actually think bail in that particular instance makes sense.

Hes not really a flight risk and presumably with a suspended license he doesnt really pose much risk to the public.

He's possibly a lucky boy to get bail.

If you are charged with a schedule 2 offence, such as culpable driving causing death, the onus is on you to satisfy the bail decision maker that there are compelling reasons to grant bail.

It's reported that his Dad hadn't seen him since Christmas so I wonder how realistic the bail condition to supervise him 24-7 is. And if they are not close would he give a shit about his Dad losing the $100,000 he has stumped up? If he's found guilty of culpable driving causing death he's facing up to 20 years in prison so that would be a significant motivation to go missing.

Suspending someone's license doesn't stop them driving. One of this guy's charges is driving while not having a valid license.

 

[phantom13]

He's possibly a lucky boy to get bail.

If you are charged with a schedule 2 offence, such as culpable driving causing death, the onus is on you to satisfy the bail decision maker that there are compelling reasons to grant bail.

It's reported that his Dad hadn't seen him since Christmas so I wonder how realistic the bail condition to supervise him 24-7 is. And if they are not close would he give a shit about his Dad losing the $100,000 he has stumped up? If he's found guilty of culpable driving causing death he's facing up to 20 years in prison so that would be a significant motivation to go missing.

Suspending someone's license doesn't stop them driving. One of this guy's charges is driving while not having a valid license.

All valid points, based on the general expectation and current rates of non remand pre trial it would have been quite the shock to see him held.

 

[GreyCrow]

MrsEddieBetts does he get an interview?

 

[JackOutback]

A major reason people get bail is because our prisons are overflowing and the time to trial can be years (and that's on our governments, not the judges). If you deny someone bail for as much as two years and they are found not guilty, then you have wrongly jailed someone for a significant amount of time. It would be a factor in deciding bail, the likelihood of their being found guilty, time to trial etc.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

MrsEddieBetts does he get an interview?

View attachment 2156159

Bless, depends how old they are. If they're 15, we'd at least give them a call and maybe some resume advice if they were open to it!

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

A major reason people get bail is because our prisons are overflowing and the time to trial can be years (and that's on our governments, not the judges). If you deny someone bail for as much as two years and they are found not guilty, then you have wrongly jailed someone for a significant amount of time. It would be a factor in deciding bail, the likelihood of their being found guilty, time to trial etc.

But here is the thing I alluded to previously was an otherwise decent person like John Farnham's late manager Glenn Whealey spent 15 months in jail for failing to declare income from 2 events he organised (who honestly did that hurt aside from the w***ers at the ATO) and many drink drivers who kill people and in some cases rapists and foul women/spouse and children beaters spend less time in the clink.

If our Prisons are overflowing, simply build more elsewhere (even in the Simpson Desert for all I care)
Do the crime, do the time.. We have plenty of untouched land in all states (except ACT and Tas) to build more prisons.

Wheatley wasn't a scam artist who destroyed lives like Skasey or Bond, his incarceration is still one of our biggest criminal injustices imo

 

[Off The Couch]

I get where you're coming from, but it's just bail. He hasn't been set free after a conviction.

Bail is presumed, and it is up to the prosecution to prove bail should be denied.

Outside court, Mathiasson’s lawyer said he had not coped well while in custody.

“He’s had some enormous difficulties and we hope those difficulties will be overcome now that he’s on bail,” he said.


I can’t tell you how much rage this causes.
There’s 10 year olds in custody waiting trial and this guy who literally killed someone is out on bail

The life of the privileged