Pier Paolo Parisi on LinkedIn: FCFC 7 Jun 24 removed post / repost, AHPRA, ASIC extracts | 17 comments (2024)

"If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change" (The Leopard).Reappointments to the "new" Administrative Review Tribunal.I wonder how many are otherwise on the Commonwealth's payroll? Or in private practice, competing with representatives appearing before them? Or formerly of government agencies, or private practices, that competed, or even still compete, with those appearing before them? Or more than one of these variables, at the same time?To say nothing of "part-time" appointments.All this can be worked out, if desired. It's better done, with the benefit of a statistical consideration of outcomes, of their decisions.https://lnkd.in/gVg2a4p9

5

2 Comments

"What if he had not recorded the call?" This comment, of District Court Judge Pickering SC, continues to echo. Hauntingly. I heard it, during the unsuccessful appeal, of a police officer, who is a son of a former premier. He was convicted, for making a false police statement, that a man, in a call, said he would kill another officer. The innocent man, who had recorded the call, was charged, and put in custody, without access to his recording. The guilty officer, whose lie put the innocent man there, will not go to prison. The innocent man was imprisoned, the guilty one was not. I explain this contradiction, elsewhere:https://lnkd.in/gvfUePGP The judge had no sympathy, for the guilty officer. In arguments, he repeatedly referred to "extraordinary" differences, between the call, and the statement. A statement made just 3 hours after the call, with detailed, quoted speech, whose correctness the officer expressly acknowledged, in a jurat. A statement that was not qualified, even after an innocent man was imprisoned, as a result of it. The judgment was emphatic, and scathing. His Honour returned to what the caller would have faced, without a recording. He would have faced an immediately reported alleged threat, and detailed statement, by an officer of good character, with contemporaneous intel entries. This, he said, made the innocent man "incredibly vulnerable". His Honour began to add, "A real travesty of justice could have -", before, stopping, and, noting the innocent man's arrest, and incarceration, saying, "did occur". https://lnkd.in/gdSaSAee

63

15 Comments

5

Is this guy available for Origin? Or is any tie with NSW insufficient? Or, subject to the restraints impairing the independence of politically influenced prosecutors, will he instead be facing an assault charge? https://lnkd.in/gtm3Y4ka

2

2 Comments

7

1 Comment

10

Australian legal argument, of the highest standard, is in the High Court. The arguments, in the three Vasta appeals, are no exception. The subject matter could hardly be more stimulating: the extent, if any, of a "right" to commit a legal wrong, that is, an "immunity".Last Friday, the wrongly imprisoned Mr Stradford (a pseudonym) filed his submissions, authored by Perry Herzfeld SC and Daniel Reynolds. They respond to all three appeals, and an intervention attempt. They are best read after those of the appellants, and intervener, and the judgment under appeal. Their eloquence and persuasive force is readily apparent, however, even on their own. Just one aspect, for example. The attempt to abolish the distinction applying to judicial immunities of superior, and inferior, court judges. In comments having a wider application, concerning concealed aspects of decisions, and the need for open justice, it was said ([79], [87]): "[T]he Commonwealth and Judge Vasta invite this Court to abolish the distinction between the immunity of superior and inferior court judges that has been recognised at common law for over 400 years. That radical step should not be taken....A[] reason for the distinction in modern times is that the work of superior courts is exposed to a far greater degree of publicity than that of inferior courts. The decisions and reasons for judgment of superior courts are generally published online, and important cases are reported by the media and even live-streamed online. By contrast, much of the work of inferior courts happens in relative obscurity, away from the public eye. There is a greater risk that inferior court judges may become mini-tyrants over time, running their courts as their own private fiefdoms. As Judge Vasta said: 'that's what I do. If people don’t comply with my orders there's only [one] place they go' (J[22]). It is difficult to see how any superior court judge could say such a thing in court without rightly fearing opprobrium." https://lnkd.in/gCq_pitS

4

Is anyone keeping the "score" of children killed? Or does a homicide only count when deployed to support a wider social claim?A homicide, by its nature, affects everyone. It reminds us that we will also die, one day. That each of us can be killed, by a fellow human being, including one who we trust.Of all the homicides in media reports, and cases studied, at law school, and as a practitioner, none defy all prior learning, like this. A young person, 17, killing her child sibling, aged 10. My own mother, at 10, was taken out of school, to help raise her 4 younger siblings, including a newborn. Her mother had married at 15, eloping. It's not easy to view a 17 year old, as anything other than, effectively, a young adult. It's also hard to see an elder sister as the opposite of a caring, protective maternal proxy. Cultural biases, powerful as they are, can only go so far, however.Understanding violence, and deviance, in Australian culture, is only beginning. Settlement was a foundational act of homicidal violence. That part was torn out of the pages of the history texts. Even land law, for 200 years, proceeded on a related, essential, false premise (Terra nullis). There are other false assumptions, straining every sinew, to remain valid. https://lnkd.in/gvjaMPdh

11

4 Comments