Sentencing in Australia is a disgrace

[TCB]

I would like to bring attention to the disgraceful Judge Sarah Bradley of Cairns. This woman is out of touch with reality and needs to be booted from the system. This is the judge that let loose the 9 (yes nine!) teenagers raped a 10 year old girl in Aurukun.

Sarah Bradley stated that the nine year old girl "probably agreed" to have sex with all nine. Now how would a nine year old possibly be capable of this decision!?

She offers leniency to Aboriginals and has said "The gross over-representation of indigenous people in our prisons and detention centres is unacceptable" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Bradley_(Judge) ). This mentality has skewed her sentencing.

If someone is a criminal they should be treated as such no matter how many of that race makes up the population of prisons!

Well pointed out Aargh but there were 6 teenagers and three adults with the oldest of the adults being 26 years of age. This Judge like a majority is out of touch and out of control. Yes she still works in the same job and still presides in Cairns which takes in all of Cape York. And yes she is still handing out the feather duster for punishment.

As reported on 10/12/2007
"Judge Bradley said Woolla was the oldest and should have known a lot better.

"You cannot have sex with anyone under 16," she said.

"However, as I said before, I am not treating anyone any differently in terms of being a ringleader, and in your case, again, I will impose a sentence of imprisonment but it will be wholly suspended so you do not go to jail today.

"But if you get into more trouble in the next year, you could end up in jail."

Woolla had been arrested on August 7, 2006, and the judge said the 14 days he spent in custody awaiting his sentence was to count as "imprisonment already served".

When sentencing the juveniles, Justice Bradley said: "All of you have pleaded guilty to having sex with a 10-year-old girl and (one of the juveniles) has pleaded guilty to having sex with another young girl as well.

"All of you have to understand that you cannot have sex with a girl under 16.

"If you do, you are breaking the law, and if you are found out, then you will be brought to court and could end up in jail.

"I accept that the girl involved, with respect to all of these matters, was not forced, and that she probably agreed to have sex with all of you.

"But you were taking advantage of a 10-year-old girl and she needs to be protected, and the girls generally in this community need to be protected.

"This is a very serious matter.

"It is a very shameful matter and I hope that all of you realise that you must not have sex with young girls.

"Anyone under 16 is too young.

"Some of you are still children yourselves.

"Others of you are adults but I am treating you all equally in terms of the behaviour.

"I am not treating any of you as the ringleader or anything like that."

She asked each prisoner to stand up and said she hoped they would realise it was wrong to have sex with young girls.

Justice Bradley then offered them probation and when each agreed to accept that, she said she would not record a conviction.

To one of the juveniles, she said: "You are still a child. You have pleaded guilty to one offence of rape.

"You have been in a lot of trouble in the past, though, and you still have some community service to do.

"You have not been doing that well. I am prepared to offer you probation but you have got to stick with the rules of probation."

The juvenile agreed and was then placed on 12 months' probation, with no conviction recorded. "

 

[Calliope]

http://www.thepunch.com.au/

The evil men do and the courts that ignore it.

One of the first of the sadly limited number of court cases arising from the death of Dianne Brimble on a Pacific Sky cruise came to an end this week.

Its conclusion achieved nothing, other than to reinforce the public belief in the cavernous divide between community standards and the sentencing practices of the judiciary.

While there are other cases on the horizon which cannot legally be the subject of discussion here, the unsatisfactory conclusion of this week’s case involving one of the “Brimble Eight”, the execrable Leo Silvestri, has raised the worst case scenario surrounding the shocking death of this young woman.

Namely that the plodding nature of justice and the pernickety application of the law – all these things may conspire to ensure that no-one faces any genuine punishment over that fact that a woman was left for dead in a drugged stupor on the cold linoleum floor of a cheap cruise ship.

 

[Julia]

I heard on the radio that he (or one of them) received a suspended sentence.
They were a particularly disgusting group of parasites.

 

[MrBurns]

I think there's a very real case for forming a Star Chamber here -

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086356/

Count me in.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I think there's a very real case for forming a Star Chamber here -

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086356/

Count me in.

Be careful Burnsie.

Star Chambers are yer Iran and Laden ways of dispening justice.

The judge in this case may have decided that the whole community was so stuffed that a message needed to be sent , via her closing remarks.

It is possible that behind the court , as the sentence was being read, another child was being molested by an elder.

One of my girlfriends is a judge, I won't say where, and on the pillow she worries about each and every judgement she makes. She is a good person and like this judge in Cairns has to adjudicate over many bizarre manifestations of human behaviour and culture.

gg

 

[MrBurns]

Be careful Burnsie.

Star Chambers are yer Iran and Laden ways of dispening justice.

gg

No they're just barbarians, nothing just about anything they do.
Star Chamber 09' would just clear the streets of scum because the courts are impotent.

 

[Calliope]

One of my girlfriends is a judge, I won't say where, and on the pillow she worries about each and every judgement she makes.
gg

Does this judge of yours know that you are driving an unregistered vehicle?

 

[Happy]

From abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/10/

SIEGE MAN KNOWN TO POLICE

Police say the man involved in a siege in South Australia's north-east yesterday was known to them.
The incident began on Thursday morning when the man stabbed an officer near Peterborough before stealing his patrol car and hitting a pedestrian.
He then assaulted an elderly woman he took hostage at a nearby property.
She was able to escape and alert police.
The siege ended at 7.30pm when police entered the house and found the man dead.
Police believe the 32-year-old died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
Assistant commissioner Graham Barton says the man was on parole and had been involved in two other sieges in recent years.
"He has a previous history with us, and the fact that he was involved with two previous sieges with us over a period of time made us extra careful in the way that we approached the matter," he said.
Commissioner Barton says the three victims of Thursday's siege remain in a stable condition.

It is all well in reactive approach to crime, but isn’t it time to be more proactive and have known to police or known former criminals under better control?

Or maybe even excluded from community altogether until completely reformed?

 

[trainspotter]

As some of you are aware I own a pearl farm. I also have a shop that sells my pearls once they have been created into fine jewellery. I asked the sales staff to perform a stock take on the 2nd of July. Whilst going about their duties one of the cabinets was left open. In walks a very shifty looking criminal type who swipes a $2000 ring out of the cabinet whilst staff are looking the other way. THREE CCTV cameras watch his every move. Police are called. Video evidence handed over. They pick up the lowlife scumbag who swiped my piece of jewellery within 48 hours because "He was known to them". Goes to court and the learned judge gives this bottom dwelling felcher a 3 month good behaviour bond. He is also ordered to pay restitution of $10 a fortnight. This will only take him 7 years and 7 months to pay me back. Heres the kicker. He only has to make 2 payments and then plead financial hardship and payments are suspended indefinitely. It is then up to me to go to the Clerk of Courts and pay $80 to get the bailiff to go and follow him up for my money. What happened to the ring you may ask? Never to be seen again. GREAT STUFF. Oh yeah .... the staff member that left the cabinet open has just informed me she is going on holidays to Italy for a month. Pffffffffffffttttttttt !!! Justice for all !

 

[Ageo]

As some of you are aware I own a pearl farm. I also have a shop that sells my pearls once they have been created into fine jewellery. I asked the sales staff to perform a stock take on the 2nd of July. Whilst going about their duties one of the cabinets was left open. In walks a very shifty looking criminal type who swipes a $2000 ring out of the cabinet whilst staff are looking the other way. THREE CCTV cameras watch his every move. Police are called. Video evidence handed over. They pick up the lowlife scumbag who swiped my piece of jewellery within 48 hours because "He was known to them". Goes to court and the learned judge gives this bottom dwelling felcher a 3 month good behaviour bond. He is also ordered to pay restitution of $10 a fortnight. This will only take him 7 years and 7 months to pay me back. Heres the kicker. He only has to make 2 payments and then plead financial hardship and payments are suspended indefinitely. It is then up to me to go to the Clerk of Courts and pay $80 to get the bailiff to go and follow him up for my money. What happened to the ring you may ask? Never to be seen again. GREAT STUFF. Oh yeah .... the staff member that left the cabinet open has just informed me she is going on holidays to Italy for a month. Pffffffffffffttttttttt !!! Justice for all !

Trainspotter, unfortunately in our game (jewellery, gold etc..) the only form of justice is your own. Ill leave it at that

 

[trainspotter]

Plan B is already underway Ageo *wink wink*

 

[nunthewiser]

Mmmmmmmmm

sounds like an insider setup job to me trainspotter


happy to investigate and get to the bottom of this problem for a mere 5 k

can start monday

oh and full board and alcohol is expected so stock up

 

[Calliope]

A corrupt Qld politician is convicted as guilty on 36 charges of corruptly receiving $360,000. The maximum sentence is seven years, although apparently this is the sentence for each charge.

Today the Judge, Patsy Wolfe sentenced him to seven years. She said he had mitigating circumstance. He hadn't been caught before. He and his family were suffering from humiliation. He was cooperative with the police, etc.

He also put on a display of crocodile tears during the trial, but that didn't fool the jury who returned the guilty verdict in two hours.

The punchline is... he will be out in two and a half years for good behaviour.

 

[Ageo]

Plan B is already underway Ageo *wink wink*

Make sure you use cigar cutters as they work wonders

 

[MrBurns]

It's about time someone stood up and said the bleeding obvious - these Judges are in fairy land........

Jail urged over violent child attack
Posted 10 minutes ago

Map: Adelaide 5000
South Australia's Director of Public Prosecutions has personally argued that the man who kicked his young child, lacerating his liver, be ordered to serve his suspended sentence.

Troy Levi Galffy, 34, last year admitted to recklessly causing harm to his son at Munno Para in 2006.

Judge Sydney Tilmouth suspended a two-and-a-half year sentence, largely because Galffy was his family's main breadwinner.

Stephen Pallaras today told the Court of Criminal Appeal that the only proper penalty for Galffy's conduct was an immediate jail term.

Mr Pallaras said the judge had failed the community, the justice system and the injured child, who could have died from the attack.

Mr Pallaras said there was no-one else other than the courts to send a harsh message to anyone inclined to abuse children, that such behaviour would not be tolerated.

The court has reserved its decision.

 

[veni_vedi_vici]

I have many questions:

Why barristers take cases, know that offenders did the crime and use loopholes to get accused of the hook, don’t they have conscience?

It's called the cab rank rule, a barrister cannot refuse to take a case unless their are special circumstances.

 

[veni_vedi_vici]

Mr Burns,

Do something proactive, become a judge then you can clean the streets up as you see fit.

 

[GumbyLearner]

I wonder what principles were used in the sentencing of these individuals.

Her worship has certainly used some very descriptive adjectives to describe this senseless attack and robbery.

I hope the DPP will be appealing this one.



http://www.theage.com.au/national/assault-by-former-refugees-savage-20090728-e09w.html

Mohamed was jailed for 22 months with a minimum of 13 months, which included three months for breaching an earlier suspended sentence.

Mentel was jailed for 18 months with a minimum of nine months and Kiir for 17 months with a minimum of seven months, with all three terms to be served less time served on remand since February.

 

[MrBurns]

I wonder what principles were used in the sentencing of these individuals.

Her worship has certainly used some very descriptive adjectives to describe this senseless attack and robbery.

I hope the DPP will be appealing this one.

Mohamed was jailed for 22 months with a minimum of 13 months, which included three months for breaching an earlier suspended sentence.

Mentel was jailed for 18 months with a minimum of nine months and Kiir for 17 months with a minimum of seven months, with all three terms to be served less time served on remand since February.

Her worship should be sentenced to spending every night from here on on a deserted station in a bad area until she learns first hand about these matters and the maggots who did this crime should be simply shot dead.

 

[johnnyg]

In her hour-long sentencing remarks, Ms Broughton recounted how the offenders followed the man into the station tunnel underpass before Mentel punched him.

Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah.

As the title of the thread, the sentences are Absolutely Disgraceful.

To Veni - Why would you want to become a judge for, the ones who hand down the tough sentences are hung out to dry, and then have their sentence overturned.