Welcome To The Sandpit
I love a good argument so please leave a comment
Please support the Sandpit
Do you feel lucky?
Recent comments
Top Posts & Pages
Blogroll
Play Chess online
check out the source of these clever cartoons by clicking the image
My Car Blog
Just personal and not that political
Sweet as, in Sydney
likes a drink
the name says it all
Cafes life and food
Life in London
Living and love
Amusing and witty Canadian
Photography NZ style
Gender Issues
No to feminist oppression
Good sense on Domestic violence issues
No Misandry here
Environment and global warming
String theory and debunking AGW from a physicist's point of view
Jo does it for me
Anthony debunks "Global Warming" with wit and style
AGW Scepticism NZ style
Steve knows his sums
Jennifer rocks!
definitely not futile
mainly the other side
Decaffeinated Soy Latte Sipper
libertarian central
Legal Eagle and Scepticlawyer
The good lefty
knowledgeable on Islam
Conservatives
a wise head on young shoulders
he rides true
Bing Bing
Feisty Carrot top blogger
Good stuff here!!!
Mild Colonial Boy
more than legal tender
Hated by leftards because he cuts them to shreds
Good sense on mid-east questions
from her bunker in Londonstan
Witty, amusing and hated by leftards
Has the right attitude to cyclists
Mark Richardson
3-2 High Court majority dismisses Brent Huxley’s appeal for murder of Michael McCabe
On 18 September 2019, Brent Malcolm Huxley was found guilty in the Townsville Supreme Court of the murder of Michael James McCabe. He was sentenced to life imprisonment.
McCabe, a known illicit drug user, was murdered on or about 16 August 2015. Police found McCabe’s “partly-skeletonised and partly-mummified” body in remote bushland at the bottom of a steep, rocky embankment in Crystal Creek, north of Townsville, on September 17, 2015.
An autopsy revealed Mr McCabe had multiple fractures to his face, consistent with having a large rock dropped on his head.
The Crown case was that there was a “plan” schemed by Huxley to murder Mr McCabe with the help of others. It was alleged McCabe had been assaulted hours before his death on 15 August 2015 in a unit in Burnda Street, Townsville.
The prosecution alleged that Rewha, a co‑accused, assaulted McCabe in company in the unit, and that Huxley subsequently murdered McCabe on 16 August 2015 at Crystal Creek or elsewhere in Queensland.
The primary evidence against Huxley was from Darren Hess, who claimed that Huxley had confessed he had committed the murder to him in August 2015.
Another witness who gave evidence at the trial was Candis Nicole Greer. In front of the jury, she indicated that she was refusing to be sworn or affirmed as a witness to give evidence. In the absence of the jury, she continued to refuse to give evidence as a witness and was charged with contempt of court.
The evidence she eventually gave was that she had consumed significant quantities of methylamphetamine and alcohol on 15 August 2015 and did not recall seeing Huxley when McCabe was assaulted and removed from the unit.
The impugned direction to the jury was as follows:
“You should only act upon [Ms Greer’s] evidence if, after considering her evidence with the warning that I have given in mind, and all the other evidence in the trial, you are convinced of its truth and accuracy. In particular, consistent with the directions I will give you in relation to the case against Mr Rewha, as a matter of law, you should only act upon her evidence if you are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that her evidence is truthful, reliable and accurate. If you are not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the evidence of Ms Greer is truthful, reliable and accurate, then you should disregard it.”
A tight 3-2 High Court decision which turned on the construction of the impugned direction had the majority dismissing the appeal.
Full story:
Daniel Keneally convicted of fabricating evidence
Constable Daniel Keneally was charged in October last year with fabricating evidence following a telephone conversation in February 2021 with a man named Luke Moore. Keneally had subsequently submitted a report that Moore was threatening to kill a police officer, which resulted in Moore being charged with using a carriage service to menace and threaten to kill, and refused bail, resulting in him spending time in jail for three weeks.
Moore had fortunately recorded his discussion with Keneally jnr, and that recording showed that Keneally’s report was false.
Now that the trial has concluded, we can exclusively share the primary materials that demonstrate Constable Keneally’s shameful conduct.
Read more:
Annastacia Palaszczuk quits
Another corrupt, incompetent covid criminal gone.
This power-hungry lady delighted in locking us in our homes, forcing us to wear masks when walking with our dogs or driving our own cars and destroying restaurants in Brisbane, and then rewarded her Chief Medical Officer for providing scientific cover for her insane totalitarian policies by appointing her governor.
Meanwhile, Queensland has been left saddled with even more debt, while her Labor mates continually feed from the public trough.
McGowan, Andrews, Marshall and Palaszczuk are all now out of office. The covid crooks who locked us up because they were on a power trip have all gone. Their outrageous oppression of the people appears to have thankfully cut their careers short.
Don’t let the door hit you on the way out, Annastacia.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/politics-now-foreigners-home-buyers-hit-with-tax-hikes/live-coverage/2f5a36c0694fba269af08da0e6c4dc03
Judge Salvatore Vasta successfully sued for false imprisonment
The facts
In 2021, Judge Vasta was sued for $2M for false imprisonment of a party that appeared before him.
The proceedings arose from what happened on 6 December 2018, namely when Judge Vasta made the following declaration and order:
1. That the Applicant [MR STRADFORD] be sentenced to a period of imprisonment in the [X Correctional Centre] for a period of twelve (12) months, to be served immediately with the Applicant to be released from prison on … 2019, with the balance of the sentence to be suspended for a period of two (2) years from today’s date.
In the reasons for judgment delivered extemporaneously, Vasta J wrote that:
“The matter went before Her Honour Judge Turner on 26 November 2018. Her Honour ordered that the matter be adjourned for hearing of a contempt application. What Her Honour found was that there had been compliance with order 3(b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g) and (i) of my order, but there had not been compliance with orders (a), (h), (j), (k), (l), (m), (n) and (o) of my orders. For that reason, Her Honour found that the Applicant husband was in contempt of my orders and sent it to me to deal with as I had foreshadowed in my orders.”
In fact, Judge Turner had made no such determination.
As a result of Order 1 above, the husband was deprived of his liberty and imprisoned.
Statutory provisions
Part XIIIB of the Family Law Act, which consists of s 112AP, deals specifically with contempt of court. Section 112AP(1) provides that the section applies to a contempt of court that either “does not constitute a contravention of an order under this Act” or “constitutes a contravention of an order under this Act and involves a flagrant challenge to the authority of the court”.
Section 17 of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act provided that:
“17 Contempt of court
(1) The Federal Circuit Court of Australia has the same power to punish contempts of its power and authority as is possessed by the High Court in respect of contempts of the High Court.
(2) Subsection (1) has effect subject to any other Act.
(3) The jurisdiction of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia to punish a contempt of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia committed in the face or hearing of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia may be exercised by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia as constituted at the time of the contempt.”
Section 35 of The Family Law Act provided that:
35 Contempt of court
Subject to this and any other Act, the Family Court has the same power to punish contempts of its power and authority as is possessed by the High Court in respect of contempts of the High Court.
The decision
The written reasons for judgment of Justice Michael Wigney from the outset made it fairly apparent what the result would be:
“The applicant in this proceeding was the victim of a gross miscarriage of justice. He was detained and imprisoned for contempt following what could fairly be described as little more than a parody of a court hearing. He spent seven days in prison before being released. The order that resulted in his incarceration was subsequently set aside. The central issue in this proceeding is whether he is entitled to a remedy to compensate him for the injury and loss suffered by him as a consequence of that lamentable incident…
e spent five miserable days in a police watch house in Brisbane before being transported to a correctional facility operated by the third respondent, the State of Queensland. He spent another two difficult days in that facility before he was released on bail pending an appeal.
There could be no real dispute that the Judge made a number of fundamental and egregious errors in the purported exercise of his power to punish Mr Stradford for contempt. He sentenced Mr Stradford to imprisonment for contempt without first finding that Mr Stradford had in fact failed to comply with the orders in question. He erroneously believed that another judge had made that finding, though exactly how he could sensibly have arrived at that position in the circumstances somewhat beggars belief. He also failed to follow any of the procedures that he was required to follow when dealing with contempt allegations and otherwise failed to afford Mr Stradford any procedural fairness. He effectively pre-judged the outcome. Imprisonment was a fait accompli.”
Full story:
Feminism in Australia is officially dead
Remember Julia Gillard?
She was the Prime Minister of this country who famously was totally opposed to mysogny and sexism.
“I WILL NOT BE LECTURED BY THIS MAN ” she once thundered at Tony Abbott to the rapturous applause of the left:
(367) Julia Gillard misogyny speech voted most unforgettable Australian TV moment: watch in full – YouTube
Julia Gillard reckoned that the reason why voters hated her was because they were all sexists. It was all because she was a woman, not because she was an utterly incompetent leftist who lied about the carbon tax and embraced grubs like Craig Thomson and Peter Slipper.
In the dying days of her failed Prime Ministership, Gillard even launched an organisation named ‘Women for Gillard’.
So imagine our surprise when we discovered that Julia Gillard can’t even define what a woman is nowadays.
Feminism in Australia has officially died.
The drums roll for Drumgold’s legal career
Sofronoff KC said he was “deeply disturbed” by Shane Drumgold’s ignorance of ethical principles and accused him of a “Pilate-like detachment”, invoking the moment Pontius Pilate washed his hands of Jesus’s fate, letting the mob decide who should be crucified.
In our view, Sofronoff KC was right not to make any declaration of Drumgold’s fitness to remain on the roll of lawyers. That fell outside of the scope of the inquiry. Nevertheless, the findings automatically support an inference that Drumgold should no longer remain a lawyer.
Sofronoff KC’s inquiry initially looked like it would be about little more than looking into a spat between the ACT Office of Prosecutions and the Australian Federal Police, who held different views about the merits of the prosecution of Bruce Lehrmann for allegedly raping Brittany Higgins in Parliament House.
This is now looking like the biggest legal scandal in Australia since the Lawyer X fiasco. Like the Lawyer X fiasco, this involves a flagrant breach of the fundamental rules that govern the conduct of lawyers. In some ways, the two scandals are mirror images of one another. Whilst Drumgold’s conduct kept the defence in the dark and deprived them of material they were entitled to, Nicola Gobbo’s conduct involved disclosing matters to police that should have never been disclosed because of the duty of confidence that she owed her clients. Gobbo was struck off for her fundamental betrayal of her clients.
A Prosecutor holds a particular duty to act in fairness towards an accused and the Court. Drumgold’s conduct shows that he apparently lost sight of the nature of his role, and the serious responsibilities of that role. He also apparently overlooked the fact that Brittany Higgins was not his client, and even if she had been, his overriding duty was to the administration of justice and he had no right to mislead the Court or to keep evidence from the defence that it had a right to.
Full story: https://sterlinglawqld.com/the-drums-roll-for-drumgolds-legal-career/
Anthony Albanese goes the full Mussolini with Ministry of Truth
As great as it might have been to have our first Italian Australian Prime Minister, that is no excuse for Anthony Albanese to turn into Mussolini and try to use the powers of the government to surveil his political critics and require social media companies to censor them.
This is pretty much what is happening with a bill he proposes to make into law.
The Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2023 is about stopping websites and online social media platforms allowing content that the government in all its wisdom thinks is misleading and harmful.
Anthony Albanese has been Prime Minister for just over a year, and already he is trying to become Il Duce.
Albo has gone the full Commo and wants to determine what is true and what is not true. As if he would know. He doesn’t even know the unemployment rate or the cash rate:
Anthony Albanese probably wants to prohibit people from comparing him to Il Duce online, even though he is acting a bit like the fascist Italian dictator.
We should not be surprised. Remember how Labor in its dying days of office last time tried to regulate the media to stop it from criticising its poor performance?
We were warned that it wont be easy under Albanese. With inflation still very high and now crackdowns on free speech, that has certainly turned out to be true.
This is yet another sinister leftist attempt to curb free expression.
Ben Roberts-Smith appeals defamation defeat
Last month, the Federal Court found Roberts-Smith had committed war crimes and upheld the defence of contextual truth in dismissing his claims.
Roberts-Smith is contesting some of the factual findings including all findings he committed murder, contending that Justice Anthony Besanko “cherrypicked” evidence in his judgment.
Read more:
https://sterlinglawqld.com/ben-roberts-smith-appeals-defamation-defeat/
Iain Hall's SANDPIT 