Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, 43, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 - #14

[UnfoldingTruth]

ok i probably missed the next one sorry

Not to say they haven't as of now. Its just the last report I heard, they had not.

 

[Watsonian Institute]

As I understand the doctrine of the Rule of Law, it is what underpins the Australian Constitution, the same Constitution which protects the freedom of political communication.

Meaning, on political issues people's opinions, that is, their voices, can be heard without fear of being locked up so long as what they say isn't defamatory (this is a generalised approach but hopefully illustrates the point).

The Rule of Law also underpins the concept of democracy, also pretty well established by our Constitution. Which is what a lot of people are exercising on this site, their say.

I don't see the ROL as a 'nicety' but essential for those of us who live in a liberal democracy. In this way it prevents us being locked up for speaking our anger and outrage. It is what enables us all to have our say here.

Australians freedom of speech is implied under the Constitution. The freedom of political communication protects communications between politicians, which is why Parliament operates under Privilege, in the same way court reporting is covered by privilege while sub judice is in effect.

This has been an area of concern for many Australians: http://www.nswccl.org.au/issues/freespeech/index.php

Since we're not discussing political or governmental speech and documents, there is no relevance.

The Rule of Law Association of Australia has provided a reference for freedom of speech and freedom of the press in this country: http://www.ruleoflawaustralia.com.a..._Press_and_Freedom_of_Speech_in_Australia.pdf

Cheers

AAMOF

 

[factfinda]

Yes, but your average Joe still has an opinion.

But only as long as that opinion is not defamatory, or can rely on a defence against a defamation suit.

 

[Keentoknow]

Haha... so you're keeping the wine to go with Keentoknows fireworks ??

Come to Bribie Island and I will supply the wine lol

 

[Bayside]

Regardless of any links, guilty people still get away with murder. Innocent people still go to jail. It is a link-less fact I'm afraid.

That is very true.

 

[Bayside]

Come to Bribie Island and I will supply the wine lol

A cold beer sounds perfect to me haha.

 

[Berry]

In my personal life I judge a person's character by what they do. It's hard for people to say exactly what they think and feel. Even if you consciously attempt to be totally frank, your subconscious has a huge bearing on the words you choose, on how you say them and on your body language. Skilled detectives seem to have almost a sixth sense for knowing not just when a person is lying, but what that person's body is saying.

I agree, some people are honestly groomed and well trained to be by parental role models.....but detectives have years of 'unspecified observations' in a criminal immersion Hawkins.

What do you surmise they saw that first visit to his house though.

What do you find you are skilled at the most in this Allison world Hawkins?

 

[Bayside]

Not to say they haven't as of now. Its just the last report I heard, they had not.

Me too, quite the opposite. iMO

 

[linette]

Come to Bribie Island and I will supply the wine lol

I'm very close to you... but can I have a coffee? White with 3 thanks.

 

[mountainhigh]

I was referring to the post in which you stated that everyone but everyone in GBC's life now wants nothing to do with him! If you do not know any of these people personally, then I am curious as to how you can make such a broad generalisation. Public opinion is a fickle beast at the best of times so I don't think one can simply assume that everyone hates / suspects / mistrusts / wants to punish GBC just because it seems to be public opinion or because everyone in your own circle feels like this.

Yes EVERYONE in 'her circle' feels like this, its a 'big circle' with jagged edges and you can only really live on the outer parts of 'the circle' because its too arrad in the middle of 'the circle'.....the circle is called Australia!!

 

[indogwetrust]

Australians freedom of speech is implied under the Constitution. The freedom of political communication protects communications between politicians, which is why Parliament operates under Privilege, in the same way court reporting is covered by privilege while sub judice is in effect.

Thanks Watsonian for all your info.

I think you'll find that the implied freedom protects anyone who wants to communicate on a political issue whether it be by writing, speech, protest. It is not just for politicians, it is for the press, anyone as I just noted above.

As for whether this is a political issue, that's more debatable.

The point I was trying to make was Hawkins use of the Rule of Law as a 'nicety' when in actual fact it underpins so many of the rights and freedoms we take for granted. It is a doctrine that has a number of principles attached to it such as against Bills of attainder and a whole lot of other things.

 

[Fuskier]

As I understand the doctrine of the Rule of Law, it is what underpins the Australian Constitution, the same Constitution which protects the freedom of political communication.

Meaning, on political issues people's opinions, that is, their voices, can be heard without fear of being locked up so long as what they say isn't defamatory (this is a generalised approach but hopefully illustrates the point).

The Rule of Law also underpins the concept of democracy, also pretty well established by our Constitution. Which is what a lot of people are exercising on this site, their say.

I don't see the ROL as a 'nicety' but essential for those of us who live in a liberal democracy. In this way it prevents us being locked up for speaking our anger and outrage. It is what enables us all to have our say here.

INDOGSWETRUST: Thank you. Another helpful contribution of those factors which underpin our Constitution and enable us to exercise our freedom of speech in this Country. Appreciated.

 

[linette]

But only as long as that opinion is not defamatory, or can rely on a defence against a defamation suit.

IMO I can have an opinion. Normal everyday people, along with everyone else, will always have an opinion. I'm not defaming him, I am simply stating an opinion.

 

[indogwetrust]

Sorry forgot to add - it is the implied freedom of political communicaiton that is protected under the Constitution. People usually read it as a general freedom of speech but that is not strictly correct.

 

[CaseClosed]

Does anybody know if GBC has closed Taringa and moved somewhere else or has the business folded completely?

 

[linette]

Does anybody know if GBC has closed Taringa and moved somewhere else or has the business folded completely?

Hmmm... I think I recall reading a post today saying how it was up for lease... but he hadn't had permission to move... something like that. :/ Also, something about the naming rights of the building were up for lease?? Just what I remember reading.

 

[Bayside]

Does anybody know if GBC has closed Taringa and moved somewhere else or has the business folded completely?

I believe records showed he has ceased trading so I would say he wouldnt be in a position to start up elsewhere.

 

[CJ60]

This goes against the very cornerstone of the justice system in Australia. There is absolutely nothing in the law that allows a place for people to express anger, outrage and frustration outside the legal system. This is what the system is in place to prevent - and is the definition of lawlessness.

I would be very interested to know what place are you referring to and where it exists, and how it operates *outside* the legal system.

Violent offenders do need to be called to account - that is why we have a justice system.

Also, the definition of the term "decent citizens" depends on who creates the definition of "decent".

Personally, I would hate to see anyone follow this line of thinking and believe they are permitted to operate outside the law, and justified in their behaviour.

If people need to vent frustrations, there is a whole industry of psychologists waiting to help them.

Cheers

IMO, etc

@ Hawkins.

IMO you are one of our most well respected posters on this forum. I eagerly await your response to this post.

Thank you, Hawkins.

 

[mountainhigh]

Does anybody know if GBC has closed Taringa and moved somewhere else or has the business folded completely?

Couldnt give you a 100% factual answer on this CC, but I highly doubt that there is 'a business' to be 'moved' somewhere else quite frankly.

no staff left as are as we know
no physical premises that we know of
no listings (well nearly no listings)

Someone asked the Qn the other day about his rental role. I think you will find its insignificant. I don't believe it was an area that they concentrated on until just recently. you need hundreds of these rentals to make it worthwhile anyway. (But I bet even some of them are running for cover now also)

I don't think he will be running to reopen an office in kenmore, brookfield area anytime soon.

 

[indogwetrust]

This goes against the very cornerstone of the justice system in Australia. There is absolutely nothing in the law that allows a place for people to express anger, outrage and frustration outside the legal system. This is what the system is in place to prevent - and is the definition of lawlessness.

I would be very interested to know what place are you referring to and where it exists, and how it operates *outside* the legal system.

Violent offenders do need to be called to account - that is why we have a justice system.

Also, the definition of the term "decent citizens" depends on who creates the definition of "decent".

Personally, I would hate to see anyone follow this line of thinking and believe they are permitted to operate outside the law, and justified in their behaviour.

If people need to vent frustrations, there is a whole industry of psychologists waiting to help them.

Cheers

IMO, etc

Totally agree with how you've put this Watsonian, thanks