HAIG    REPORT:    GoTo [on this page] HaigReport's Menu Of Themes of Menus for our thousands of pages
TIPS for
Navigating HaigReport:  If you arrived at this page, referred from a Search Engine such as Google et al, your URL link will NOT have an #Anchor/Marker to take you to the relevant spot on this page.  In that case, we do recommend that you view our "Latest HaigReport Promotions" of recent additions to our websites, by Clicking Here.  It will open in a new Browser window. 

If
you Click Here, you will be taken, usually, to the specific Unique Content on this page, for which you were most likely seeking.  However, if you Click Here, you will be taken to the Top of the HaigReport Header, below on this page. 

However, if you have arrived at this page from another of our Website pages, your link will usually have an #Anchor, also called a marker, which will take you to the intended specific spot on the page where that marker is positioned.  In fact, it will probably take you there prior to your reading this.  Moving to that Anchor is the final step in the loading of this page.

 HAIG     REPORT:   Is now on  twitter  [from 2nd June, 2013]  link to us HERE on twitter     See our Twitter Strategy    

 HAIG    REPORT:  SEE: Russell Mathews' COMMENTARY:    Russell Mathews' [BCom BSc LLB & BA] current TOPICAL commentary on GOVERNMENT, politics & business     Press to READ       Press for MENU   

 HAIG    REPORT:    WANTED:
Healthy female "dog" to breed with Parson Russell Terrier, to produce ASSISTANCE DOGS.   Rochedale South QLD 4123
I wish to breed from my Parson Russell Terrier. He is a trained assistance dog. He has a wonderful nature. The breed of his mate could be varied or a cross; eg Parson Russell Terrier, Jack Russell Terrier, Beagle, Bull Terrier, Bull mastiff, Staffy, and/or Fox Terrier plus many others. She does not need to be "pedigreed". I am very protective of my dogs. She will become very valuable to me and become one of my assistance "dogs". If we can assist each other, please contact me on my contact form, including your email address and your landline phone number so I can phone you to discuss. 

Because I am disabled and have an LLB [so therefore understand the Law surrounding disabilities and assistance dogs] I am now branching out to providing Assistance dogs to disabled persons [even if disabled in only a minor way and so not even realizing it]. This is not a business proposition but rather just a very necessary service I can offer to the community.
Many people have a disability and do not realize their ailment or "problem" is by law, the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) [DDA], classified as a "disability". This is especially so for people getting on in years, and who have a dog, and are maybe moving to accommodation where they are told they cannot take their dog. In a majority of cases, those people cannot be legally forced to surrender their animal/dog.
I will be assisting those person who already have dogs, but are being forced, unlawfully, to dispose of them because maybe they are moving accommodation. I can train your existing dogs to be assistance dogs and provide the documentation as required by the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) [DDA]. I do not intend to charge for this, but just maybe cover some marginal costs.

    View the Latest    HAIG     REPORT Promotions:  in this Scrolling Window, or OPEN in new browser:     

 Click here  to Learn how your Personalized Alert Notice [IMMEDIATELY ABOVE] is prepared by our HAIG Unique Visitor Algorithm: [HUVA] or  Click here  to see your UNIQUE Personalized Alert Notice in a new Browser Window.


Courts Respect is fundamental to prosperity and happiness.

Our legal system     Home

The Star Chamber 
In 1487 the English court became a judicial body separate from the king's council, with a mandate to hear petitions of redress. Court sessions were held in secret, with no right of appeal, and punishment was swift and severe. In 1641 the Long Parliament abolished the hated Star Chamber, though its name survives still to designate arbitrary, secretive proceedings in opposition to personal rights and liberty. The Star Chamber could order Torture, Prison and Fines and there was no appeal from the Star Chamber.

A good story to the star chamber judge could get your enemy tortured, imprisoned and fined. You could even have your own wife burnt as a witch.  
 
The European Witch-Hunts, c. 1450-1750
For three centuries of early modern European history, diverse societies were consumed by a panic over alleged witches in their midst. Witch-hunts, especially in Central Europe, resulted in the trial, torture, and execution of tens of thousands of victims, about three-quarters of whom were women. Arguably, neither before nor since have adult European women been selectively targeted for such large scale atrocities.


The rule of law was introduced to limit the improper use of the legal system.   
The rule of law is the principle that governmental authority is legitimately exercised only in accordance with written, publicly disclosed laws adopted and enforced in accordance with established procedural steps that are referred to as due process. Due process (more fully due process of law) is the principle that the government must respect all of a person's legal rights, instead of just some or most of those legal rights, when the government deprives a person of life, liberty, or property. Procedural justice concerns the fairness and the transparency of the processes by which decisions are made

Applying the law to the facts? (What courts are supposed to do) 
I would estimate, from observations, this happens about 70% of the time. 
Courts are hiding their miscarriages of justice by being secretive. The Courts must be open and accountable to guarantee everyone gets their fair hearing with the law being properly applied to the full honest accurate facts. There are many Acts which are now conducted in secret and these include Family Court, Peace and Good behaviour, Domestic Violence, Mental Health and Guardianship. In Queensland courts the Justices Act applies and the only people entitled to the transcripts are those who have an interest in them and that is at the discretion of the Registrar. Much of the legal workload is now being conducted by Tribunals where the laws of evidence do not apply and are secret. The noble principles of the Rule of Law have been eroded.

There are three sections of law and they work differently.
There is the Civil Legal System, the Criminal Legal System and Tribunals.


How trials are conducted is defined in
The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules Rules and The Criminal Procedure Rules respectively. Tribunals are very close to a star chamber and have no, or, next to no rules. An example of a Tribunal System coming to Queensland soon under Labor is VCAT.

Due Process - Procedural Fairness requires: See: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules and The Criminal Procedure Rules
That the Defendant knows the charge against them.
That the Defendant is afforded an opportunity to prepare a defense.
That the Defendant knows the case against them, they are given the evidence they have to defend themselves from. In criminal this is the Police brief.
That there is no surprise caused to the defendant. This means that any evidence held back and kept secret and in surprise cannot be used in a trial because it would cause surprise.
The Law of evidence applies. See the Evidence Act at www.legislation.qld.gov.au 
    The evidence has to be sworn to or affirmed, which can invoke the penalty of perjury when it is deliberately falsely given.
    Only that which was witnessed at the time of the event is evidence.
     Hearsay - What someone was told is not evidence. 
     Malice - That which would cause the defendant to suffer prejudice is also not allowed.
    The evidence can be contested - this means the witnesses can be cross examined.
Both sides are given Justice - their right to be heard.
Both sides have the right of appeal to a higher judge.

  The Civil Legal System - Here the Plaintiff, the person with the claim asks the Judge for something from the defendant. The test is on the balance of probability. The claim is nearly always for money but can also be for some performance (the doing / or not doing of something).

The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules apply (note section 444).

The Judge looks down upon the Plaintiff with two questions:

What do you want? What you want from the Judge is an order from the Judge and what that order is, is defined in the Application and statement of claim. The Judge is asked a question and has to give an answer to that question. It is important to properly define the order(s) sought. They have to be very clear and precise.

Why should I give it to you? Why you should get it requires the law to be applied to the facts. This is covered with a legal submission which summarises the law as it should be applied to the facts, yes you tell the Judge how to suck eggs - how to do his job. The facts are defined in affidavit(s). An affidavit should obey the laws of evidence in that it should be restricted to what the person swearing the affidavit actually witnessed. Where there are documents attached to the Affidavit the documents are not evidence. What is important on the documents needs to be said again in the affidavit to make it evidence. Evidence is that which is sworn or attested to. The documents are only there to support the evidence provided on the Affidavit.
Telling a lie on an affidavit is perjury and the courts place themselves as most important. Perjury is considered to be a crime against the court so the penalty is high, equal to murder.

Trouble is: Judges never do anything about perjury so people get away with telling lies on their affidavits. 

Cheating in courts is done on the evidence. The evidence is where lies are told. 
The Judge interferes with the evidence by refusing to allow one side to present the evidence that will show they should win or should not lose.
Judge deliberately misinterprets the evidence for the benefit of one party. This happens when Judges are corrupt. Often afterwards Legal Aid is lobbied so that there will not be aid given to support an appeal. The Judge will say that they find the evidence given by one side to lack credibility and then dismiss their evidence totally. Result: a false conviction can occur.
Cheating is also done by making applications such as: that the Plaintiff's statement of claim be dismissed as showing no cause of action, or that it is an abuse of process of the court, or it is frivolous and vexatious or ... . This application is supported by an affidavit where it is claimed things like harassment or some improper conduct has been occurring and that this application is a continuation of that improper conduct. Here lies on affidavit can win a reprieve for the guilty.
The Plaintiff is caught by surprise without an answer and his application is dismissed with costs against him.
Solicitor for one party is bought in some back room deal. To ensure his party loses he does not put all the evidence into the court and will make it cost his party too much or force a settlement.
Costs may be too high. Solicitors can be unscrupulous and will take advantage of their clients by increasing the costs with unnecessary delay, unnecessary letters, over charging and the like. The remedy becomes unaffordable. 
The court record can be falsified.
Documents get changed or removed from the file so that the decision made appears to be the "correct" decision on the evidence. False evidence equals false conviction.

The Remedy is the Appeals Process.
There are two types of appeals. 
1. A Rehearing of the facts. This means another trial in a higher court. 

2. A Higher Court Judge makes the determination "That with the evidence before him could the lower court Judge reasonably made the decision he made.
The appeal has two elements to it, the
facts and the law
A Judge can err by giving undue weight to the evidence, or in someway restricting the evidence presented to the court.
A Judge can err in law by not applying the correct law to the facts or not applying the law correctly to the facts.

3. If there is new evidence an application has to be made to the Judge to allow the new evidence and it has to be evidence that was not available at the time of the trial. You cannot call a witness to give evidence if that witness could have been called at the time of the earlier trial.

How they cheat on Appeal
The transcripts can get edited. A record is kept on who gets what transcript. It is important to get in quickly and order the transcript and pay for it as this will minimise interference with the transcript. They write simple things like ..... & incoherent in place of the important things.

The Solicitor will ask for some exorbitant fee up front at the last moment and make you abandon the appeal.

If you have Legal Aid, they will be lobbied to deny you legal aid for an appeal.

 

Criminal Legal System - The Police charge someone, the defendant, with a crime and the defendant then has the job of defending themselves from the charges in a court.

The Criminal Procedure Rules apply

To commit a crime one must do two things: 
1. Something defined by law as a crime. This means there is an Act of Parliament such as the Crimes Act, the Traffic Act, Vagrancy Act etc. where the thing that has been done is defined.

2. Have intended to do the thing. Killing someone is only murder if there is the intention to kill someone, it could have been an accident. If the death occurs from a deliberate act of harm, but there was no intent to kill the person, then the crime is manslaughter. I saw a woman be found not guilty when she was caught by Police doing 90 in a 60 zone and admitted to doing the 90. Her defense was that she had just bought the car, a sports car, and the speedometer was in error by 30km/hr. She had a mechanic give evidence that he had fixed the speedometer. She said she did not realize she was speeding and because it was a new sports car she had expected the sensation of speed so did not notice she was speeding. Her defense was that she did not intend to speed and this defense was accepted as proven by the Magistrate.

Defendants have the right to know the case they have to answer. This is called the brief of evidence. 

Police get innocent people convictions by:-
Fabricating evidence - they can make up the evidence and lie to the court
They can tutor witnesses for the prosecution and teach them the lies they have to tell to the court.
They can improperly or incompletely investigate and in the process lose or not collect the evidence that would show the defendant is not guilty.


Where there is a dispute Police will only look at what will get them a conviction and ignore all the other crimes the defendant suffered. They turn victims into perpetrators when the victim acts irrationally and with desperation from a desperate position.
Solicitors have taken an oath to the court, they are "officers of the court". This means they will not bring the court into disrepute. So if a prosecution witness is lying a Solicitor will not show that witness up for lying as there is the view that this will bring the prosecution and thus the court into disrepute.
Magistrates are biased for the Police. When the Police lie their evidence is considered credible and because what they say is in conflict with the Defendant's evidence the Defendant's evidence is found to lack credibility. A large chunk, (all) of the defendant's evidence is dismissed and then not considered. Thus the Defendant is found guilty.

Magistrates and Judges refuse to allow defense to lead evidence that may mitigate the crime.
When they do this they remove evidence of self defense or impairment that could go to the defendant's lack of intent. 
The court record can be falsified. Documents get changed or removed from the file so that the decision made appears to be the "correct" decision on the evidence. False evidence equals false conviction.

When Police witnesses perjure themselves they are never charged. Police will never prosecute their own witnesses. 

The High Court has made law which states:
If a prosecution witness is charged with perjury this could cause the courts a problem because when people hear about it they may not willingly come forward to give evidence.

Because of this no perjuring Police witnesses are ever charged with perjury.

The Appeal process is flawed as it is in answer to the Question
"With the evidence before him could the Judge / Magistrate have reasonably made his decision". When evidence is with held from the court that proves innocence that evidence is never considered and innocent people are made guilty and punished for crimes they did not commit. 

The Remedy is the Appeals Process.
A Higher Court Judge makes the determination "That with the evidence before him could the lower court Judge reasonably made the decision he made.
The appeal has two elements to it, the
facts and the law
A Judge can err by giving undue weight to the evidence, or in someway restricting the evidence presented to the court.
A Judge can err in law by not applying the correct law to the facts or not applying the law correctly to the facts.

3. If there is new evidence an application has to be made to the Judge to allow the new evidence and it has to be evidence that was not available at the time of the trial. You cannot call a witness to give evidence if that witness could have been called at the time of the earlier trial. 


How they cheat on your Appeal
The transcripts can get edited. A record is kept on who gets what transcript. It is important to get in quickly and order the transcript and pay for it as this will minimise interference with the transcript. They say simple things like ..... & obscure in place of the important things.

The Solicitor will ask for some exorbitant fee up front at the last moment and make you abandon the appeal.

If you have Legal Aid, they will be lobbied to deny you legal aid for an appeal.

How to fix the legal system:
1. Deal with Police who cheat by sacking them. They bring courts into disrepute.
When it can be clearly shown that a Police Officer has lied to a court he is instantly sacked from the Police Force. Instant dismissal is a must. Once a perjurer always a perjurer.
When a Police Officer has been caught out three times with his witnesses lying to a court he must be instantly sacked from the Police Force. It is the duty of a Police Officer to know his case and to know that his witnesses are telling the truth.


2. Properly investigate any claims made by the defendant in relation to the crimes of others against him or others, that may have led up to his situation.
Often people act defensively and may commit crime in their own self defense. This needs to be considered. People can become distressed, irrational and misguided. When Police take sides and only seek to get a conviction they are being unfair and this needs correction. A proper investigation will require another Police Officer from another section of the Police to be assigned the investigation initiated by the defendant. People can be set up by others and when they lack the resources to properly investigate can go down because of the malice of others.

3. The Court's case manager should collect the evidence and ensure it is complete and manage the file for both the prosecution and defendant.
The power of the court needs to be exerted to improve the honesty of the process. The case manager should be able to call on the Court Police to investigate where there might be impropriety, perjury or miscarriage of justice.

4. Legislation should have an easy reading summary of the Act placed on the internet with the Act so relevant sections are easy for citizens to find and understand.

5. Include with court forms on the internet examples showing how to present a case with the relevant forms to make it easier for the citizen to be self represented.

6. Judges should be charged with applying the law to the facts. Allowing solicitors to tell the Judge how to do his job is a Judge failing in his duty as a judge. The Judge should know the law and should be able to advise the parties of the Acts and precedence he will rely on to decide the case. We want better from our judges. When the Court's case manager has the evidence the Judge is given an opportunity to prepare by identifying the laws which apply.

7. Prosecution witnesses who perjure themselves should be dealt with properly. An Act of Parliament is required to introduce this as a crime and over ride the Judge made law. People should not be getting convicted and jailed by malicious witnesses.

8. Limits have to be placed on Judges so they can not so readily exclude evidence that may mitigate the crime. Judges can too readily refuse evidence of self defense. Evidence refused must be detailed so it can be used in an appeal if required by the defendant.

9. Create a court Police service to investigate crimes against the court. Investigate and prosecute cases where the courts could have been used improperly or lied to.

10. Courts are to be open and accountable. Privacy legislation should not apply to courts because it gives an opportunity to cover up miscarriages of justice. transcripts should be published for all to see and the media should not be excluded. The Justices Act which limits the access to the transcripts to those who have an interest in the case at the discretion of the Registrar is wrong.

Please blog your inputs and ideas. We really need courts to properly apply the law to an honest and complete set of facts. The Justice system needs improvement.
The worst injustice is the injustice of the courts being added to the injustice suffered by the victims.