(Continued from previous message)


BG> Fucking amazing, when stuff like this has obviously been going on for
BG> half a century or even more. It's social engineering at its worst IMO.

RS> Dunno about social engineering, utterly rorted welfare system anyway.

BG> It might not be intentional, but the availability of easy
BG> money tends to encourage people to become bludgers regardless.

True, thats always been a problem with some parts of the welfare
system. Its one of the few systems where you can just volunteer
for it, get pregnant, go along to the state with your hand out.
You can even argue that the volunteering could be enjoyable |-)

Then again, you can just murder someone and volunteer for jail too.

RS> He is now doing an external law degree from UNE in Armidale.

BG> ROFL!  Wants to conduct his own defence presumably.

RS> He's actually got grand plans involving becoming a legal aid lawyer.
RS> He has been largely running his own defense without counsel all these
RS> years since the drug bust and has been running rings around the legal
RS> system, appeals right up to the Supreme Court and all. Unbelievable.

BG> I can't wait to hear what happens when he finally obtains
BG> his law degree, and applies for admission to the Bar though.  |-)

Yeah.

BG> He'd likely never get to use his new found knowledge though, as
BG> I doubt that this particular magistrate would be allowed to sit on
BG> the bench at your loony Mafia mate's obviously forthcoming trial. |-)

RS> Apparently its mostly at the decision of the defendant, he can please
RS> himself. He is currently up on a drunk driving charge, and no license,
RS> and is trying to run some complicated argument that a defense of
RS> automatism reverses the onus of proof, its up to the crown to prove
RS> he doesnt suffer from it. Apparently the Act says that explicitly.

BG> Interesting.  The basic tenet of law puts the onus of proof
BG> on the prosecution, but I thought that medical conditions were
BG> the opposite when being used as a defence.  Can't find the
BG> bloody dictionary (Rob must have taken it to school), so I've
BG> no idea what Automatism is, and I presume you don't mean Autism.

No, completely different. The argument is that he wasnt in
control of his actions, he was an automaton. Say you take the
case where you have a huge row with the wife, say come home
and find her screwing the neighbour, and have a huge fight,
then storm out of the house into the car and tear off. He
is essentially claiming that he didnt choose to drink drive.

Sounds pretty feeble to me, but occasionally the legal system does
throw up some weird results, and in this case with the crown having
to prove he wasnt suffering from it, he could well get away with it
just because of the 'beyond reasonable doubt' criterion on proof.

RS> He was up for mention the other day, with the magistrate he
RS> has appealed right up to the Supreme Court. Apparently they
RS> have had some pretty bitter runins on that. The magistrate
RS> asked him if he wanted him to disbar himself but the drug baron
RS> said he didnt mind, mainly on the devil you know principle.

BG> Isn't that decision up to the magistrate himself?

Yeah, I sur he can certainly rule himself out if he wants to.

BG> Surely he should be worried about the inference drawn if
BG> he sits on this case?

Well, thats the theory. The practice can be a million miles
away from that at times too.

RS> He's also got some complicated scheme running to shaft them
RS> for costs if they lose, on the basis that they should have
RS> realised that their case was defective by now and so if
RS> they go ahead anyway, they will have to pay when they lose.

BG> It's amazing you know, that such a deviously brilliant
BG> mind should be wasted on a life of crime.

Yeah, thats what I meant myself earlier on. Corse you can also
argue that when he got set along that track he was just a psychopath
kid in school too and that it would be a very unusual personality
that could manage to force things in that direction at that stage.

BG> He must know by now that he could have become quite successful
BG> in an honest profession.

Trouble is that he doesnt regard it as an honest profession. He's
extremely scathing of most of the legal profession. Quite rightly
too in some ways, he has the mind for it in a way none of the other
legals I know have, and I know quite a few, including magistrates.

BG> That's the sort of thing which makes me wonder if it's genetic.

Well, insane, certainly. He really is literally a psychopath. Just
one of those mad people can still manage life reasonably too. There
isnt much evidence that psychopathy is hereditary, tho it certainly
does run in familys. Its less clear how much is genetic and how much
is just society. Some end up in jobs where the fact that they are a
psychopath isnt really noticed or is rewarded.

RS> God knows what this bugger has cost the state quite apart from
RS> welfare payments over the years in the court system alone.

BG> Look on the positive side though.  All of his ill-gotten gains have
BG> been redistributed through the economy, so it's not a total waste.

True, and I bet its stopped quite a few lawyers going mad with boredom too |-)

--- PQWK202