Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: When should the decision be final.

  1. #1
    Senior Member MrRadio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    The depths
    Age
    76
    Posts
    1,331
    Thanks
    608
    Thanked 204 Times in 116 Posts
    Rep Power
    269
    Reputation
    1386

    Default When should the decision be final.

    This is not a comment on any matter before the courts ATM but a question of how much should be spent on inquests and when should the Coroners decision be final. I hold no opinion one way or the other about that matter, I wasn't there I know nothing. BUT
    The death in Police custody of an Aboriginal man on Palm Island prompted an inquest which found Police were not to blame. A commmunity group wasn't happy with the result and appealed the decision so a second inquest with a second Coroner was held. This one found Police were to blame. A Government group weren't happy with that decision and appealed the decision and now a third inquest before a third Coroner is under way.
    Where should it stop, how many inquests should there be into any matter, in the absence of new, never before seen evidence, when should the Coroners decision be final. What do you think.



Look Here ->
  • #2
    Senior Member osci's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,998
    Thanks
    579
    Thanked 340 Times in 170 Posts
    Rep Power
    295
    Reputation
    1560

    Default

    I think it might have something to do with "terms of reference"
    ie: what can be looked, what can't be looked ect, and good example of this terms of reference thingy, a certain business identity, associated with a certain sporting orginisation located in a certain australian capitol city couldn't be prosecuted due the charges that were investigated on were actually outside the terms of refernce of the enquiry the AFP conducted at the time.

    However, to answer your question, in coroners court setting or any court setting, any evidence that is presented has to stand up to scrutiny, as insignificant as it may sound to you and I, it becomes pretty dam significant for a defendant and or the complainant.
    Democracy & Ignorance = A Winning Combination

  • #3
    Super Moderator
    enf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Age
    70
    Posts
    17,753
    Thanks
    16,817
    Thanked 34,961 Times in 9,058 Posts
    Rep Power
    13677
    Reputation
    644429

    Default

    I think this is the case where in the second inquiry, a key witness reversed his previous testimony and changed the result. Trouble is which story do you believe?

    Cheers
    enf
    The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.

  • #4
    Senior Member osci's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,998
    Thanks
    579
    Thanked 340 Times in 170 Posts
    Rep Power
    295
    Reputation
    1560

    Default

    Enf.....when there is a discrepency in evidence, quite simply, it has to be tested, it hs to be found why the discrepency exists, in this case from what I have read, a police officer has changed his statement.....so the question needs to be asked why did he change his statement, this obviously opens a can of worms...and as i said earlier, it may seem insiginificant to you and I, but it becomes quite significant for both the accussed and the family.
    Democracy & Ignorance = A Winning Combination

  • #5
    Premium Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Central Tablelands of NSW
    Age
    81
    Posts
    13,824
    Thanks
    1,242
    Thanked 3,806 Times in 2,525 Posts
    Rep Power
    1797
    Reputation
    56986

    Default

    They are still rehashing the 'Jack the Ripper' murders of over 120 years ago and the Kennerdy Assination 47 years ago and they will keep doing so even though the Major players in both incidents are now dead.

    I agree with osci's comment that to those directly connected to a case, it can never be 'Over'.
    There have been cases where DNA evidence not available during the original Trials have now cleared those convicted of a crime even though every bit of evidence pointed to their Guilt.
    There have been so called 'Cold Cases' when reviewed today have given a different slant on the evidence gathered and have lead to convicting someone who was thought not to be connected to the crime at the time.
    And whats MONEY compared to a person wrongly convicted and their life grieviously disrupted or one who should be convicted and is out there maybe re offending ??

    Time is something None of us can Bank.

  • The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to gordon_s1942 For This Useful Post:

    HoochDaTank (12-03-10),osci (12-03-10)

  • #6
    Senior Member
    Don Benosee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Location, Location
    Posts
    3,169
    Thanks
    1,327
    Thanked 1,557 Times in 707 Posts
    Rep Power
    445
    Reputation
    7129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gordon_s1942 View Post
    They are still rehashing the 'Jack the Ripper' murders of over 120 years ago and the Kennerdy Assination 47 years ago
    JFK on the morning of November 22, 1963: " I need another parade like I need a hole in the head"


  • The Following User Says Thank You to Don Benosee For This Useful Post:

    mandc (12-03-10)

  • #7
    Senior Member
    Arbiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,408
    Thanks
    155
    Thanked 675 Times in 369 Posts
    Rep Power
    295
    Reputation
    3039

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Benosee View Post
    JFK on the morning of November 22, 1963: " I need another parade like I need a hole in the head"
    I believe it was only 3 days after the event you could buy the JFK memorial salt & pepper shakers - complete with strategically placed hole(s).

  • #8
    Super Moderator
    enf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Age
    70
    Posts
    17,753
    Thanks
    16,817
    Thanked 34,961 Times in 9,058 Posts
    Rep Power
    13677
    Reputation
    644429

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by osci View Post
    Enf.....when there is a discrepency in evidence, quite simply, it has to be tested, it hs to be found why the discrepency exists, in this case from what I have read, a police officer has changed his statement.....so the question needs to be asked why did he change his statement, this obviously opens a can of worms...and as i said earlier, it may seem insiginificant to you and I, but it becomes quite significant for both the accussed and the family.
    Perhaps we are talking different inquiries. I haven't paid much attention. But the one I am talking about was a witness (not a cop) who reversed a key statement saying he was partially obscured by a filing cabinet, to saying there was no cabinet and he had been intimidated into saying that by police.

    I'll try to find the source.

    Your other point is a given.

    Cheers
    enf
    The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.

  • #9
    Registered User mate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,615
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 162 Times in 118 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Reputation
    -233

    Default

    Inquiries should expire when the money to pay the lawyers runs out. No public funds should be used.
    The Palm Island residents should pay a legal bill.
    The QLD coppers(union) should pay a legal bill.

    Not the QLD taxpayer.
    iam a bogan

  • #10
    Super Moderator
    enf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Age
    70
    Posts
    17,753
    Thanks
    16,817
    Thanked 34,961 Times in 9,058 Posts
    Rep Power
    13677
    Reputation
    644429

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mate View Post
    Inquiries should expire when the money to pay the lawyers runs out. No public funds should be used...
    .
    And the Truth?

    Cheers
    enf
    The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.

  • The Following User Says Thank You to enf For This Useful Post:

    Don Benosee (12-03-10)

  • Similar Threads

    1. AFACT Appeals iiNet Decision
      By enf in forum General Chat
      Replies: 5
      Last Post: 26-02-10, 01:45 PM
    2. NAB CUP FINAL Feeds ?
      By mark299 in forum Free to Air , C Band and Feeds
      Replies: 0
      Last Post: 13-03-09, 10:29 PM

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •