Maya, just remember that it is not just for the …

Comment on Supreme Court – the inside story by Bob.

Maya, just remember that it is not just for the 25000 or so people left in Alice Springs. The jurisdiction of this court is everywhere from Tennant Creek south to the border, and also from the QLD to the WA border. There can now be appeals heard in Alice Springs.
Anybody has ever done jury duty would know that the existing facility was way too small.
I had a tour through this building and the facilities are sensational. We might have a small population, but we do have a massive crime problem, there is no denying that, so we should have facilities to be able to deal with that. Hopefully it might mean people spend less time on remand and cases get processed faster.
Reflecting on the previous story on the open spaces near the old court, I found it really quite sad at the comments made by Ms. Collins though. It seems she is quite happy to accept that she must run around after her clients, “waving her arms frantically” to tell people on the court lawns that they are ready to appear in court. Surely if you had to appear in the Supreme Court, you would be nervously waiting in the foyer, as you would be terrified of not being there when called? This comment seems to indicate to me a total lack of interest and consequently a lack of respect for the whole legal process. It seems from this attitude that they are really quite used to the process. Looking at the number of Indigenous in jail, it could be the opposite of the common opinions expressed here, in that our local Indigenous population is not alienated at all by the process, having has such close contact with it for coming on to three generations now, that instead of treating it with fear of a foreign concept, it has become one of indifference. I tend to think a non-indigenous family having their first contact with the criminal justice system, through a moment of stupidity of their child, who would be far more fearful and terrified of being in such an imposing building representing something completely foreign to them.
It was also interesting that Russell Goldflam objected to mandatory sentencing, saying it alluded to the fact that the judges could not be trusted to give an appropriate sentence. I agree with Russell on that. I think mandatory sentencing is brought about by the fact that some of the sentences handed down were so out of touch with community standards, that a basic minimum had to be passed by legislators to reflect what was expected by the community.

Recent Comments by Bob

‘Disgust’ at site choices for youth detention facilities
100% James, although I doubt the guards from the adult jail would want to assist following the disgusting way they were treated by the Royal Commission.


Soy sauce now only from a bottlo
I am glad this has all been resolved. It seems the new commissioner was just a bit over zealous.
My initial thoughts were first the BDR, then this, talk about Kikkoman when he’s down!


Cops at bottle shops: expensive bluff?
Good to see some stats from Vicki, the correlation cannot be just coincidence.
As far as profiling goes, excellent.
There already is profiling for jobs in the form of special measure, and as police have said to me personally, if I know the bloke trying to purchase a bottle of Jacks is going to and his wife to hospital, he will do it.
Nice to see coppers who are not afraid to apply common sense.
I bought a carton the other night and was asked for ID, so to say it does not happen is erroneous. Once again, the PALI scheme is working according to the stats.


Anti-fracking Greens: Are jobs for the dole schemes legal?
John Argent: Your arguments have more holes that the rabbit proof fence itself.
If you are quoting that movie as a source of facts you may want to pick a better example.
If you google “holes in the rabbit proof fence” you will find plenty of info on it.
Even the person it is supposed to be about has said: “That’s not my story.”
It’s a bit like saying Jack and Rose were real people and using the movie Titanic to base your story.
As far as the White Australia policy goes, you use that as justification for the Aborigines finding the others in the bush.
You fail to understand the white Australia Policy had absolutely nothing to do with Aboriginal people. It was to do with immigration, pure and simple.
And as far as calling somebody a coconut, it is a racial slur, no matter who uses it.
If you you use it yourself then congratulations, you Sir are a racist, as racism goes both ways and being Aboriginal, African, Asian or any other colour does not give you an exemption.


Anti-fracking Greens: Are jobs for the dole schemes legal?
Unfortunately, Darwin Observer, you are correct in the way it is supposed to work, and in this case would be the Crown (Commonwealth or State) and regulated by either Comcare or Worksafe that is the regulator and responsible for enforcing the NUL WHS Act.
Unfortunately an Aboriginal worker on CDEP had a serious accident with an angle grinder, which he should have had training and instruction in using, yet he was unable to claim compensation as he was not a worker as defined by the Return to Work Act, and neither worksafe nor Comcare have said they are able to prosecute (or don’t want to) due to the way it is structured.
This should be one of the first things they should nut out as part of any planned changes to CDP or CDEP.


Be Sociable, Share!

A new way to support our journalism

We do not have a paywall. If you support our independent journalism you can make a financial contribution by clicking the red button below. This will help us cover expenses and sustain the news service we’ve been providing since 1994, in a locally owned and operated medium.

Erwin Chlanda, Editor