The Perfect Law
The Perfect Law
I don’t think most people understand what they are up against in opposing a law such as Intervention Orders (aka AVO or DVO).
These laws are nearly Perfect Laws.
These are laws which prevent crime. This is a new concept in the Law.
In every other aspect of criminal law, it must be proven that the person has broken a law before the power of the state to curtail freedoms can be enforced.
In these Perfect Laws, not only is a crime prevented, but the level of proof that a crime may be committed is no more than that of an irresponsible journalist would require to print gossip.
All that’s required is that someone thinks a crime may be committed.
There is no need for a history of crime. There is no need for any evidence of a crime.
The person is put on probation for a crime they have yet to commit.
What could be more Perfect? --Based on such laws, there would be a crime-free society.
If you thought someone might commit a crime against you, all you have to do is tell the police or the court, and they will bring the full force of criminal law to bear to prevent the crime!
You could protect yourself against crime just by identifying those around you who might commit a crime.
There is also the advantage in training lawyers because of this Perfect Law.
There is no need to bother for lawyers to learn about Civil or Human Rights. As many lawyers have written, 'Family Law is different' -- meaning the principles of Civil and Human Rights do not apply.
There is little need to bother with international principles or treaties, or even about rights at all.
Thanks to the Perfect Law, there is no need to bother lawyers with more than the rudiments of legal history and Common Law. The Perfect Law supercedes all those concepts other than precedent. The Perfect Law implants a wholly new trunk into the tree of precedent. All of the course of Common Law before it is inconsequential.
All the concepts of law since the Code of Hammurabi -- the Magna Carta, the American and French Constitutions, etc. -- are inconsequential thanks to the Perfect Law.
An attorney could be fast tracked into the workforce in 3-6 months!
And for the police, it simplifies law enforcement.
An officer can be certain that the man before them (-- And 90% of the time it is a man. Well, 87% of the time in Australia. --) is a potential abuser, a potential child molester; a potential rapist. He is certainly a passionate, intelligent man capable of all these crimes. And he would not be accused if he were not guilty.
As everyone has seen, it is always easier for the police to deal with the real criminals. It's having to deal with rights and all those other annoying complications that hinder law enforcement.
For clerks and social workers, they are saved the difficulties of their jobs, too.
There isn't any reason to treat this potential criminal civilly. A clerk or social worker can be assured that this is the potential scum of the earth and treat him accordingly. He does not deserve courtesy and consideration. You can assume he has all the potential of violence.
He does not deserve even access to the services you're there to perform.
(I had one 000 operator announce that there was violence involved. Three court clerks laughed at me cynically when I sought to file cross Intervention Orders. One female clerk even refused to give me the forms.)
This Perfect Law saves the state in so many ways. And it provides an ongoing benefit of employment for all involved, especially magistrates and lawyers, since the onus of proof is on the accused.
This is truly a Perfect Law!
A little discussion about the old days
Think about the law as you know it. Criminal laws attempt to prevent crime by the threat of punishment. Supposedly, the person will not steal because they know they will be caught and punished – usually jail or a fine.
In order to fall under the jurisdiction of such laws, the person has to commit a crime.
That is the concept of habeas corpus. There has to have been a crime committed.
Perfect Laws like Intervention Orders take away the opportunity for a crime to be committed. In fact, no crime has to be committed. There only has to be the allegation that a crime may be committed to subject the accused to the most substantial punishments:
This is a triumph of instinct, or assumption, or fears, over nearly 3000 years of legal history. But you don’t get Perfect Laws without making some changes.
It does away with the usual standard of the burden of proof. The accused is guilty on only the allegation.
There are those who will argue that Intervention Orders are based on the concept of mens rea, or the intention to commit a crime. This is the objective test of intention, that the perpetrator (unproven but convicted) is imputed to have the mindset to commit a crime to a reasonable person.
In other words, if sometime you were to shout in an argument: “I could kill you!”, under a Perfect Law statute you should be sent to jail or executed. At the very least, the person is put on probation for the crime, with the punishment already imposed.
These Perfect Laws form the basis of Family Law in modern Australian society.
Paul
I don’t think most people understand what they are up against in opposing a law such as Intervention Orders (aka AVO or DVO).
These laws are nearly Perfect Laws.
These are laws which prevent crime. This is a new concept in the Law.
In every other aspect of criminal law, it must be proven that the person has broken a law before the power of the state to curtail freedoms can be enforced.
In these Perfect Laws, not only is a crime prevented, but the level of proof that a crime may be committed is no more than that of an irresponsible journalist would require to print gossip.
All that’s required is that someone thinks a crime may be committed.
There is no need for a history of crime. There is no need for any evidence of a crime.
The person is put on probation for a crime they have yet to commit.
What could be more Perfect? --Based on such laws, there would be a crime-free society.
If you thought someone might commit a crime against you, all you have to do is tell the police or the court, and they will bring the full force of criminal law to bear to prevent the crime!
You could protect yourself against crime just by identifying those around you who might commit a crime.
There is also the advantage in training lawyers because of this Perfect Law.
There is no need to bother for lawyers to learn about Civil or Human Rights. As many lawyers have written, 'Family Law is different' -- meaning the principles of Civil and Human Rights do not apply.
There is little need to bother with international principles or treaties, or even about rights at all.
Thanks to the Perfect Law, there is no need to bother lawyers with more than the rudiments of legal history and Common Law. The Perfect Law supercedes all those concepts other than precedent. The Perfect Law implants a wholly new trunk into the tree of precedent. All of the course of Common Law before it is inconsequential.
All the concepts of law since the Code of Hammurabi -- the Magna Carta, the American and French Constitutions, etc. -- are inconsequential thanks to the Perfect Law.
An attorney could be fast tracked into the workforce in 3-6 months!
And for the police, it simplifies law enforcement.
An officer can be certain that the man before them (-- And 90% of the time it is a man. Well, 87% of the time in Australia. --) is a potential abuser, a potential child molester; a potential rapist. He is certainly a passionate, intelligent man capable of all these crimes. And he would not be accused if he were not guilty.
As everyone has seen, it is always easier for the police to deal with the real criminals. It's having to deal with rights and all those other annoying complications that hinder law enforcement.
For clerks and social workers, they are saved the difficulties of their jobs, too.
There isn't any reason to treat this potential criminal civilly. A clerk or social worker can be assured that this is the potential scum of the earth and treat him accordingly. He does not deserve courtesy and consideration. You can assume he has all the potential of violence.
He does not deserve even access to the services you're there to perform.
(I had one 000 operator announce that there was violence involved. Three court clerks laughed at me cynically when I sought to file cross Intervention Orders. One female clerk even refused to give me the forms.)
This Perfect Law saves the state in so many ways. And it provides an ongoing benefit of employment for all involved, especially magistrates and lawyers, since the onus of proof is on the accused.
This is truly a Perfect Law!
A little discussion about the old days
Think about the law as you know it. Criminal laws attempt to prevent crime by the threat of punishment. Supposedly, the person will not steal because they know they will be caught and punished – usually jail or a fine.
In order to fall under the jurisdiction of such laws, the person has to commit a crime.
That is the concept of habeas corpus. There has to have been a crime committed.
Perfect Laws like Intervention Orders take away the opportunity for a crime to be committed. In fact, no crime has to be committed. There only has to be the allegation that a crime may be committed to subject the accused to the most substantial punishments:
- A person’s right to freedom of association;
- their right to property
- and free speech;
- the pursuit of happiness;
- not only in the past but for the future are curtailed;
- and the burden of proof lies not with the prosecution, but upon the accused.
This is a triumph of instinct, or assumption, or fears, over nearly 3000 years of legal history. But you don’t get Perfect Laws without making some changes.
It does away with the usual standard of the burden of proof. The accused is guilty on only the allegation.
There are those who will argue that Intervention Orders are based on the concept of mens rea, or the intention to commit a crime. This is the objective test of intention, that the perpetrator (unproven but convicted) is imputed to have the mindset to commit a crime to a reasonable person.
In other words, if sometime you were to shout in an argument: “I could kill you!”, under a Perfect Law statute you should be sent to jail or executed. At the very least, the person is put on probation for the crime, with the punishment already imposed.
These Perfect Laws form the basis of Family Law in modern Australian society.
Paul
posted by Unknown at
6:56 PM
Social bookmark this
4 Comments:
A Guilty Mind
"The mens rea is the Latin term for "guilty mind" used in the criminal law. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, which means that "the act will not make a person guilty unless the mind is also guilty".
Thus, in jurisdictions with due process, there must be an actus reus accompanied by some level of mens rea to constitute the crime with which the defendant is charged."
With a Perfect Law, of course, all that is necessary is the presumption, based on the standards of proof established in gossip, that the person has a Guilty Mind.
By
Unknown, at 7:08 PM
You see, in civil law, there is no burden to prove mens rea.
"The exception is strict liability crimes (in the civil law, it is not usually necessary to prove a subjective mental element to establish liability, say for breach of contract or a tort, although if intentionally committed, this may increase the measure of damages payable to compensate the Plaintiff)."
At best, if not the level of gossip, then the burden of criminal proof has been reduced to the level of a strictly defined contract, although no such contract exists -- or at least, to the knowledge of the accused.
It is usually a requirement that the person be fully aware and capable of entering into such a contract.
But that would impede the effectiveness of the Perfect Law.
By
Unknown, at 7:21 PM
Australia has no world class institutions of higher education. There is a good reason for that. Instead of giving students the same liberal arts education accepted as a standard in the rest of the world, Australia gives its professionals a quick and dirty vocational education.
It's no wonder an Australian lawyer or magistrate couldn't function as a paralegal in the US or UK. (Or that they are usually sent overseas to be educated.)
Now, with these new Perfect Laws, there will be no reason for the study of law and history. An Australian lawyer can be churned out in only a few weeks...
By
Anonymous, at 8:54 PM
Very pretty design! Keep up the good work. Thanks.
»
By
Anonymous, at 2:12 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home