?JURISDICTION oNotion of how it is risen and how it is imposed ?IN 1788, ASSUMED, PUT UPON AUSTRALIA FROM THE ACT OF colinisation ?SOVEREIGNTY oFrom british states, then Australia as a commonwealth oCitizenship ?GENERAL ENTITLEMENT TO RIGHTS PROTECTION ETC. ?SOVEREIGN DOMAIN ?DIFFERENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLE, GIVEN NO ACKNOWLEDGE OF land ownership and traditional rights and customs as well as traditional rules ?AGENCY oAutonomy as a group/individual oThe capacity whether individually or collectively to exercise authority to determine oPreviously denied ?CRIMINALISATION OF TRADITIONAL ?WELFARE?PROTECTION OOXX case ?GREW UP DURING A TIME DURING HARD ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES WITH WEAK communal support due to governmental policies. ?LOST A SENSE OF IDENTITY WHEN DOING INSTITUTION UNTIL HE’S ABOUT 19. HE WAS separated from his family by the Australian welfare system. ?forced removal ?POST-WAR? ASSIMILATION ? EVENTUALLY BREED OUT ABO BLOOD FROM THE SOCIETY oProcess of catagorisation based on the portion of abo blood vs. European heritage oTargeted as half-cast or anyone with part-euro heritage oSystemic harm of forced removal oNegative relationship between police and abo people from the early stage oInstitutional harm oJohn Howard defended such system, because that’s why people believed was the right thing to do at the time ?OUTCOMES GENERATED FROM INTERVENTIONS oRestriction on alcohol oWelfare rationing o“Blanket bans” oarmy/AFP/ACC presence oADA provision was suspended oRecord number of Child removal ?FOR CHILD PROTECTION DUE TO NT CHILD ASSAULTS ?INDIGENOUS DOMAIN ?FLUID SPACES ?NEGOTIATED COMPROMISE [page 123-127] ?FRENCH POST-STRUCTAVOLIST PHILOSOPHER ?POWER/KNOWLEDGE ?DISCIPLINE + PUNISH ?DISPERSED FORM OF POWER ?MODES OF REGULATION oTarget populations.oPrivate security companies oInsurance policies ?AGREEMENT ?AGENCY ?ASBO? o“non-serious” oyoung people ocivil order/behaviour ocurfew oassociation oban from uniform/dressing Criminal Process (1) ?RISK DISCRETION ?NOTION OF 2 TIERS OF JUSTICE how was this particular evidence brought before the court? Is this the only available evidence? Is this charges the only one that applies? Other narrative aside from the one provided by the prosecutor? ?DRUG COURTS What does a fair trial mean? Police power? police station? charge/bail? remanded into police custody/bail to attend court? Local court?Bail? RIC DPP reviews evidence Committal Pre-trial hearings (disclosure of evidence,disclosure for offence ) District court 19th MARCH continues ?ATTEMPTS BY GOV TO PUT IN PLACE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS FOR DISCRETION IN decision making oThe notion of fairness. oIs open and accountable? Equal in a broad way? oIs it efficient? ?LEPRA 2001 ?YOUNG OFFENDERS ACT 1997 oDiversionary scheme ?STEER YOUNG PEOPLE AWAY FROM THE COURT SYSTEM ?AVOID PROSECUTION OR CRIMINAL RECORD ?THROUGH WARNINGS]?FORMAL RECORD KEPT FOR POLICING, cautions? also allow courts to access, youth justice conferences?conference is kinda like reparative justice [3 levels of warning ?RELATIVELY MINOR OFFENCES oShop lifting oOffensive conducts ?YOUNG PEOPLE WHO GET INVOLVED IN THE EARLY AGE, TEND to stay there if they are ever forced to participate in the criminal system oSuch scheme is trying to avoid such problem ?POLICE IN CHARGE OF THIS PROCESS oRegional difference for police attitude ?THE OPTION OF CAUTION WAS NOT USED IN many parts of the state ?ON-GOING PLANETARY CHASER CASE ? Discretion in the criteria for prosecution [page 268] ?ESTABLISHED CRIMINAL AGENCIES TO BREAK THE LINK BETWEEN POLICE HAVING ALLprosecution power? to create a more consistent and transparent approach to the conduct of prosecution ?DPP ?E. G. IN THE UK?CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICES ?ISSUE GUIDELINES PERIODICALLY oPage 268 Shawcross: must be in the public interest oReason for the DPP not to prosecute these people in the chaser case[page 269-271…] oStrict liability? assumption of guilt (unless honest and reasonable mistake fact) oThey were under the impression that with such high level security they wouldn’t be able to access this prohibited area given their poor makeup and props oUnusual for the DPP to discuss this in public oLinage between fairness and public interest o[page 272] magistrate and local courts [p. 273-] oMUNDAY v GILL oIndictment ?CROWN/STATE (E. G. R V SMITH) oSummary level ?MAGISTRATE/ “PEACE” ?ONE INDIVIDUAL VERSUS ANOTHER ?LESS SERIOUS oMagistrate courts in NSW (brought from the UK) got considerable power – public regulation (much more substantial role in the society)? now usually covered by local governments oHistorically, there’s a distinction between lay magistrate and stipendiary magistrates oThe former one usually has no legal trainings and was advised by the court?TO INTEGRATE SOCIETY WITH THE COURT SYSTEM oThe latter one is a full-time professional oPreside over Summary offences or indictable offences (by committal to the higher court OR heard summarily) oHeard in the magistrate ? sentencing usually lower oVery fast? may not be the best place to argue a case giving the limited time oQuestion of judgement giving no jury oIn recent year, there’s quite an expansion in the indictable offences heard in the magistrate courts in NSW oCommittal?Weather or not there’s a chance of conviction for the court [page 275]? sort out the cases and ensure serious and possible cases are convicted after trial oQuite often people go to committal undefended oWeakness in committal oCommittal nowadays is more of a paper exercise, but a historically important part District & Supreme court ?[PAGE 279-280] BRAKE DOWN OF BASIC TYPES OF APPEAL othe success rate is quite high (over 1/3) oLawyers potentially matter in appeal oIn crown cases, if its not allowed, it usually cannot be challenged again ? double jeopardy? such mechanism has been challenged a lot in recent years D McBarnet ?TWO TIERS OF JUSTICE ?SEPARATION OF POWER oLink between due process and public level oNo really public intervention in the process oOn summary level, the court is not really accountable ?TRIVIALITY oToo trivial for public consumption oPublic perception? usually go to district and supreme court cases oAccused ?IMPORTANT TO ACCUSED THEMSELVES ?STRUCTURE ? HIGH LEVEL OF DISENGAGEMENT ?MORE SERIOUS CASES ARE MORE COMPLEX IN TERMS OF LAW???? ?ITS ABOUT CONSTRUCTION, THE FACTS ARE SIMPLY BECAUSE LAWYERS MAKE IT simple ?SIGNIFICANT DISCRIMINATION AGAINST PEOPLE WHO APPEAR IN FRONT OF THE magistrate courts Welsh ?NEW OFFENCES PARTICULARLY STRICT LIABILITY oEven tho laws are strict forward, they can often be very complex oConsiderably change in the attitude of lawyers oNew generation of students coming through oAssumes that some of the new minor offences are not that complex oChange in context READ THE CONTEMPORARY AUSTRALIAN RESEARCH WEBSITE Various types of demina [page 294] Increasing number of women magistrates Carlen ?(MAIN FOCUS) THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE COURT ROOM osocial architecture of the court not technical ositting high staring down at the court onew courts have high security system olimited room for lawyers to move ?REFLECTIVE OF THE POWER.