|
5yo boy allegedly raped on Nauru could be sent back to detention centre, doctor says A five-year-old boy who was allegedly raped on Nauru is facing the prospect of being returned to the offshore detention centre where his attacker remains. The revelations come from paediatricians who have detailed their concerns to the ABC about the child and the wellbeing and safety of about 160 other children held in Australia's detention centres. Paediatrician Karen Zwi said the young child suffered serious mental health problems after the alleged sexual assault. "Like many other children who are very distressed he regressed, he began bed-wetting, he became very anxious about his mother's wellbeing, he actually began to self-harm, as I've seen several other children do as well and eventually he was transferred over to the mainland for treatment," Dr Zwi said. She said the child's greatest fear was returning to Nauru. "That is this huge cloud hanging over him. That he will be returned to an absolutely traumatic and devastating environment for him." The boy's fate is likely to hang on the result of a High Court decision about a challenge to the Federal Government's policy of sending asylum seekers arriving by boat to detention at centres on Manus Island and Nauru, that will be delivered tomorrow. If the court case fails, Immigration Minister Peter Dutton has flagged his intentions of sending the group of 160 adults, 37 babies and 54 other children back to Nauru. Detention 'breaking spirit' of young people In exclusive interviews, two young women spoke to the ABC, giving first-hand accounts of the horrific conditions children are enduring in offshore detention centres. One of the girls, Jamilah, 20, from Somalia, said being in detention on Christmas Island had broken her spirit. "My friends, all of them, they were harming themselves. I tried to be strong and say that was not the right thing I could do," she said. "I was thinking killing myself was the last thing I could do in my life." Another girl, Assiya, who was held on Nauru for more than 12 months, told the ABC how she attempted to kill herself after daily taunts from her captors and being physically assaulted by a guard. "I used to be a very strong person and always tried to think positive but they really break me down. There was a point I couldn't think of life anymore," she said. "Sometimes the guards bring video of the Prime Minister and they make us watch it, saying you will never call Australia home. Same thing that they tell us every day. "The more you try to do something, the more you get upset and hurt and treated like animals." She said she attempted to hang herself with a scarf and was saved by a friend from dying. A mincing machine' of traumatic events After doctors raised concerns about the mental health of Assiya and Jamilah, both were transferred to the mainland for treatment. But they face the prospect of being returned to detention at any time. Dr Zwi said children kept in offshore detention had "been through a mincing machine". "They've had one traumatic event after another. Sometimes I feel they are broken into little bits and it's really hard to put the pieces back together again," she said. "It's almost impossible to help them to heal and recover if they know that they're going to go back to that environment." Average detention time for children stretches to 14 months Around 160 children are being held in detention by Australian authorities. The figure has dropped from 2013, when the number of children detained reached almost 2,000. But children are being held for much longer, an average of 14 months. On a visit to Nauru, paediatrician Hasantha Gunasekera said he was horrified to see how the children were suffering. "We hardly ever see young children and adolescents so traumatised by life that they would want to take their own life," Dr Gunasekera said. "But in Nauru and in detention centres where kids have been kept, sometimes for most of their life, we see very young children who just can't take it anymore and try to kill themselves or wanting to hurt themselves. Or saying things like, 'I may as well just jump off the roof'. "There's no point anymore. I had one parent say to me, 'I brought my kids here for them to be safe, not to learn how to commit suicide'. What do you say to a parent like that?" Doctors speak out despite jail threat Dr Gunasekera and Dr Zwi know they could be charged and jailed for speaking out about what they have seen in Australia's detention centres. Under the Border Force Act passed in 2014, anyone working in immigration detention, including doctors, faces two years' imprisonment for revealing details of what goes on there. "Paediatricians have a responsibility to make sure the system stops damaging children and that's why many of us have chosen to speak out," Dr Zwi said. Dr Gunasekera said if Australians knew what was happening in offshore detention, they would be shocked. "If the Australian people knew actually what was happening, if they saw the trauma on the faces of the kids like we saw," he said. "That's why there is secrecy around every part of this policy, it's because its so shameful." A spokesman for Mr Dutton said he would not be making any comments about the High Court challenge until after the announcement. "We will wait to see what the court decides and make comment after that," he said. He said the medical attention given to people in Australian-run detention centres was "pretty much what you get in Australia". The spokesman said issues relating to doctors speaking out under the Border Force Act were dealt with last year and that it was made clear that the provisions were needed to protect sensitive information. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-02/boy-allegedly-raped-on-nauru-could-be-sent-back-to-detention/7132608
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2016 04:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 16:52 |
|
|
PUP.png
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2016 05:16
|
|
|
MysticalMachineGun posted:MrsMachineGun was outraged this morning about the proposed changes to the senate voting laws this morning - while I argued that the current system is less than representative the other side of the coin is Libs and Labor want to change it so they can have more seats for themselves. Is it worth changing to keep nutballs like Leyonhelm out or worth keeping for the occasional good 'un like Muir to slip through? Muir was on ABC24 this morning saying that he'd like to see the end of preferences altogether.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
Think of how bad it would have been with the Carbon Tax.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2016 06:15
|
|
|
Christian Lobby: government has met us over gay marriage 'no' campaign The head of the Australian Christian Lobby, Lyle Shelton, has said changing the definition of marriage may cause some people to think he is gay, as he revealed that the organisation has been approached by the government to discuss the “no” campaign of a same-sex marriage plebiscite. Shelton was asked on Sky News on Sunday night how allowing same-sex marriage would affect his own marriage. “If the definition of marriage is changed, it’s no longer assumed ... that I’m married to a woman. So that affects me straight away,” he said. “So you’re worried that people may think you’re gay if the law changes?” host Patricia Karvelas asked. Shelton replied: “They may or may not, but certainly the terms of my marriage have changed, and of the millions of other marriages in Australia”. The Australian Christian Lobby (ACL), an organisation vocally opposed to changing the definition of marriage, partly due to the argument that children need both a mother and a father, has been approached to discuss its role in a potential plebiscite on the issue, Shelton said. “We’ve had some initial discussion,” he said. “The government has reached out to us and some other groups in this space.” Last week attorney general George Brandis told Senate estimates that consultations have started with stakeholders on a possible plebiscite. Shelton has confirmed with Guardian Australia that the ACL has been part of that consultation process. “We’re thankful for that conversation,” he said. “We have every confidence that this will be a fair process.” But the ACL has warned against truncating the process, after suggestions that the plebiscite could be held as early as October. “I think people need time to realise the importance of changing the definition of marriage,” he said. “An October plebiscite would be a surprise ... It seems an unrealistic time frame.” The prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, has committed to holding the $160m plebiscite if the Coalition wins the next election, despite being personally for marriage equality. Brandis is due to take a proposal on the mechanisms of the vote, including if it is binding on Coalition MPs who are against same-sex marriage, to cabinet for approval shortly. Labor says a plebiscite is unnecessary and has pledged to hold a vote on the issue within 100 days of winning office. Despite the outcome of a plebiscite, parliament will still need to vote to remove restrictions in the Marriage Act that limit marriage to being between a man and a woman. Shelton wants the no campaign to be funded in the same way that the yes campaign is funded. “I would expect that equal funding would be provided to both sides as there is to any normal referendum, or in this case, plebiscite,” Shelton said. “It’s got to be fair debate and I think, more importantly, people from our side of the debate have got to feel free to speak without being labelled as haters or homophobes or bigots. That’s been really tough in this whole thing. None of us want to see that ugliness in this debate. We want to be respectful to the other side, but we want to be able to be free to be able to speak about why marriage should be retained as between a man and a woman.” Jason Tuazon-McCheyne, a candidate for the Australian Equality party, said neither side of the campaign should receive government money. “I’m against public funding ... equally, no funding,” he told Sky News. He thinks a plebiscite will be divisive and dangerous for members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) communities. “I think a fear campaign is very, very easy to sway people’s minds. People don’t understand [the issues], necessarily,” he said. Tuazon-McCheyne said that the government should fund more counsellors and psychologists to work during the plebiscite campaign, citing already high numbers of suicides or attempted suicides by members of the LGBTIQ communities. Shelton labelled that “terrible emotional blackmail” and said that the no campaign has “respectfully” put forward its case until now. “No one is saying that same-sex couples can’t be good parents. Of course they can,” Shelton said. He said the next logical step in the debate would be about assisted reproductive technology, like surrogacy and in-vitro fertilisation (IVF). “I’m not sure we have had a proper community debate on this,” Shelton said. “I’m with the global feminist movement because I want a ban on all surrogacy. It’s inherently exploitative of women.” http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/15/with-gay-marriage-people-could-think-im-gay-says-christian-lobby-head
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 05:13
|
|
|
starkebn posted:fire up the barbeque, it's time for Save a sausage sandwich for me!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2016 00:21
|
|
helmet chat
|
Zenithe posted:So this happened $92,294 of $55k funded
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
Bold the whole thing Serco guards bar asylum seeker advocate from visiting Baby Asha in hospital Serco guards employed by the Department of Immigration have barred an asylum seeker advocate from visiting Baby Asha and her mother at a Brisbane hospital. Doctors at Brisbane’s Lady Cilento children’s hospital are refusing to discharge the one-year-old baby, known as Asha, who was being treated for burns sustained at the Nauru offshore processing centre, because they do not believe the centre provides a safe environment for a child. Natasha Blucher, a former Save the Children worker who is now advocacy coordinator for the Darwin Asylum Seeker Advocacy and Support Network (Dassan), has been supporting the family, but said her permission to visit with them has been revoked without explanation. Blucher told Guardian Australia she had applied to visit Asha and her mother earlier this week. She had been granted permission by the Department of Immigration to visit the mother and baby on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, citing their relationship of two years. Blucher met with the pair on Tuesday morning, but upon returning in the afternoon she was approached by a “quite rude” Serco guard who told her approval had been revoked and she had to leave. Subsequent repeated phone calls to the Department of Immigration have been ignored or fobbed off, according to Blucher. Serco referred questions from Guardian Australia to the immigration department, which said visitation rights were decided on a case by case basis with a number of considerations, “primarily in relation to the ongoing security and welfare of the people they are seeking to visit”. The spokesman said the department was in contact with a number of people and authorities, including the family. “Decisions are being made in the best interests of the child and family and where visitation refusals are made they are for good reasons, which may not be able to be shared publicly,” he said. “Authorised legal representatives and caseworkers for detainees are not impeded in their visitation applications. This individual is not an authorised caseworker for this family and does not deliver services on behalf of the department or its service providers.” In response Blucher said it didn’t make sense for the department “to state that these decisions are made in the best interests of the family, when it’s the family themselves who are so upset that I’m not allowed to see them”. Blucher said Asha’s mother had not been allowed to receive calls from her. She questioned the government’s recent promise of compassion towards asylum seekers currently in the custody of Australian authorities. “The government has made statements that they are going to treat people with compassion and on a case by case basis,” said Blucher. “When Malcolm Turnbull was asked about Asha specifically he said he wouldn’t comment on individual cases but that we’ll be treating all people with compassion. Not allowing a mother with a sick child in hospital to be visited by someone she’s known for two years when she has no other friends around is not compassion.” Asha was born in Australia to her asylum-seeker parents. In June she was removed to Nauru at the age of five months, against the advice of Save the Children. She developed gastroenteritis within a week. A protest and vigil outside the Brisbane hospital supporting Asha and her doctors has entered its seventh day. When asked about the case on Monday, Turnbull told media the government would not make any decisions which would “imperil the health or security of any individual”. “We’re managing this policy with great care and with great compassion, and at the same time doing everything we can to ensure that we do not do anything or say anything which will be used by the people smugglers to get more vulnerable people on to those boats,” he said. The government is also under pressure from community groups, churches and state and territory leaders to grant amnesty to 267 asylum seekers who are set to be deported back to offshore processing and detention following the high court decision which ruled the system legal. On Wednesday human rights lawyers said the government had agreed to give at least 72 hours’ notice of any attempt to deport Asha and her family back to Nauru. At the same time it was revealed the government had withdrawn its assurances to do the same for the 267 other asylum seekers facing transfer. http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/18/serco-guards-bar-asylum-seeker-advocate-from-visiting-baby-asha-in-hospital
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2016 06:11
|
|
|
How soon you forget a little documentary called SeaQuest DSV
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2016 09:44
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2016 09:46
|
|
|
Big Willy Style posted:Cool, for some reason I thought they were only for academics They're for support staff too, and they're pretty good.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2016 02:32
|
|
|
Zenithe posted:almond-milque rice-toast I have a nut allergy you piece of poo poo
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
Birb Katter posted:Auspol March: Is blackface OK yet?  
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
Auspol March: Blackmailed by self-harming babies
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 05:20
|
|
|
Timeline: Why Save the Children workers want almost $1 million compensation from the Federal Government Nine Save The Children staff who were at the centre of a political storm surrounding the Nauru Detention Centre have lodged a compensation claim against the Federal Government of nearly $1 million. The staff were removed from the small Pacific island of Nauru after an internal security report suggested the workers were involved in political activism by coaching asylum seekers to self-harm and to fabricate stories of abuse. Documents obtained by 7.30 show that the nine workers will claim for loss of income, consolation for pain and suffering and hurt and humiliation and damage to reputation on Monday. They will also request a formal apology from the Government that acknowledges the Government's actions damaged their reputation and caused embarrassment. A spokeswoman from the Department of Immigration and Border Protection said: "The Department continues to engage with Save the Children Australia and former staff, through their legal representatives, and is aiming to settle their claims as quickly as possible." Here's how the events unfolded: Aug 1, 2013 Save The Children begin work on Nauru An initial one-year contract begins allowing Save The Children to provide education and protection services and welfare services to minors in detention centres on Nauru. The contract was valued at $36,740,058.53. February 2014 Services expand Save the Children services expanded to include welfare, recreation and education services. The contract is changed to from a solely child welfare focus to providing services to families, childless couples and single adult women. September, 25 2014 New policies introduced The Australian Government introduces legislation to Parliament to resurrect the Howard-era temporary protection visa (TPVs), and to create a new visa called a safe haven enterprise visa (SHEV). The bill also moves to classify babies born to asylum seekers in Australia as "unauthorised maritime arrivals" to ensure they will be blocked from applying for a permanent protection visa and can be resettled offshore. Then-immigration minister Scott Morrison sends a video message to transferees on Nauru and Manus Island offshore processing centres. September 29, 2014 First allegations of abuse on Nauru Fairfax reports allegations of sexual abuse of women and children and threats of rape by guards working in the detention centre on Nauru. October 2, 2014 Staff accused in internal report Ten Save the Children staff are accused of coaching asylum seekers to self-harm in an internal report by the other service provider on the island, Transfield (now Broadspectrum). The six employees who on the island are removed. October 3, 2014 Staff suspended The nine employees who were still employed by Save The Children are issued a removal letter suspended on full pay. The six employees who were on the island are deported by the following day. Immigration minister Scott Morrison orders an independent investigation into sex abuse claims and the alleged coaching of the asylum seekers to self-harm and refers the matter to the Australian Federal Police. Save the Children advise the Nauru Minister for Justice and Border Protection, David Adeang, that the organisation rejects the allegations of inappropriate behaviour and is willing to cooperate with the review. March 20, 2015 Staff are cleared The independent review chaired by Philip Moss clears Save the Children staff of any fabricated abuse allegations or coaching. It also finds evidence of sexual abuse in detention centre. May 15, 2015 Another review ordered The Immigration Department, headed by Peter Dutton, commissions an independent report by the Adjunct Professor Christopher M Doogan in response to the Moss report. October 15, 2015 Nauru police raid Save the Children offices are raided twice by Nauruan Police accompanied by Australian Border Force. Laptops and phones are seized. Staff are accused of leaking information, especially emails regarding journalists' entry to the centre from the Nauru Operations Manager. October 31, 2015 Transfield wins Nauru contract Transfield (now BroadSpectrum) takes over Save the Children's welfare services role on Nauru, after winning the bid for Save the Children's contract which expired on October 31. The contract outlines that they will also manage security on Nauru and Papua New Guinea and is worth $1.2 billion. A handful of Save The Children employees remain on island to finalise affairs and complete the transition to the new service provider. They say they are completely off the island by mid-November. January 15, 2016 Doogan report public The second review by the Department of Immigration, the Doogan report is made public. It says Save the Children workers should receive compensation and that their removal was not justified. February 22, 2016 Compensation claim lodged Lawyers for nine Save The Children workers lodge to seek compensation from the Federal Government for nearly $1 million for the loss of income, pain and humiliation the forced removal caused. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-22/timeline-save-the-children-workers-on-nauru/7180992
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
Should have stayed with the narrative of the self harming baby imo.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2016 05:04
|
|
|
Police dismiss claims Baby Asha deliberately hurt by mother in order to leave Nauru Allegations baby Asha was deliberately harmed by her mother as a way to get the family off Nauru and into Australia have been refuted by medical records and dismissed by police and advocates. The suggestion that the Nepalese woman deliberately harmed her one-year-old child appeared to have grown from comments made by the immigration minister, Peter Dutton, in parliament, a subsequent attempt by crossbenchers to censure him and media reports on Tuesday of a police investigation. The Queensland police investigation, sparked by a child protection notification reportedly from a guard, has since been closed and no charges have been laid. On Monday Dutton suggested the government was the target of attempted blackmail by asylum seekers seeking healthcare. Dutton had been asked a question in parliament referencing baby Asha and, within his answer, was the following statement: “I’m not going to conduct a situation, not going to preside over a situation where we have people self-harming to come to hospitals in this country because they believe that is the route out into the Australian community for Australian citizenship.” He immediately followed the statement with comments about baby Asha, prompting accusations he was implying Asha had been deliberately harmed by her mother. The Tasmanian MP Andrew Wilkie moved to censure Dutton for his comments, telling parliament the accusation that people self-harmed to gain citizenship was “one of the ugliest things I have heard in this place in my time serving here”. The motion was seconded by the Greens MP Adam Bandt and supported by the independent MP Cathy McGowan. However, it was defeated when Labor voted with the Coalition because, Labor’s immigration spokesman, Richard Marles, said, Dutton’s comments had been “over egged” by Wilkie. Dutton defended his comments and said he made no judgment about Asha’s injuries. On Tuesday the Courier Mail reported a guard had alleged Asha’s mother had “confessed” to purposefully harming Asha to get them out of Nauru. It is not known exactly what, if any, statement made by Asha’s mother – who speaks English as a second language – led to the actioning of a child protection notification by the guard. Queensland police confirmed to Guardian Australia it had received a child protection notification but would not say when it was received. The spokeswoman said an investigation was conducted and finalised. An asylum seeker advocate, Natasha Blucher, said Asha’s mother had been interviewed by police last week. Blucher, a former Save the Children worker who had been cleared of accusations she and others incited asylum seekers to self-harm, said the questions largely centred around whether Blucher had coached her to burn Asha. Blucher was not subsequently questioned and the investigation has since closed. Blucher, who has known Asha’s parents for about two years, said Asha’s mother would be “absolutely distraught” at the suggestion she had harmed her daughter. “If anything, she has been very protective of the child in a difficult environment,” Blucher said. “She’s done everything she possibly can to keep her safe.” Hospital records of Asha’s treatment, seen by Guardian Australia, show there was no evidence anybody else was involved in her injury. Asha, who is a year old, sustained a “superficial, partial thickness” burn to her chest in an accident with recently boiled water that was cooling in the tent in which she lived. “The injury occurred when [Asha] pulled a bowl containing recently boiled water off a table onto herself,” the medical record said. “[Asha] lives in a tent with no kitchen facilities except for a kettle. [Asha’s] mother boils all the water she consumes to ensure it is safe for drinking. “There is no clinical evidence that the burn injury was non-accidental.” Daniel Webb, who is acting for the family, said the government needed to get perspective on the issue. “Last night was this family’s first night of freedom in two-and-a-half years,” he said. “It’s incredibly sad that they have to wake up to such hurtful things being said about them. Asha’s mother will be really confused and upset.” Shen Narayanasamy, the human rights campaign director for GetUp, accused Dutton of ignoring the medical evidence. “Dutton is in possession of medical reports which clearly state Baby Asha’s injuries were accidental,” Narayanasamy said. “It’s rotten politics and we will ensure the family is able to fully explore their defamation options against this minister and his Border Force.” Dutton had since repeated his question time comments, telling Channel Nine: “We are not going to allow people smugglers to get out a message that if you seek assistance in an Australian hospital, that somehow that is your formula to becoming an Australian citizen.” Advocates have drawn comparisons between the allegations and the 2001 “children overboard” accusations. At the time – which was shortly before a federal election the Coalition would go on to win – ministers in the Howard government insisted that asylum seekers arriving in Australian waters by boat had deliberately thrown their children into the sea in a “planned and premeditated” attempt to force the navy to take them to Australia. The defence minister at the time, Peter Reith, released photographs of children in the sea wearing life jackets, asserting the pictures were evidence the government’s stated version of events was “absolute fact”. The then prime minister, John Howard, said: “I express my anger at the behaviour of those people and I repeat it: I can’t comprehend how genuine refugees would throw their children overboard ... I certainly don’t want people of that type in Australia, I really don’t.” It was found by a subsequent parliamentary inquiry that the version of events presented by the government was untrue: that no children were thrown into the water in the incident; that the pictures presented were taken a day after the alleged incident was said to have taken place (when the asylum seeker boat broke up and sank under tow from the navy and almost all passengers ended up in the water); and that military chiefs had explicitly told government officials no children were thrown overboard in the incident. The Greens senator Sarah Hanson Young said the government had “form” when it came to making false accusations and allusions. “The children overboard affair and the recent unfair sacking of 10 Save the Children workers on Nauru shows why we should be suspicious of what this government says,” she said. “When it comes to who to trust out of Peter Dutton or the medical professionals who are trying to protect children on Nauru, I know who I’ll back every time.” Dutton’s office has been contacted for comment. Asha and her family are still on the Australian mainland, according to the department of immigration, but their exact location since being moved into community detention is unknown. Dutton has said that once “legal and medical” issues are resolved, all families will be returned to Nauru. Lawyers and advocates said they had been unable to contact the family for up to three days, before making contact Monday night. http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/23/police-dismiss-claims-baby-asha-deliberately-hurt-by-mother-in-order-to-leave-nauru
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2016 05:53
|
|
|
Getting owned by Shill Borten. Shameful.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
Birb Katter posted:Auspol March: Mental Illness Poofterism Looks like the guy's got form Judge rules 'N-word' not offensive AUGUST 10, 2010 4:24PM A QUEENSLAND judge has found the terms "friend of the family" and "sandnigger" are not offensive to a reasonable person. Magistrate Michael O'Driscoll made the ruling yesterday when he dismissed a case against a Gold Coast retiree charged with sending an offensive facsimile to a local politician, the Gold Coast Bulletin reported . Denis Mulheron, 62, sent the fax to the office of Queensland lawmaker Peta-Kaye Croft on June 30 last year. It called on the Labor Party to tighten immigration laws against "niggers" and "sandnigger terrorists", and Muslim women with circumcised genitals. Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar. End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar. Staff member Christie Turner, 28, told Southport Magistrates Court she was deeply offended when she read the one-page document, which also made reference to indigenous Australians as "Abos". Mr Mulheron, from the Gold Coast suburb of Labrador, told the court he had grown up with the slang terms for Arabs and black Africans and did not believe they were offensive. "I'm not a member of the cafe, chardonnay and socialist set ... to me that is everyday language," he said. He argued in court they were no different to calling a New Zealander a "Kiwi" or an American a "Yank". Mr O'Driscoll ruled that Mr Mulheron's words were not enough to invoke criminal sanctions. "The words used were crude, unattractive and direct but were not offensive to a reasonable person," he said. But he made it clear the court in no way condoned Mr Mulheron's comments. Queensland Premier Anna Bligh said the use of the term "friend of the family" is highly offensive and has no place in modern Australia. The case comes after a judge in the Queensland city of Townsville ruled last Thursday that it was acceptable for people to tell police officers to "f*** off". Townsville judge Peter Smid threw out a case against Bardon Kaitira, 28, who swore at a female officer outside a nightclub on December 20 last year in the early hours of the morning. Judge Smid said: "The defendant spoke normally, he had his hands in his pockets and walked away. It's not the most polite way of speaking but those who walk the beat would be quiet immune to the words."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2016 04:47
|
|
|
Anidav posted:In a Shorten vs Shorten. Who wins? 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
At least every response so far is calling him out.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
Luke "what do words mean?" Simpkins
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 00:53
|
|
|
hooman posted:~The worst potato ever. "no boats effectively "
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 05:31
|
|
|
Zenithe posted:Had some time to look into the Safe Schools propaganda business. This one is from George "fight me irl" Christensen *ahem* If I might offer a rebuttal: Gays bad.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
Cartoon posted:
Striker Eureka can't hold a gun properly
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2016 01:02
|
|
WE ARE SO VERY VERY hosed
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 16:52 |
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:I'm the T-34 I'm the googly-eye battleship
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2016 01:03
|
|