There Has Been Debate Within The Australian Government

The latter case of DPP v Carr (2002) shows many similarities, providing that arrest should and can only be used as a method of last resort, and must not be used for minor offences where the defendant can be identified . In this particular matter, a highly intoxicated Mr Carr was of the belief that police were accusing him of throwing a number of rocks, when this was not the case. This confusion led Mr Carr’s to use offensive language, which provoked the police officer to caution the accused. Mr Carr was then soon after arrested for offensive language because of the continuation of this offence, and also for resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer in the execution of their duties. The main issue in this matter was whether or not the arrest was lawful, and if so, was it improper. It is important to note that this case was decided before the provisions of LEPRA was passed by the parliament and became valid law meaning the Court had to rely on common law principles to determine its outcome. The arrest for vulgar language in this case was held to be proper because the officer had reasonable suspicion (having witnessed him swearing and

Words alone, even aggressive ones, can not constitute an assault and must be accompanied by some bodily act or gesture that indicate a present ability to effect a purpose. In R v Secretary it was held that the reference to ‘present ability’ meant an ability, based on known facts as present at the time of the making of the threat, to effect a purpose, and that the threat may be one of future violence, and not an apprehension of immediate violence. In this case, it was Livingstone’s aggressive nature in addition to the knife in his hand that instilled in Blyton an apprehension of a future threat of personal violence which constitutes assault pursuant to s 245 and satisfies the first condition of s

Provocation was previously controlled under S2 of the homicide act 1957, the act stated where a person kills or is party to a killing of another, he shall not be convicted of murder if he was suffering from such abnormality of mind as substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing. The new defence S54-56 Coroners and Justice Act 2009 replaced defence of Provocation S3 Homicide Act 1957; it came into force October 2010.

This essay will ultimately contend that the Sentencing Amendment (Coward 's Punch Manslaughter and Other Matters) Act 2014 is an ill-founded initiative made by legislators, giving the impression of a powerful Government without truly reducing the violence. Using a close reading of each provision of the legislation in unison with extrinsic materials, this piece will outline the efficacy, necessity and likely impacts of the Act.

In 1967, after ten years of campaigning, a referendum was held to change the Australian Constitution. Two negative references to Aboriginal Australians were removed, giving the Commonwealth the power to legislate for them as a group. This change was seen by many as a recognition of Aboriginal people as full Australian citizens.

The recently passed ‘Sentencing Amendment (Coward’s Punch Manslaughter and Other Matters)’ arose within a highly politicized context and has led to controversy. The amendment was introduced in response to a perceived increase need to legislate on deaths caused by king hit punches or “coward’s punch”. It amends both the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) and the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic), by defining a punch to head or neck as dangerous act, introducing a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years for manslaughter by one punch, and increases the mandatory minimum sentence for manslaughter by gross violence to 10 years . However, there is likely little need for this legislation, as pre-existing law was already capable of dealing with the offence, and the implementation of this legislation will likely fail to effectively achieve its purpose. Moreover, the introduction, or increase, of a mandatory sentence will be unlikely to effectively deter individuals, and will remove the courts discretion regarding sentencing. In this essay I will argue that the legislation is unneeded to prosecute those who king hit others, and that it will likely fail to have its intended effect.

1: Imagine walking through Sydney Airport, excited as you wait to catch your flight when all of a sudden a brawl that can only be described as “chaotic, wild and uncontrolled” breaks out. As you watch on, frozen in fear, a man begins to aggressively beat his rival with a metal bollard, stabbing him and killing him in cold blood; How would you feel if that man was allowed to walk the streets of NSW? Walk on the same footpath as you, shop in the same aisle as you. Well this man, Mick Hawi was allowed to, as he was released on bail five years after committing this crime.

Now, in 2017, the protests over Australia Day and the history of the country have escalated to a level first seen here in America. Over a week ago, in Sydney’s Hyde Park, the statute there dedicated to Captain James Hook was vandalized. With what is presumed to be spray paint, “no pride in genocide” and “change the date” were written across the statute. Many members of Australia’s nationalist party have spoken out and held their own protests in response to this “heinous” act. They have spoken out how this act is tarnishing the history of Australia and given the country a bad name as well as spreading the positivity of nationalism. The Prime Minister of Australia, Malcom Turnbull called the act, via Facebook, an act of Stalinism, and that Australians

Conclusively, Law reform is a perpetual or ongoing process: it is constantly evolving in conclusion, need for law reform in our contemporary society is vital. It Is important that the Australian law is consistently reformed on a regular basis to prevent any  issues to ensure to ensure that we live in a society of peace, justice, regulation and a society which upholds values , morals and ethics Through law reform by understanding and recognising that there is a problem in our community which can be fixed through the legal system we may use the federal, state, etc. law to unpin and prevent this issue and the way to reform the law to fit the contemporary society and prevent revenge porn from ruining lives Through the process of law reform, legal

Thus, in order to prove manslaughter through the defense of provocation, the subjective fault element of second-degree murder must not be present. Section 232 (2) of the Criminal Code states that in the case of provocation the accused “[acts] […] on the sudden and before there [is] time for their passion to cool”. This means that, in order for provocation to exist, the accused must not have had the necessary guilty knowledge with respect to the course of action they were taking. In Buzizi’s case, this subjective condition for manslaughter is not satisfied, and the subjective fault element for second-degree murder still exists. At trial, the accused revealed that he had a significant degree of knowledge as to what he was doing during the altercation. For instance, when the accused testified, he stated that when the victim tried to pick up the exacto knife after dropping it, this is when he decided to grab the victim by his sweater and stab him (R v. Buzizi 248 blah 47). This establishes that Buzizi not only knew precisely what he did to the victim, but it also establishes that he knew his motivation for doing so, which was that he was afraid of the potentiality for the victim to attack him with the knife. During his testimony, Buzizi

INDENT is a culturally aware organisation that prides itself on working across cultural barriers. INDENT recognises the challenges Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are faced with and acknowledges the impact past government Australian policy has affected our Nation’s Indigenous people. We do this by: • Working with community Elders to implement and help guide us with our programs, community Elders are encouraged to attend our programs and interact with children • Our programs are based on promoting positive Aboriginal identity • Zero tolerance policy in regards to racism, stereotyping or biased behaviour or comments • Work with Interpreters to overcome language limitations.

For thousands of years, sculpture has been an integral part of society. Whether life-like, marble sculptures of the Renaissance (think Michelangelo, Bernini) or ceramic alteration of reality (Henry Moore), art has been the subject of critical commentary and public opinion. This is why the Queensland Government introduced their Art Built-In Policy, a policy aimed at providing funding for public artworks and improving community awareness of the value of public art. In 2006, Michael Keniger, Deputy Vice-Chancellor of the University of Queensland evaluated this document and reported that:

EDE 325 Assignment 1 Case study (30%). Due 20th June, 2016, 1500 words (10% leeway +/-) Includes intext references.

1.2 Research Aims and Objectives The aims and objectives of this dissertation are to determine whether the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 has successfully addressed the issues that surrounded the defence of provocation. This will enable a determination to be made as to whether victims of domestic violence are now able to raise the defence of loss of self-control more easily and whether better protection is now being provided to those suffering from domestic violence and battered women’s syndrome. The development of case law concerning provocation will be critically analysed in order to understand the effectiveness of the new loss of control defence.1.3 Research Problem Although the introduction of a new loss of control defence was intended to rectify this area of the law, it seems as

Some people may say that having control over someone or something can bring satisfaction and a sense of power. In the an article called “Gunman Kills Himself After Hostage Drama (584)” written by Charles P. Wallace and Tim Waters loss of control and the feeling of being helplessness makes Robert B. Rose commit a last act of asserting control over himself. In another article written by Martin E.P. Seligman called “On Learned Helplessness (585)” the feeling of loosing control of oneself is something that can cause someone to do things that they thought they would never do. What is hard to understand is that some of the things the someone may commit may implicate the lives of others in a negative way and the ending result could be death.