I wasn’t going to blog about the current Australian Federal election. After all, enough other people will spill oceans of ink on it, and I have a decent enough contempt for my own opinions not to waste people’s time shoving them down their throats. My only credentials to comment, after all, are being moderately bright and reading the Shepparton News and The Australian fairly regularly, and hearing the odd bit of radio and TV news.

However, I had one or two little insights on some of the parties and thought I’d throw them out there, one week into the campaign, for whatever they’re worth.

1. Australian Labor Party and Liberal Party of Australia/National Party of Australia

The ALP and the Liberal/National coalition are the main contending parties, but they’re so similar in policy that it takes a degree of imagination to identify real differences. Suffice it to say that one is ever-so-slightly to the left, and the other is ever-so-slightly to the right. To steal a line from P.J. O’Rourke, to support their campaigns requires one to jump on the blandwagon.

Currently, the battleground issues seem to be these –

(a) On asylum seeker policy, the ALP would direct all unauthorised boat arrivals to Papua New Guinea. The coalition would try and tow them out of Australian waters. I think it’s safe to say nobody much expects either policy to achieve anything over the long term.

(b) On the building of the National Broadband Network, Labor would connect every house to the grid and the Coalition would connect as far as a ‘node’. I’m not convinced the election will be won or lost on the NBN: my strong impression is that the great mass of voters (a) don’t understand what the NBN is for, (b) don’t see it as particularly relevant to them, and (c) have only heard of it lately in the sense of it being behind schedule and spreading asbestos.

2. The Greens.

Eternally the “party of the future”, the Australian Greens acquired a House of Representatives seat at the last election. Over the last few years they lost their long time leader Bob Brown, replaced by the fairly uncharismatic Senator Milne. Their policies are fairly predictable for a green party. Maybe they’ll keep their House of Reps seat, and maybe they won’t. Maybe they’ll keep their Senators, and maybe they won’t. Despite some fevered imaginings, I don’t think anyone genuinely believes that one day they’ll form a government.

3. Katter’s Australian Party

Like most parties with their leader’s name in the title (think Pauline’s United Australia Party), KAP is essentially one politician’s personal following. The party’s heartland is very much rural and regional Australia and its ideas are an odd compound of libertarianism and pre-World War One economics (in two words: tariffs and autarky).

My personal fear is that if this party gets significant publicity in the campaign, the attention will be a poisoned challice for rural Australia. At a time when country areas are being depopulated for the city (1), when rural jobs can’t be filled for want of candidates (2), and when urbanites everywhere are tending to look down on country dwellers as ignorant yokels, the countryside surely needs to show its reasonable, sophisticated and creative side. What it has here is a party whose candidates seem to be preoccupied with sexual morality (3) and whose policy goals include the right to boil a billy without a permit. For obvious reasons, this does not fill me with hope.

4. Palmer United Party

Founded this year by a prominent businessman, this party carries the odour of a Donald Trump-style publicity stunt. It has done little so far to make its policies known aside from putting them up on its website (which, in our information-saturated world, is the equivalent of talking in a locked room). I have literally no idea what the party thinks on any given issue and can’t see a lot of point finding out, given that only its founder seems to think it likely to win any seats. So far their biggest contribution to the campaign is trying to attract volunteers with a party involving models and sex. I am unable to comment in non-defamatory terms.

The campaign rolls on…

Notes

(1) See Chris McLennan, ‘No longer a barrel of fun at Lalbert’, Weekly Times, 18 July 2012, p. 12; idem, ‘Wedge of Darkness’, Weekly Times, 1 August 2012, p. 8; Bernard Salt, ‘How Warren lost its youth’, The Australian, 15 February 2013

(2) Chris McLennan, ‘A farm by any other moniker’, Weekly Times, 30 May 2012, p. 17; idem, ‘Search for Ag future’, Weekly Times, 1 August 2012, p. 10.

(3) ‘Katters party gets into strife’, Shepparton News, 25 January 2013, p.53; Marty Silk, ‘Katter party is ‘homophobic’: member’, Brisbane Times, 13 February 2013.

The finding of an inquest into a death at sea by the Coroners Court of South Australia was reported in the Weekend Australian of 10-11 August 2013.

Facts

On 17 February 2011, abalone diver Peter Clarkson was diving from a boat operated by skipper Howard Rodd. While diving, we was taken by two great white sharks.

After Mr Clarkson was taken, Mr Rodd claimed to have circled the area in the boat for a time before returning to shore. He did not alert authorities immediately, did not drop a buoy to mark Mr Clarkson’s last position, did not radio for help, did not use flares to attract other boats, or stay in the area until help came.

Ruling

Coroner Johns described Mr Rodd as incompetent and noted that had he acted promptly at least four hours of daylight would have been available to undertake rescue measures.

The Coroner found that Mr Rodd had failed to “act in the way best calculated to ensure that a proper search could be mounted”.

Significance

Practitioners may find this case useful in arguments as to the standards of care applying to masters of fishing boats.

The outcome of a prosecution of a company in the County Court was reported in the Herald Sun newspaper of 3 September 2012 at p. 11.

Facts

The employer of 51 year old Lydia Carter arranged a work function at a go-karting facility. While driving at the facility Ms Carter misjudged a turn and crashed into a tyre barrier, suffering fatal injuries.

Subsequent investigations found that the tyre barrier did not meet Australian standards, the harness restraining Ms Carter was loose, there was no padding on the steering wheel and the attending staff were not trained in first aid.

Trial

Charges (not identified in the report) were brought against the company in the County Court in 2009.

Determination

A fine of $1,400,000 was imposed by the County Court.

Note

The corporation went into liquidation a month before the case began and the fine remained unpaid at the date of the report.

The outcome of a prosecution for child cruelty and bestiality before Judge McGill in the Brisbane District Court was reported in the Shepparton News of 24 January 2013 at p. 14.

Facts

The unnamed 30 year old woman had been married for some years to a manipulative and abusive husband, on a background of prior sexually abusive and violent relationships.

Between 2005 and 2010 she was repeatedly coerced into engaging in sex acts in front of some or all of their six children. On two occasions these acts included intercourse with the pet dog.

Trial

The woman pleaded guilty to two counts of child cruelty and two of bestiality. Her husband had also abused some of their children and at the time of the trial was serving a lengthy period of imprisonment.

Determination

The woman was sentenced to three years probation.

The outcome of a prosecution for bond-bid rigging before Judge Wood in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York was reported in the Australian newspaper of 26 July 2013 at p. 24.

Facts

A component of the process of bond trading allows local governments to raise money from investors using bond deals, then investing the proceeds in investment products which banks and others sell off in a competitive process.

Between 2001 and 2006 three employees of UBS – Peter Ghavami, Gary Heinz and Michael Welty – concocted a scheme which resulted in municipalities being substantially overcharged in connection with these deals (according to the government, US$25,000,000.00).

Trial

The accused were convicted by a jury of the charges brought against them. The government had sought particularly severe penalties, including over a decade of imprisonment, perhaps as a reflection of the severe financial hardship being caused by municipal financial woes (1).

Determination

In sentencing, Judge Wood sentenced the accused as follows –
* Ghavami: 18 months imprisonment and a $1,000,000.00 fine. Her Honour noted that Ghavami faces deportation to Belgium.
* Heinz: 27 months imprisonment and a $400,000.00 fine
* Welty: 16 months imprisonment and a $300,000.00 fine

Note

(1) See Mark Curriden, ‘The Next Chapter’, 97(11) A.B.A. Journal 51 (2011).

The outcome of an appeal against the rejection of an application for workers’ compensation by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals was reported on the website of the Lexington (Kentucky) Herald-Leader of 2 August 2013.

Facts
The plaintiff was employed as a longshoreman (stevedore) by the defendant. On 8 January 2006, while intoxicated at work, he fell over a railing while attempting to urinate and dropped six-feet onto a concrete surface, suffering injury.
A workers compensation claim was lodged and rejected by his employer, which took the position that intoxication had caused his injury.

Procedural History
The rejection was the subject of proceedings in Oregon’s Benefits Review Board and a court of administrative law.
The plaintiff’s provided inconsistent histories of the incident, in which the origin of a claim that he had tripped over part of his employer’s equipment, was initially given as his own memory and then as information from other workers.
The rejection of his claim was confirmed. An initial appeal to the US District Court was rejected.

Appeal
The plaintiff appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. On appeal the worker raised the additional argument that his injuries were caused by the concrete onto which he fell and not by drunkenness. This argument did not impress the Court, which took the view that if intoxication caused the fall, it also caused the injuries.

Determination
The plaintiff’s appeal was rejected.

Note
Hat-tip to journalist Nigel Duara (Twitter @nigelduara) whose report provided the material for this casenote.

The outcome of an appeal against the sentence for murder before the Victorian Court of Appeal was reported in the Herald Sun newspaper of 24 July 2013 at p. 17.

Facts

The defendant believed that one Peter Rule had told police of his (Borg’s) marijuana-growing business. Borg Lured Rule to a factory, shot him and then burned his body in a drum. What remained was then cut up with a chainsaw, crushed, and placed in hydrochloric acid before being dumped in the sea.

Trial

Borg was convicted in the Supreme Court before Lasry J and sentenced to 23 years imprisonment with a minimum of 19 years.

Appeal

The Director of Public Prosecutions appealed the leniency of the sentence.

Determination

The Court of Appeal upheld the DPP’s appeal. It took the view that a “planned execution carried out for the sole purpose of protecting a criminal enterprise at least approached the worst case of an offence for which the maximum penalty is life imprisonment”. It also considered that Borg’s denials of responsibility precluded a finding of remorse.

Borg was re-sentenced to imprisonment for 28 years and 9 months, to serve a minimum of 24 years and nine months.

The outcome of a prosecution for theft in the County Court before Judge Douglas was reported in the Herald Sun newspaper of 24 July 2013 at p. 9.

Facts

The defendant was the president of the association managing a kindergarten. Between February and October 2012 he stole $224,008.48 in a series of transactions (essentially all of the kindergarten’s funds).

Trial

Mr Telios pleaded guilty to theft.

Determination

The Court noted that gambling provided the defendant with an escape from negative emotions and took into account his guilty plea and remorse. He retained the support of family and friends and had prospects of rehabilitation. The Court also noted that his family had suffered as a result of the situation.

Aggravating factors were the large amount of money stolen and the time and effort expended in stealing it, as well as the breach of trust involved.

He was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment with a minimum of two.

The outcome of a compensation claim arising out of a shooting by law enforcement in a Californian court was reported in the Los Angeles Times of 15 June 2013 at p. AA3.

Facts

The deceased, Robert Thomas Jr, was standing outside a party in 2010. Two sheriff’s deputies attended. Mr Thomas was frisked by one deputy and then ran. The deputies pursued him. It has been asserted that they saw him reach for a gun which was sticking out of his pocket. At this point one of the deputies shot Mr Thomas 9 times, causing death.

A gun was found at the scene of the shooting but its provenance is disputed.

Trial

Mr Thomas’ family brought proceedings against the LA County Sheriff’s Department. The matter was heard by a jury.

Determination

On 14 June 2013 the jury awarded the deceased’s family $7,500,000.00.

Note

The Department has announced its intention to appeal.

The outcome of a prosecution for 11 counts of murder before Latham J in the New South Wales Supreme Court was reported in the Australian newspaper of 2 August 2013 at p. 8.

Facts

Roger Dean was a male nurse in a nursing home. One night he lit two fires in the nursing home in an attempt to conceal his theft of a large quantity of prescription drugs. He assisted one resident away from the fire but abandoned the others.

Trial

Mr Dean pleaded guilty to all charges.

Determination

The Court described the offender’s crimes as “heinous, atrocious and greatly reprehensible”. In Latham J’s assessment, neither his plea of guilty nor his ingestion of a large quantity of drugs prior to his crimes, reduced his culpability.

Mr Dean was sentenced to imprisonment for life.