Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Skilled legal advice with
accessible & personal attention

Courts not coping with the caseload?

By johnboy - 8 May 2009 8

The ABC brings word that our Supreme Court needs more judges and a bigger building to cope with its burgeoning caseload.

Some might quibble that the “modern jury trial” is just a way for defense lawyers to pad their fees while bombarding juries with so much useless information that the poor men and women, good and true, are no longer sure what colour the sky is, let alone the guilt of the defendant.

Others might wonder that if the justices handed down longer custodial sentences to the serial offenders which adorn our city then those offenders would have less scope to commit further atrocities on the public which in turn require still more jury trials.

Local legal bods are certainly in furious agreement that a fifth judge is needed, if only because they would very much like to be that judge.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
8 Responses to
Courts not coping with the caseload?
farnarkler 4:26 pm 08 May 09

Jack Pappas for the next judge!!

Emlyn Ward 4:05 pm 08 May 09

They can’t even cope with a few excess kangaroos being shot. Pathetic.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_ 3:56 pm 08 May 09

Not with the high concentration of bleeding heart leftys in this town…

Emlyn Ward 3:48 pm 08 May 09

ant said :

Good point. It beggars belief that the same judge can see the same clown coming before them umpteen times, and still hand out non-custodial sentences. Tehy must think that committing criminal acts is “normal”. Locking up all teh criminal certainly worked in New York – it was heavy-handed and often wrong, but it worked. People are out walking their dogs at 2am now, chatting with each other. (in New York).

Agreed. I want to scream every time I read about the latest crim to go before the courts having “29 previous offences”.

*SURELY* a sane society would take notice when somebody reached *3* offences and would take steps to ensure that person stopped re-offending?!?!?!?!

Qbn Gal 2:20 pm 08 May 09

Perhaps the old building could be turned into a museum to justice!

ant 2:18 pm 08 May 09

“Others might wonder that if the justices handed down longer custodial sentences to the serial offenders which adorn our city then those offenders would have less scope to commit further atrocities on the public which in turn require still more jury trials.”

Good point. It beggars belief that the same judge can see the same clown coming before them umpteen times, and still hand out non-custodial sentences. Tehy must think that committing criminal acts is “normal”. Locking up all teh criminal certainly worked in New York – it was heavy-handed and often wrong, but it worked. People are out walking their dogs at 2am now, chatting with each other. (in New York).

Heavs 1:10 pm 08 May 09

It’s heritage nominated but not listed at this stage. Beautiful facade. Shitful interior. Leaking roof. Non-functioning air-conditioning. Bursting at the seams with staff. New Court building definitely required.

Gobbo 12:57 pm 08 May 09

Not quite on topic, but concerning the Court Building nonetheless.

I am quite fond of the existing Supreme Court’s facade. I consider it an iconic building of Canberra. I am probably just a nut and totally alone in that opinion.

However, would this building have been included on a heritage register? Should it be?

Am I just being attached to an old building for no particular reason?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site