GUILTY Australia - Jill Meagher, 29, Melbourne, 22 Sep 2012 #5

[Scoobysnack]

It's far to huge this case... this horrid nightmare yes I do believe and have faith the jury and judge will do everything in their power to throw away the key once the accused is found guilty ( as hell :furious: )

 

[Jmbr]

If he is not locked away for the rest of his life I will lose any faith I had left in the Australian legal system. What is the worst thing is he will probably get parole after he has served his minimum sentence. Tougher laws are needed.

Women should not feel afraid to walk alone at night, and that's exactly how I feel, and will continue to feel until the law shows these men it's not ok. God! I'm so angry and upset! I just wanted an admission from him! What a useless piece of S**t!

 

[Jmbr]

It's far to huge this case... this horrid nightmare yes I do believe and have faith the jury and judge will do everything in their power to throw away the key once the accused is found guilty ( as hell :furious: )

I'm praying for a good judge. Unlike AB's original judge and SC's murderers judge.

 

[Jmbr]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/la...buse-allegations/story-fnat79vb-1226555928026

Is anyone as concerned about this as I am?

We expect that magistrates who preside over cases of sexual offence will do so impartially, fairly, and in the public’s best interests, but how can we expect that when we hear about alleged conduct such as this?

To hear about this on the same day as AB’s committal mention is disconcerting to say the least. How many more magistrates have skeletons in their closets, some that may never be discovered but may be negatively affecting (for the victim, and for us … the public) the outcome of court cases?

I've read lots of disturbing reports on judges... I think there has to be a severe sentence for this. There will be public revolt if not.

Not that the public opinion counts, but I feel this case could (hopefully) change a few things.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Here we go: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/ca195882/s3a.html

Crimes Act 1958 - SECT 3A

Unintentional killing in the course or furtherance of a crime of violence
3A. Unintentional killing in the course or furtherance of a crime of violence

(1) A person who unintentionally causes the death of another person by an act
of violence done in the course or furtherance of a crime the necessary
elements of which include violence for which a person upon first conviction
may, under or by virtue of any enactment, be sentenced to level 1 imprisonment
(life) or to imprisonment for a term of 10 years or more shall be liable to be
convicted of murder as though he had killed that person intentionally.

(2) The rule of law known as the felony-murder rule (whereby a person who
unintentionally causes the death of another by an act of violence done in the
course or furtherance of a felony of violence is liable to be convicted of
murder as though he had killed that person intentionally) is hereby abrogated.

Life ...

And said again here: http://www.adla.com.au/web/page/VIC_Murder under 'What police must prove according to VIC law for murder'

(a) The accused caused the death of another person by an intended act or omission.

(b) There was malice aforethought that preceded or co-existed with this act or omission.

(c) Malice aforethought is satisfied in a number of ways.

Firstly, it may be satisfied by an intention to cause the death of, or grievous bodily harm to, any person whether such person is killed or not.

Secondly, it may be satisfied by knowledge that the act which caused death would probably cause the death of, or grievous bodily harm to, some person, whether such person is actually killed or not.

Thirdly, it may be satisfied by an intent to commit any crime the necessary elements of which include violence and which may on first conviction be punished by life imprisonment or imprisonment for a term of 120 months or more, where the death is intentionally caused by an act of violence done in the course or furtherance of such a crime.

According to this: http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/LTObject_Store/LTObjSt6.nsf/DDE300B846EED9C7CA257616000A3571/A57E26DFDAB404DCCA257975000569FB/$FILE/58-6231aa229A%20authorised.pdf

38 Rape
(1) A person must not commit rape.
Penalty: Level 2 imprisonment (25 years maximum).
(2) A person commits rape if—
(a) he or she intentionally sexually penetrates another person without that person's consent—
(i) while being aware that the person is not consenting or might not be consenting; or
(ii) while not giving any thought to whether the person is not consenting or might not be consenting; or

(b) after sexual penetration he or she does not withdraw from a person who is not consenting on becoming aware that the person is not consenting or might not be consenting.

So rape is a level 2 offence, punishable by up to 25 years which is 300 months, so from my understanding of the above statutes, if the first crime 'rape' qualifies him for a term of imprisonment of 120 months (10 years) or more then her death as a result of violence from such will be considered murder and qualify him for imprisonment for 'life' which means life imprisonment. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ca190082/s431a.html

His personal history and ability to rehabilitate will also impact upon his sentencing as the judge will need to protect the public against his potential future dangerousness upon release.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Another note to consider: The victimology in this case will count against him somewhat.

 

[Fuskier]

There is also the small matter of the believability of his claim .. If the jury think he did mean to kill her in order to avoid the possibility of her identifying him to the police later they will convict on that basis...

Let's remember this girl had been attacked, raped, murdered and buried - unknown to anyone (except her killer). This perpetrator may never have been found or this crime ever solved - except for CCTV video. He is alleged to have confessed to Police and he led them to where he buried her and where they subsequently recovered her body. This crime has rightfully outraged our community both here and overseas. My opinion only.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Let's remember this girl had been attacked, raped, murdered and buried - unknown to anyone (except her killer). This perpetrator may never have been found or this crime ever solved - except for CCTV video. He is alleged to have confessed to Police and he led them to where he buried her and where they subsequently recovered her body.

...are you worried he'll get a reduction for that? Possible but minimal. Jason Downie got a reduction of 4 years, but he plead guilty and there was no trial.

 

[Fuskier]

...are you worried he'll get a reduction for that? Possible but minimal. Jason Downie got a reduction of 4 years, but he plead guilty and there was no trial.

I was referring to the gravity, the enormity of this heinous crime and the outrage it has generated within our community both here and overseas.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

OH I agree....that and his future dangerousness...I can't see a judge giving him anything less than life. He is unable to be rehabilitated.

 

[Fuskier]

OH I agree....that and his future dangerousness...I can't see a judge giving him anything less than life. He is unable to be rehabilitated.

Yes, the type of character it takes to commit such a serious crime and his future dangerousness to women.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Agree. If for any reason he was ever released he would be unable to stop himself from reoffending IMO and no amount of surveillance or control mechanisms would be able to stop him either.

 

[Scoobysnack]

Sorry Mods, just went back an re read the rules for this thread.

 

[Ausgirl]

If this guy gets less than life (and I mean LIFE, not "life with parole in 10 years...) I have no doubt Australians will raise their voices against it in anger, en masse.

That said, it's terrifying to think he could employ technicalities to get off a murder charge when it's plain that Jill WAS murdered.

I wish I could go to the court and watch the proceedings, but it's not physically possible atm (I hope this changes..). Are there any Melbourne folk here who will be attending further sessions?

 

[DrWatson]

Here we go again - this is what happens when these animals are let out on so-called "supervision orders". He was even wearing a GPS tracker ankle bracelet - so the police went straight to his home where he was re-arrested. But it didn't stop him giving in to his urges!

When will they learn?

http://tinyurl.com/bfc994f

 

[Scoobysnack]

Here we go again - this is what happens when these animals are let out on so-called "supervision orders". He was even wearing a GPS tracker ankle bracelet - so the police went straight to his home where he was re-arrested. But it didn't stop him giving in to his urges!

When will they learn?

http://tinyurl.com/bfc994f

:banghead::furious: shaking my head.

 

[fruity]

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2013/01/27/13/33/jill-meagher-could-be-removed-from-wikipedia

A Wikipedia page dedicated to the murder of Melbourne woman Jill Meagher could be taken down after the site's administrators suggested the content may not be "notable" enough.

...

Wikipedia has asked its users to have their say on whether Ms Meagher's death warrants inclusion on the website.

Wiki link:
Death of Jill Meagher - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

IMO it is notable. IIRC her case was the first in Australia which has been impacted by social media. I don't have a wikipedia account otherwise I would post that there.

 

[Paulie11]

I was wondering if someone could inform me as to whether if the accused (Adrian ernest bayley) were suspected in any other crimes (of rape or murder or missing persons), whether the public would have any opportunity to find out? Would the police, that is, have occasion to tell us about these suspicions of theirs? Given the callousness of this brutal crime against Jill Meagher, it seems to me that he might have done this before. This being possible, the police would surely look into recent suspicious missing persons cases to see if bayley could in any way be connected. They might find credible connections, though they might be unable to be substantiated in court. Provided that, it seems to me that we the public would be none-the-wiser as to those police suspicions, connections.
The only way I can see information of other suspicions coming to light is the police giving vague information to journalists who would slip it into their stories: police suspect him of other crimes, at least one of which was brutal in nature, etc. I can see this as the only avenue we would be likely to find out other connections. Further to this, would the judge be supplied with a confidential file as to what the police believe? Is that a common practice? What do others think about this? I don’t know how our legal and law system works and how the police and judiciary interact.

Finally, wasn’t there more information released at the initial hearing to which we, the public, are not privy? I am not sure why the judge had to have a several hour recess to have the police explain some things to the family members, before court proceeded. Was there some information released there in court which the media did not release?

 

[Ausgirl]

Paulie. <modsnip>- are we allowed to talk about that now? Australian law makes it hard to openly discuss a case while it's being prosecuted..

If MSM here in Aus gets wind of Jill's page being removed, or a fuss is raised on FB it might prompt more people to comment to Wiki staff.

I agree, it is a significant case - not only for the social media aspect, but because of the massive public outcry and marches through the streets, etc - the nation's response is a wake up call that our laws regarding repeat violent offenders aren't enough to protect us and something needs to be done about that.


The QLD guy Dr. Watson linked is another murder waiting to happen, it's not 'if' but 'when'. Great example. Just disgusting.

And we also need a national database for sex offenders!

 

[Paulie11]

this is an interesting article which speaks about australian law:
http://www.themonthly.com.au/tough-crime-advocates-all-rise-work-judges-kate-rossmanith-6159