It isn't only Victoria. Legal Aid is Federally funded as well, everyone in Australia contributes but the distribution is under each state and territory's management.Lucky him!
First financed by Mum&Dad
and now (according to OP)
by good folks of Victoria
Only the best for the accused!
Australia Samantha Murphy, 51, last seen leaving her property to go for a run in the Canadian State Forest, Ballarat, 4 Feb 2024 *Arrest* #10
- Thread starter StillDiggin
- Start date
- Status
SouthAussie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2012
- Messages
- 29,749
- Reaction score
- 181,066
Lucky him!
First financed by Mum&Dad
and now (according to OP)
by good folks of Victoria
Only the best for the accused!
It is not luck. It is considered to give the defendant a fair trial. As Trooper said, Legal Aid prioritises these kind of funding requests. They work out a deal with the lawyer.
We don't need a defendant appealing a murder conviction because his legal representation was inadequate.
It would be unreasonable if he had second rate, or amateur representation because , while Galbally now wears the Public Defenders hat, he is going up against some of VIctoria's finest and shiniest barristers from the Public Prosecutors office., the playing field, so to speak, has to at least attempt some levelling.
SouthAussie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2012
- Messages
- 29,749
- Reaction score
- 181,066
And it actually avoids further court costs. The court, the prosecutors, the defence, all of the filings.
Let him have good representation, and he should only go to court for one trial. Not go back for an appeal due to poor legal representation.
Dotta
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2021
- Messages
- 11,074
- Reaction score
- 67,649
Are those not so fancy but with legal degrees
inadequate then?
Phew!
Not good news for those who are crammed in jails all over the country with murder charges
JMO
Last edited:
SouthAussie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2012
- Messages
- 29,749
- Reaction score
- 181,066
Which is not to say that they also didn't have good representation. They just were proven guilty. This well may be the case with PS.
There is not that many of them. in prisons over AU, not as many as some countries...Are those not so fancy but with legal degrees
inadequate then?
Phew!
Not good for those who are crammed in jails all over the country with murder charges
JMO
There is no such thing as an unfancy Barrister. One gets to be a Barrister by being extremely fancy.
But each one of those prisoners 'crammed in jails all over the country,' has had access to Legal Aid, if their charge had a long prison sentence looming, and without doubt, some of them would have got Galbally or a Galbally frere to represent them if they were in Victoria.,
In NSW someone from Forbes Chambers, or Samuel Griffith Chambers, or the one and only Mario Licha, a born entertainer.
In Brisbane, you could get Alex Nelson, or Bradley Wright. all excellent and experienced.,
There seems to be some vague idea that this having a specialist barrister is a one off, granted only to Mr S. Not so. It happens all the time, and it is how the system operates.,
Last edited:
Rocket333
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2014
- Messages
- 991
- Reaction score
- 4,967
Thank you both. That is clear and makes sense. As Trooper noted, you need and want a level (ish) playing field.
I was a bit astonished at reading this.,.There have been some Finnish studies done on this, but none in AU...
( this article expands a bit into the correlation between the killer and the victim and other interesting bibs and bobs. )
Homicides where the victim's body is not recovered pose unique challenges to investigators and are particularly difficult to solve.1 Despite many examples of no-body homicide cases in numerous jurisdictions, no empirical study has been undertaken on cases where no part of the victim's body is ever located. Although criminologists have studied issues such as geographic disposal patterns and offender countermeasures, they have been silent on the specifics of how offenders permanently dispose of victim's bodies and how this can be overcome in investigations. Forensic medical studies examining cases where bodies are disposed or concealed but eventually located provide the most relevant findings.
( this article expands a bit into the correlation between the killer and the victim and other interesting bibs and bobs. )
Homicides where the victim's body is not recovered pose unique challenges to investigators and are particularly difficult to solve.1 Despite many examples of no-body homicide cases in numerous jurisdictions, no empirical study has been undertaken on cases where no part of the victim's body is ever located. Although criminologists have studied issues such as geographic disposal patterns and offender countermeasures, they have been silent on the specifics of how offenders permanently dispose of victim's bodies and how this can be overcome in investigations. Forensic medical studies examining cases where bodies are disposed or concealed but eventually located provide the most relevant findings.
Yes - bit off topic but my partner wishes cars had a sort of Faraday cage around them so mobiles couldn’t be used inside them.
Faraday cage - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
If its a well sealed metal box, then no it won't. Put your phone in the microwave (DON'T turn the microwave on) and try ringing it.
IMO - Yes, I agree. Also, I’m a similar age to SM, also a runner with a smart watch & here’s the kicker, also a Snapchat user ha ha. At our age, we have older friends, friends our own age & friends of the Snapchat age & younger. Fingers crossed SM had multiple social media platforms & her phone reveals SO much!!
Dotta
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2021
- Messages
- 11,074
- Reaction score
- 67,649
I was talking about jails (remand centres) for those waiting for trials.
Not prisons - these are for convicted criminals.
Do all those on remand get top notch lawyers by State?
Just asking because OP stated that the accused has a right to a fancy ( very expensive) lawyer of HIS choice.
What is the difference between this accused and others charged of murder?
They usually get Public Defenders.
Not fancy but reliable and educated ones.
But deemed as "inadequate" here.
In my country a Public Defender is chosen among those "in line," waiting their turn.
The accused cannot choose.
But gets the lawyer whose turn is at this time.
It is FAIR.
No privileges.
But, of course, if the accused wishes to choose - he/she pays.
Who can forbid the rich?
It makes sense, no?
That is why IMO,
PS (his family) hired this particular lawyer and pays for his defence.
JMO
Last edited:
Funny you mention this defense because I was going to raise it as a possibility.
There was a case in Australia that I’m trying to remember / track down, where an alledged perpetrator received a (probably well deserved) physical blow to the head during some sort of struggle, and the defense attorney argued that their client was temporarily incapacitated and therefore could not be blamed for shooting her during the altercation. If anyone knows which case I’m thinking of, please chime in!
SouthAussie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2012
- Messages
- 29,749
- Reaction score
- 181,066
I was talking about jails (remand centres) for those waiting for trials.
Not prisons - these are for convicted criminals.
Do all those on remand get top notch lawyers by State?
Just asking because OP stated that the accused has a right to a fancy ( very expensive) lawyer of HIS choice.
What is the difference between this accused and others charged of murder?
They usually get Public Defenders.
Not fancy but reliable and educated ones.
But deemed as "inadequate" here.
In my country a Public Defender is chosen among those "in line," waiting their turn.
The accused cannot choose.
But gets the lawyer whose turn is at this time.
It is FAIR.
No privileges.
But, of course, if the accused wishes to choose - he/she pays.
Who can forbid the rich?
It makes sense, no?
That is why IMO,
PS (his family) hired this particular lawyer and pays for his defence.
JMO
No worries, Dotta. I was just pointing out that people here can and do hire top notch lawyers for serious offences, using Legal Aid. And PS may have done so.
It is not a known fact that PS' parents are footing the bill. (This convo started because you were asked for a link.)
We will likely never know who is footing the bill because of the attorney-client privilege of keeping things confidential.
imo
Rocket333
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2014
- Messages
- 991
- Reaction score
- 4,967
I was reading that automatism is rarely used in criminal law. Also that, “Voluntary intoxication is not automatism. Involuntary intoxication can constitute automatism”.
Automatism (law) - Wikipedia
Dotta
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2021
- Messages
- 11,074
- Reaction score
- 67,649
How can I give a link to my mind?
To my thoughts?
My post contained words like:
"It seems...
If ...
JMO - meaning
Just My Opinion"
At no time have I said that PS gets a fancy lawyer of his choice., just because. If one is paying for one's lawyer, one chooses, I went thru all the differences between one paying for one's lawyer, and one having a lawyer assigned to one's case.
I will go thru it again, just in case'
First up, the private paying of the secondment of a lawyer. ( it is your lawyer who arranges a Barrister for you. One does not walk in to Barristers chambers unannounced, it is moved up to a Barrister thru your lawyer. ) Your lawyer seeks out the Barrister for your problem, and negotiates fees, and times,, and consultations, and if the Barrister takes your case, your lawyer instructs him/her.
If Legal Aid is paying, the idea that Stephenson can choose his very expensive lawyer is a total incomprehension of what has been outlined. I don't know where that idea came from. Remove all idea of Stephenson involved in that , the choosing, at all., This is what happens.
(1)His lawyer ( Tamanika from Ballarat ) contacts Legal Aid, and lays out the severe problem S has, and what can be done to assist.
(2) As I previously stated this is what happens now. Legal Aid consult with each other, ( it's a panel of paralegals and barristers ) and a decision is made as to the working out of financial matters, and legal matters and legal tactics.
(3) Legal Aid contact the Bar Association, ( in other words, the Barristers Union ) who mumble and mutter and peruse all the documentation, and then decide, right., one of us will take this on.
(4). The Barristers roster is moved up to the Bar Association ( the roster is settled each judicial year, some barristers perhaps pass away, some are overseas pursuing cases in , say, Pretoria, or Kingston, or Bahrain, they are OFF the roster ) of those Barristers ( and every barrister has to go on the roster ) their names go into a barrel and the barrel is spun and out comes one name. In this case, Galbally.
(5). The barrister who's name comes out has to take the case. It is neither the Barristers choice, NOR Stephensons, who it is.,
This is how it has been done for a century. This is how it is done in a lot of places around the world where the British Judicial System operates. .. as opposed to , for example, the French Napoleonic Code, which does things differently.
The confusion is apparently a belief that a PUBLIC DEFENDER is totally different person to any lawyer or barrister. It is not. If a Barrister is called upon to PUBLICLY DEFEND someone, the Barrister BECOMES THE PUBLIC DEFENDER. He wears the public defenders hat.
Every solicitor can be a public defender, and often is , when on duty in the local court, on court day. Solicitors take it in turns, and leave their private practice, for one day, and become, for one day a week, the public defender lawyer at the court house.
None of this system is new or strange or particularly Australian. The same process takes place in nearly 72 nations around the world.
I will go thru it again, just in case'
First up, the private paying of the secondment of a lawyer. ( it is your lawyer who arranges a Barrister for you. One does not walk in to Barristers chambers unannounced, it is moved up to a Barrister thru your lawyer. ) Your lawyer seeks out the Barrister for your problem, and negotiates fees, and times,, and consultations, and if the Barrister takes your case, your lawyer instructs him/her.
If Legal Aid is paying, the idea that Stephenson can choose his very expensive lawyer is a total incomprehension of what has been outlined. I don't know where that idea came from. Remove all idea of Stephenson involved in that , the choosing, at all., This is what happens.
(1)His lawyer ( Tamanika from Ballarat ) contacts Legal Aid, and lays out the severe problem S has, and what can be done to assist.
(2) As I previously stated this is what happens now. Legal Aid consult with each other, ( it's a panel of paralegals and barristers ) and a decision is made as to the working out of financial matters, and legal matters and legal tactics.
(3) Legal Aid contact the Bar Association, ( in other words, the Barristers Union ) who mumble and mutter and peruse all the documentation, and then decide, right., one of us will take this on.
(4). The Barristers roster is moved up to the Bar Association ( the roster is settled each judicial year, some barristers perhaps pass away, some are overseas pursuing cases in , say, Pretoria, or Kingston, or Bahrain, they are OFF the roster ) of those Barristers ( and every barrister has to go on the roster ) their names go into a barrel and the barrel is spun and out comes one name. In this case, Galbally.
(5). The barrister who's name comes out has to take the case. It is neither the Barristers choice, NOR Stephensons, who it is.,
This is how it has been done for a century. This is how it is done in a lot of places around the world where the British Judicial System operates. .. as opposed to , for example, the French Napoleonic Code, which does things differently.
The confusion is apparently a belief that a PUBLIC DEFENDER is totally different person to any lawyer or barrister. It is not. If a Barrister is called upon to PUBLICLY DEFEND someone, the Barrister BECOMES THE PUBLIC DEFENDER. He wears the public defenders hat.
Every solicitor can be a public defender, and often is , when on duty in the local court, on court day. Solicitors take it in turns, and leave their private practice, for one day, and become, for one day a week, the public defender lawyer at the court house.
None of this system is new or strange or particularly Australian. The same process takes place in nearly 72 nations around the world.
Last edited:
Do all those on remand get top notch lawyers by State? Yes, if Legal Aid thinks their case requires it. It depends on the severity of their crime. As I said before. Charged with murder, most likely., Charged with drunk and disorderly, no, probably not.I was talking about jails (remand centres) for those waiting for trials.
Not prisons - these are for convicted criminals.
Do all those on remand get top notch lawyers by State?
Just asking because OP stated that the accused has a right to a fancy ( very expensive) lawyer of HIS choice.
Do all those on remand get top notch lawyers by State?
They usually get Public Defenders.
Not fancy but reliable and educated ones.
But deemed as "inadequate" here.
In my country a Public Defender is chosen among those "in line," waiting their turn.
The accused cannot choose.
But gets the lawyer whose turn is at this time.
It is FAIR.
No privileges.
But, of course, if the accused wishes to choose - he/she pays.
Who can forbid the rich?
It makes sense, no?
That is why IMO,
PS (his family) hired this particular lawyer and pays for his defence.
JMO
They usually get Public Defenders.
Not fancy but reliable and educated ones.'... yes.. if your crime is of a certain level of complexity and has not attracted a long prison sentence, precisely. If your accusation has all the potential for a long prison sentence, then you get a Barrister,.
Things to remember. It is the crime itself that gets Legal Aid attached to it. Not the accused per se. It could be Clancy the Clown, or Patrick Stephenson, it makes no difference. If your crime requires a Barrister ( murder HAS to have a Barrister representing you, because a MURDER trial is a SUPREME Court matter, and ONLY a BARRISTER can represent you at the SUPREME Court., .. )
In my country a Public Defender is chosen among those "in line," waiting their turn. This is redundant because 'in line', is no different to having your Barrister drawn from a barrel. Different countries have different systems and it is a redundant exercise comparing one to the other.
In your country the system is civil law system, as opposed to the adversarial law system. Or the inquisitorial system, more akin to the French Napoleonic code of judicial workings. Judges in your country take a more active part , comparing one system to another is ridiculous and time wasting, on any level. Both have merit. Which is why both have lasted. It is worth noting, perhaps, that Poland has slowest processing in the higher courts that even the World Justice Project rated it not only the lowest in Europe, but in the world.
Judiciary of Poland - Wikipedia
(On the European level, Poland has slower proceedings in the highest courts, and has in general slower processing of civil cases than the median.[146] This problem is also noted by the United States Department of State[147] and by the World Justice Project,[148] which assigned the lowest grade to the timeliness of civil proceedings, which not only was behind other European countries but also much below the world average score (in criminal proceedings, the situation was still assessed as somewhat worse compared to its peers but was much better than in civil cases). In 2013, the Centre for Public Opinion Research (CBOS), a state-run pollster, found that by far the most common complaint about the Polish justice system was the length of court proceedings.[149] )
Again. The crime of murder is heard in the Supreme court.
Only a Barrister can represent you in the Supreme Court.
Hence, you are provided with a Barrister out of Legal Aid. Because it would be unjust not to.
Or you pay for one , of your own choosing, yourself. ,
'
Last edited:
wallyworld
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2022
- Messages
- 218
- Reaction score
- 2,038
I read this yesterday and wondered if it was written in sarcasm or indeed a warning! could you please elaborate?
Rocket333
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2014
- Messages
- 991
- Reaction score
- 4,967
Hey Dotta, it’s all ok so don’t stress. As an Australian female the last thing I wanted was the accused to have any privileges or advantages. If he uses our public system (and is assigned a Barrister) he’ll get who he’s given, and if he pays he can choose. Probably much like anything and anywhere.I was talking about jails (remand centres) for those waiting for trials.
Not prisons - these are for convicted criminals.
Do all those on remand get top notch lawyers by State?
Just asking because OP stated that the accused has a right to a fancy ( very expensive) lawyer of HIS choice.
What is the difference between this accused and others charged of murder?
They usually get Public Defenders.
Not fancy but reliable and educated ones.
But deemed as "inadequate" here.
In my country a Public Defender is chosen among those "in line," waiting their turn.
The accused cannot choose.
But gets the lawyer whose turn is at this time.
It is FAIR.
No privileges.
But, of course, if the accused wishes to choose - he/she pays.
Who can forbid the rich?
It makes sense, no?
That is why IMO,
PS (his family) hired this particular lawyer and pays for his defence.
JMO
I wonder if you might have been confused when Trooper said something about Barristers being fancy? That made me laugh because there’s a lot of pomp and postering and privilege attached to the position (rightly or wrongly so) and I for one know a Barrister who would delight in being called “fancy” because he’s not no matter how much he tries. I doubt PS’s Barrister can offer a significant advantage over other Barristers no matter how fancy.
My point is that it’s fine and we want it to run like this so that PS gets his day in court and can’t complain that he didn’t.
JMO and just wanting to simplify and reassure.
- Status