Skip to main content

Norman Scarth Freed

The Court of Appeal have reduced his sentence so he is now free. However, there really is a question asked when recording a court hearing is thought to be worse than looting.

Indeed if courts are now to be televised should we not compromise and keep out the cameras, but allow recording (even if the recordings are not broadcast).


Anajinn said…
Here, here. It's about time audio recording was allowed in court.

Maybe people will sign the petition
Anajinn said…
The story which our current Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, tells about Lionel Murphy's comments from the bench of the High Court of Australia on the Aboriginal man, Mr Neal, are entirely appropriate to the situation of Mr Scarth: You are entitled to be an agitator.

Regards, Bill Rowlings, CEO









Acknowledgments continued ..........
Anajinn said…
1. Good Evening, and thanks Professor Dietze for your very kind introduction.
2. First, I would like to acknowledge the traditional custodians on whose land we are meeting today – the Ngunnawal people - whose cultures we honour as among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.And I would like to pay my respects to Elders past and present.
3. I’d also like to recognise
- Our hosts this evening – the ANU College of Law and in particular Associate Dean Fiona Wheeler and Head of School Stephen Bottomley;
- Members of Lionel Murphy’s family;
- Trustees of the Lionel Murphy Foundation;
- Dr Kristine Klugman – President Civil Liberties Australia and Mr Bill Rowlings – CEO Civil Liberties Australia;
- Dr Helen Watchirs – ACT Human Rights and Discrimination Commissioner;
- Mr Daryl Dellora;
Ladies and gentlemen.

It’s a great honour to have been asked to speak this evening. I have entitled this year’s address as Lionel Murphy’s Legacy – Vigilance against Injustice in the Justice System.
And I wish to speak to the national shame that is the over-representation of Indigenous Australians in the criminal justice system.
And to the practical steps the Commonwealth and the States and Territories must take to right this enduring wrong.
This problem has been brought to the public’s attention this year particularly because of the 20th Anniversary of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and the release in June of the House of Representatives Inquiry Report Doing Time – Time for Doing: Indigenous Youth in the Criminal Justice System.

Lionel Murphy
But before turning to that I’d first like to pay a brief tribute to Lionel Murphy, whose memory we are here to honour tonight - a great Labor leader, an accomplished Attorney-General and an inspiring High Court Justice.
And in doing so, I would like to speak briefly of a judgment he wrote as a judge of the High Court - Neal v R.
The case was that of an Aboriginal man, Mr Neal.
Mr. Neal was Council Chairman in Yarrabah, a community in Northern Queensland. This community had a deep sense of grievance about the paternalistic treatment by white authorities, including the management of the store which was reportedly selling rotten meat. Mr Neal had argued with the store manager about the management of the reserve. When the discussion reached an impasse, Mr. Neal swore at the store manager and spat at him.
For this, Mr Neal was sentenced to two months hard labour. On appeal to the Queensland Supreme Court, Mr Neal’s sentence was increased to 6 months.
Mr Neal then appealed to the High Court where Lionel Murphy presided.
The year was 1982, and Murphy noted in his judgment the appallingly high rates of Indigenous incarceration at that time – that although Indigenous Australians made up only 1 per cent of the total population they made up nearly 30 per cent of the prison population.
In addressing the question of Mr Neal’s relatively harsh sentence for what was a seemingly trivial offence,
he said:
“That Mr. Neal was an ‘agitator’ or stirrer in the magistrate's view obviously contributed to the severe penalty. If he is an agitator, he is in good company. Many of the great religious and political figures of history have been agitators, and human progress owes much to the efforts of these and the many who are unknown. …Mr. Neal is entitled to be an agitator.”

Needless to say, Mr Neal’s appeal was allowed.
So I’d like to draw some inspiration from Lionel Murphy tonight as I speak to the challenges that we currently face in terms of the overrepresentation of Indigenous Australians in the justice system - an injustice which remains nearly 30 years after Neal v R.

On 11/09/2011, at 2:58 PM, CLA Webmaster wrote:

Lance Williamson
Civil Liberties Australia
0416 266 130 or
02 6288 0401
Jake Maverick said…
THEY do record audio in court at least, I actually noticed one turning soem kind of device off as i was leaving once....i wa staught to believe it was ILEGAL to record someone without their knowledge and consent. But then again I thought shooting people repeatedly in the ehad was also illegal, never mind kicking in doors and attacking people in thier own homes...raping, torture dropping bombs on children....

Kiddyprinting? declared illegal to i think couple of years ago now probably....still going on though isn't it? As well asDNA colelction....

Recording/ filiming someone against their will isa form of rape and i will never consent to that, whetehr it's strapped to some yobs head in the street oron a pole poiting through my window 24/7 again....
so even if i was 'allowed' to have soemwhere to live where can i live? not even able to get out of the country (if i had the means) unless i changed my name and 'consented' to being irradiated......
Jake Maverick said…
any comment on Maurice?

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England. The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity. The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back. This is an issue that needs further work. In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.