watching what happens in Australia can be instructive..it's like a preview of what is coming in the UK and then visa versa. A new law introduced in England is usually enacted here in time. It's alarming sometimes-a few years ago I hear a local politician who looked like being elected as state Premier declare he would embark upon a massive privatisation of public assets campaign as it had been so successful in the UK !.
Baby-swinging video uploader fronts court
A man charged over a video of another man swinging a baby around like a rag doll, says he'd be happy with a trial by jury.

Christopher Charles Illingworth, 60, of Maroochydore, briefly appeared in Maroochydore Magistrates Court on Thursday charged with two counts of using a carriage service to transmit child abuse material.

His lawyer Chelsea Emery told the court the matter would be strenuously defended.

The case was adjourned to February 19, 2009, to allow the prosecution to gather more evidence.

The freelance journalist and father of four allegedly shared the video using the website Liveleak, a site similar to YouTube but mainly carrying short videos relating to news and current affairs
www.smh.com.au/news/technology/web/babys...8/1229189776629.html

Two past Australian court cases stand out in my memory. Unfortunately I can't recall such details and names or dates so maybe, Veritas, you can assist with that.

One was in the 90s when a former sportsman (I think) was accused by a young girl of abusing her while lodging at her parents house. She was specific and certain about the dates, but he was able to prove that he had not moved into the house until several months later. The judge declared that it was irrelevent whether he was there at the time she said, so long as she believed that to be true. That seemed a very odd and reckless judgement to me.

The other case was where a man was about to be sentenced for murder and his aleged victim turned up at court. I believe the alleged victim was a young woman whose parents insisted she would never leave them of her own accord. What this case showed was that it is possible to find someone guilty of a crime which never took place.

The Judicial Systems in the UK - USA - Australia ( and probably many other places ) now presume guilt before innocence. It makes it easier for those involved.

The BBC TV drama programme Criminal Justice showed the system ignoring the truth and having a life of its own very well.

TV suggests that the Police always get their man when the reality is that they always get A man. It matters not whether they are guilty or not.

The best sort of person is a naive person - so the Police try and pin crimes on people who have never been in contact with the Justice System before in their life. I dont know - but I would suspect that JK had never been arrested before and had no knowledge of the Justice System and therefore was "helpful" and perhaps too confident that the "truth" would be found out and everything would then be solved ( Like on TV )

The reality is totally different. The Criminals know how to play the system and get away with 95% of what they do. Innocent people get trapped by the system and find that their voice is silenced so that their HARD EVIDENCE is quite often never even presented in court ( hence the huge number of appeals which free and overturn decisions ).

By the time an accused can "prove" their innocence they may well have lost their jobs - some friends - some family - and quite often their mental health. The Police rely on this and choose their victims carefully. Sometimes they pick on the wrong family ( De Menezes ) but usually they get away with it.

I would rip apart the UK justice system and sack the lot of them from Top to Bottom. They are institutionally ALL corrupt. There needs to be a new Justice System based on each person appearing being human and needing to repay their debt to society. It needs to be a positive experience so that we do not create career criminals who blight our society - we create them so we should not moan too much about them ) In addition the financial incentives need to be taken out of the system and all trials and cases need to be on fixed fees. The CPS should be taken out of Police Stations and given true independence and the Police should PAY for any cases that are not proved with hard evidence. There should be no more "fishing" expeditions at the taxpayers' expense. Finally - historic cases should be no older than 1 year for anything other than murder. This would stop the compensation culture from those who seek to make money from it. Crimes with no evidence should not be prosecuted. ( For instance the bloke who abused his daughters and had children with them would have current evidence against him - the DNA record of his incestous children - so he would be prosecuted ) however, someone recounting a "crime" from 10 years ago would not be allowed. If it was not a crime then how can it be a crime now ? especially if no evidence exists except one person's word against another ( not enough to ruin a person's life )

Witch hunts are now STATE approved. They should be stopped. It is the symptom of a society that has lost its way and has more in common with pre civilisation than the civilised society which we claim to have created. If democracy is used to justify MOB RULE then democracy is wrong. Those who sit above our justice system have blood on their hands in my opinion - they have failed society.