 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Proud Pies 
Joined: 22 Feb 2003
Location: Knox-ish
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
thanks for that.......gee, wish i could see into the future seeing that I asked the questions yesterday and the age published that today.......how fortuitious.
_________________
Jacqui © Proud Pies 2003 and beyond |
|
|
|
 |
Zakal
One Game, One Club, One Jumper
Joined: 04 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Culprit wrote: | The issue of saying sorry will amount to dollars in compensation is why the country will never move forward as one. The other line is why should I say sorry for what people did in the past. These arguments are always the beat up of the right wing of our society. The fear factor argument I call it. We have enjoyed making money from the land for multiple decades and even more now with the mining boom and we have given the blacks sweat FA for it.
How many aborigines does everyone think are actually alive and living in this country? There are around half a million and that is decreasing as years pass. That is around 2.5% of the population. Worse case scenario we give them a million dollars each, that is half a billion dollars unless my maths is screwed. Now proportion that to GDP. We are talking a drop in the ocean and that is giving them a million each which would rarely be the payout. If we took 10% of the military budget we have spent on our war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan and put that into the compensation fund for the aborigines to draw from I doubt if the fund would run out of dollars.
Someone mentioned about the USA and the Indians (red ones). They have a treaty and have a system in place. We have no treaty and no system.
The rednecks bring up that a black man raped a child so we have military intervention. White man has been doing it for years yet we do not have the military involved just the police.
What is even more amusing is most whites would not know what an Aboriginal if they ran into one.
I am against them burning the flag, but understand the frustration.
We all should be sorry for the ignorance of generations of whites as its still going. |
Dont even get me started on the better uses for our military budget, but anyway, thats another issue.
As for that payout figure, im pretty sure we use the American Billion (thousand million) instead of the British Billion (million million) when calculating our national financial stuff like GDP (could be wrong however).
In which case 500 thousand million dollars would equate to around 73% of GDP (using a figure of $687 thousand million as our GDP which i believe is based on a 2007 estimate).
hehe probably woudlnt be the easiest bill to pass. 
Although it seems from that article Nomad posted, any compensation will have to be based upon the legal ramifications for the government of saying sorry as a compensation fund doesnt appear likely to be established...and given there wont be a compensation fund, you would have to assume the apology will be worded in a manner akin to an "expression of regret" or in some other 'liability-neutral' way...otherwise (and again this is only an assumption) wouldnt it make more sense ot just establish a fund? |
|
|
|
|
Culprit 
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Don't worry Zakal, Howard oops I mean Rudd will make sure compensation in any form cannot be obtain from the apology. 
A fund yes and each case should be judges on it's merits. Not one in all in. |
|
|
|
|
Proud Pies
Joined: 22 Feb 2003
Location: Knox-ish
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Frank Stone wrote: | | Zakal wrote: | | Proud Pies wrote: |
without being labelled racist for not knowing....i have highlighted in bold above what my question relates to:
a. Is the apology just for the stolen generation?
b. Is the apology for all injustices over the past 200 years?
c. Is the apology for the Colonisation of this country?
d. Is the apology for all of the above? |
Yeah this is something ive been curious about too, because as Sheriffe points out, in typical Rudd fashion this another 'promise' made with flourish without much stipulation as to substance. "we will say sorry!" "for what mr Rudd?"..."ahm...anything John Howard wouldn't say sorry for".
Sounds great when theres a worm watching, but it doesnt really do a hell of a lot to fill us in on those questions. Although maybe im just ignorant because i love the herald sun so much....that Mike Sheahan, he's such a champ. |
Why not do your own independent research?
Google is your friend |
thanks for your suggestion Frank.....you don't think i'd already tried to find out exactly what it is that the apology was for?
_________________
Jacqui © Proud Pies 2003 and beyond |
|
|
|
|
Alec. J. Hidell
Joined: 12 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
If someone steals my car, do I need them to apologise before I sue them for compensation?
_________________
The one man in the world, who never believes he is mad, is the madman. |
|
|
|
|
Alec. J. Hidell
Joined: 12 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Proud Pies wrote: |
thanks for your suggestion Frank.....you don't think i'd already tried to find out exactly what it is that the apology was for? |
No
_________________
The one man in the world, who never believes he is mad, is the madman. |
|
|
|
|
Culprit
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Frank Stone wrote: | | If someone steals my car, do I need them to apologise before I sue them for compensation? |
You are presuming they got caught. In this day and age that is a rarity. |
|
|
|
|
Zakal
One Game, One Club, One Jumper
Joined: 04 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Frank Stone wrote: | | If someone steals my car, do I need them to apologise before I sue them for compensation? |
Of course not, but you will find it a hell of a lot easier to get up if you have an admission of guilt, as it will rule out a number of the defences open to the car thief.
Nevermind the fact that stealing a car has always been against the law, the sad fact of the indigenous situation is that what was done was not only done under the law, but in many cases it WAS the law.
The only case im aware of of this kind that succeeded was one about halfway thru last year in the SC of SA...and on my limited understanding of the facts of that case, it was only because the government didnt follow its established removal procedure properly that enabled that claim to get up. Im still not sure how the plaintiff managed to get exemption from the limitation period.
I think about $500,000 was awarded in that guys case.
On a more general note, you would think that if these cases are going to continue, the government would be better of putting the millions it spends fighting these cases (one a couple of years ago cost upwards of $10million i believe) into a compensation fund, as Culprit suggests, on a merit basis. Even if they then legislate against all other forms of recovery, at least all the money being expended goes into compensation rather than legal bills, court costs and overtaxing the court system. |
|
|
|
|
Zakal
One Game, One Club, One Jumper
Joined: 04 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Just a further update on that case i referred to earlier.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23030433-2862,00.html
Is apparently going back to court to claim 37years worth of interest on compensation payout. Apparently that will more than double his initial payout figure to somethign in the order of $1.2million if succesfull, and i think thats based on a rate of 6.5%. |
|
|
|
|
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Culprit wrote: | | How many aborigines does everyone think are actually alive and living in this country? There are around half a million and that is decreasing as years pass. That is around 2.5% of the population. Worse case scenario we give them a million dollars each, that is half a billion dollars unless my maths is screwed. Now proportion that to GDP. We are talking a drop in the ocean and that is giving them a million each which would rarely be the payout. If we took 10% of the military budget we have spent on our war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan and put that into the compensation fund for the aborigines to draw from I doubt if the fund would run out of dollars. |
Throwing money at people doesn't work. At best it's a band-aid for the problem.
| culprit wrote: | | The rednecks bring up that a black man raped a child so we have military intervention. White man has been doing it for years yet we do not have the military involved just the police. |
Feel like adjusting those blinkers a little?
These issues (sexual abuse, petrol sniffing, etc) DO exist within some Indigenous communities and it almosty certainly goes hand in hand with the poor standard of living that such communities have to endure. Or are you trying to deny that, as well?
| Culprit wrote: | | What is even more amusing is most whites would not know what an Aboriginal if they ran into one. |
Huh?
If what you say is true (and I highly doubt it), then you are saying that you would prefer a nation where people were identified by their racial origin as opposed to their personality. Perhaps Aborigines should wear yellow stars as a way of identifying them? 
| Culprit wrote: | | We all should be sorry for the ignorance of generations of whites as its still going. |
I agree, and I fear it may be a long time before anything changes.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Culprit
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
David my point on the money, it's irrelevant and I put the point if we actually put it down in dollars and cents people may inderstand that. The side pushing for no apology is saying no because they do not wish to pay money and no other reason.
Blinkers? never seen the military intervene when we have had a pedophile suspected and arrested.
You miss the point once again.
Nothing will change because reality is the white man simply does not care and would rather they disapear. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
a) not true. While that may be some people's reasoning, it is almost certainly not the majority's. Money is irrelevant to my views on the issue.
b) The military did not intervene because of one isolated incident.
c) Well, what were you trying to say then?
d) Who are you speaking for here? Which white men in particular?
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
sherrife 
Victorian Socialists - people before profit
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: |
b) The military did not intervene because of one isolated incident.
|
I'd like you to find me some articles and/or reports that list a few of these incidents. Just so that I know you're not simply taking the media and the government's word for it that they exist.
_________________
I would be ashamed to admit that I had risen from the ranks. When I rise it will be with the ranks... - Eugene Debs |
|
|
|
|
Zakal
One Game, One Club, One Jumper
Joined: 04 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| sherrife wrote: | | David wrote: |
b) The military did not intervene because of one isolated incident.
|
I'd like you to find me some articles and/or reports that list a few of these incidents. Just so that I know you're not simply taking the media and the government's word for it that they exist. |
you want articles but dont want him taking the medias word for it? hehe
anyway, had a bit of a dig around (albeit a hasty one):
Hales v Jamilmira BC200301705 Court of Appeal
Respondent 50 year old Aboriginal man.
Respondent argued custom entitled him to have sex with girl because she was his promised wife and only discharged firearm to stop her leaving.
Whether reduced sentence for first offence of imprisonment for one day manifestly inadequate.
Whether appeal court gave too much weight to cultural factors, too little to need to protect young girls and gave insufficient weight to purpose of discharging firearm.
Held: Appeal allowed on first offence and dismissed on second offence.
Notwithstanding cultural factors, sentence for first offence manifestly inadequate, failing to reflect seriousness of offence and community concern to protect young girls.
Sentence on second offence at lower end of scale but not manifestly inadequate.
Horne v Carlon BC200703931
Criminal law — Offences — Prostitution offences — Inducing minor
Appellant convicted of aggravated assault and prostitution offences.
R v GJ - BC200511229
[9] The respondent was at the time of sentencing a 55-year-old traditional Aboriginal man.
The child, SS, was born in mid 1990. When she was about four years of age, the child’s family promised her as a wife to the respondent in accordance with traditional Aboriginal law. As the child grew older, she went to college in Darwin. In June 2004 during the school holidays, when the child was in Year 9, she formed a friendship with a young male. She had returned during the school holidays to reside with her grandmother in the Yarralin community. She did not really know the respondent except as “the old man”.
[11] On about Friday 18 June 2004, the child stayed in the home of a mutual friend with whom the boy also stayed. Word spread about this and the respondent believed that a sexual relationship had occurred between the young boy and the child.
[12] On Saturday 19 June 2004, the respondent and the child’s grandmother went to the house where the child and boy had stayed. The child was having breakfast. The grandmother took the child outside. The respondent had gone to the house armed with two boomerangs. When the child was brought outside by her grandmother the respondent struck the child with one of the boomerangs with some force over her shoulders and back.
[13] The respondent and the grandmother then took the child back to the grandmother’s house. At that house, the respondent again struck the child over the area of her shoulder and arms. The grandmother also struck the child with a big stick. Not surprisingly, the child was upset and crying.
[14] The child, the grandmother and the respondent decided that the respondent would take the child to an out-station. The grandmother told the child that she had to go with the respondent. The child did not want to go with the respondent and said so to him. She asked her grandmother if she could stay, but rather than assisting the child, the grandmother packed the child’s personal belongings including her school bag and insisted that the child go with the respondent. She was forced into the respondent’s car where she sat with the respondent’s wife and two other persons crying and shaking.
[15] The respondent then drove to the out-station and stopped at the respondent’s house there. The child was taken into the house with the respondent and his wife and two small children.
[16] During the evening the respondent took the child by the leg and dragged her into a bedroom. The wife took the other children and went to another room. The child kicked and screamed and resisted. The respondent lay her on a bed in the room and asked for sexual intercourse. The child told the respondent that she was only 14 years old. The respondent hit her on the back. He then lay next to the child and remained there throughout the night. No act of sexual intercourse occurred.
[17] The child spent the next day in the company of the respondent’s wife. That night the respondent told her to go into the bedroom. She obeyed and the respondent followed her into the bedroom where he removed all of her clothes except her t-shirt. He then pushed the child onto the mattress. Whilst she was lying on her stomach, the respondent had a boomerang in his hand and threatened her with it. He then had anal intercourse with her. During the intercourse the child was frightened and crying. She was in pain. The intercourse caused a deep laceration at the edge of her anus. Later examination by a doctor also revealed painful areas over the child’s body.
[18] Whilst in the room that night the child kicked the respondent in the groin area. The respondent told her that she was not going to be allowed to go back to her grandmother or to school. The respondent turned off the light and went to sleep with his arm around her.
[19] The child later told the police that she was “at that old man’s place for four days” and that she was crying “from Saturday to Tuesday”. She knew that she was promised to the respondent in the Aboriginal traditional way but she did not like the respondent. In the words of the child: “I told that old man I’m too young for sex, but he didn’t listen.”
R v NOELIE GOODWIN - BC200306761
- woman raped by a juvenile offender with a 3yr old child in tow.
Staats v R - BC9802453
Criminal law — Sentencing — Sexual penetration of girl under age of sixteen
Where accused sentenced to 8 years imprisonment, with non-parole period of 5 years and 7 months on three counts of having sexual intercourse with a minor and one count of recording indecent image of minor.
Now admittedly these are just a few cases, but they only represent the cases that went all the way to the NT Court of Criminal Appeal...usually because the crimes were considered so serious as to justify an appeal against the gross inadequacy of the sentence initially imposed. The VAST majority of cases that even get reported, will never make it this far. |
|
|
|
|
nomadjack
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Location: Essendon
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
