Apple hit with $676 million legal bill in patent case

Apple said it will appeal the decision. Source: AFP

 

APPLE has been ordered to pay $676 million ($US$532.9 million) by a US federal jury that found Apple’s iTunes music store uses software that infringes on patents held by a Texas company. 

An lawyer for plaintiff Smartflash LLC praised the verdict. Apple immediately announced plans to appeal and said the case shows the need for Congress to reform the U.S. patent system.

The case involves three patents that Smartflash holds for software used in storing data files and managing access through an online payment system. The outcome will likely add fuel to a broader debate over the federal patent system and complaints that it’s easily abused by companies that make most of their revenue through patent lawsuits.

“Smartflash makes no products, has no employees, creates no jobs, has no US presence and is exploiting our patent system to seek royalties for technology Apple invented,” Apple said in a printed statement. The statement added: “We rely on the patent system to protect real innovation and this case is one more example of why we feel so strongly Congress should enact meaningful patent reform.”

Apple chief executive Tim Cook oversees a company that is worth $US750 billion. Source: AP

 

The suit was heard by a federal jury in the Eastern District of Texas, which has become known as a hotbed for patent lawsuits and a favourite jurisdiction for lawyers pursuing patent claims.

Smartflash is headquartered in Tyler, Texas, where the court is also based.

While Apple denied infringing on Smartflash patents, an lawyer for the Texas firm said jurors in the case worked hard and “saw through” Apple’s arguments.

The jury agreed with Smartflash’s argument that Apple used software based on ideas patented by inventor and Smartflash executive Peter Racz, without permission. The Texas firm alleged that in 2000, Racz met to discuss his ideas with prominent software designer Augustin Farrugia, who was then working for a European company but later joined Apple to work on security programs for its iTunes store.

Apple has lost two previous patent cases in the Eastern District of Texas and successfully appealed both of them.

In the Smartflash case, the jury’s award of $676 million is unlikely to be a financial strain for Apple, which earned $US39.5 billion in profit last year on sales of $US182.8 billion.

news.com.au 26 Feb 2015

Apple, another company committing corporate fraud, that is allowed to exist.

A company that only exists from slave labour and appalling work conditions.

A company that defrauds tax offices world wide of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

The Australian government also sues multinational IT companies for hundreds of millions of dollars over its patented Wi-Fi technology that the companies use in their products.

Australian Constitution Act - The time of Federation

The time of Federation

Some History

We accept that the people of this continent known as Australia recognize that the traditional inhibitors of the aforementioned continent are of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander decent and that the Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people are the Indigenous people of this continent. Like it or not, it was the United Kingdom (UK),that settled this country, bringing with them their central form of Governance that had operated for centuries.

The Colonies:

In the mid to late 1800s, the Colonies were not working together instead they were constantly trying to outdo one another to the people’s disadvantage. They were also consistently making laws that were repulsive to the people and offensive to the Laws of England.This misbehaviour still continues today.

The rampant Governments of the Colonies were misbehaving so badly that the UK Parliament were forced to make a law, the Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865 (Imp) that stopped such Governments from making laws that were repugnant to the Laws of England. The wise men and women of Australia (The humanitarians) were not particularly happy with the way the Colonies were behaving to the extent, that in their eyes Australia needed a local umbrella body (the Commonwealth Government) that had the ability to restrain the Colonies.

Federation

At the time just before Federation, Australia consisted of six Colonies. To turn six Colonies into the Commonwealth of Australia required an Act from the UK Parliament. The Act that the UK Parliament used to Federate Australia was called; “An Act to constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 9^th July 1900”. That Act is a Law of the UK Parliament and they can repeal, amend or do nothing with it and the latter is what has happened.

There is no provision to change the Constitution Act other than the UK Parliament and it’s extremely unlikely that they would do that without a referendum of the people in this country. The Constitution Act is made up of a Preamble and 9 Covering Clauses or Sections and no more. The Constitution Act is an enabling act, in other words an Act that allowed Australia to Federate.

We must understand the difference between the Constitution Act and the Constitution. We also must understand that the Constitution is part of the Constitution Act.(Covering Clause 9)

The Constitution Act.

Below we have included part of the preamble, with some explanation of the Constitution Act.

An Act to constitute the Commonwealth of Australia;

and is referred to as the Constitution Act.

Preamble.(Relevant part only).                       

“Whereas the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania, humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God, have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth, under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and under the Constitution hereby established.”

“Whereas the people…..; the words “Whereas the people” establish the fact that it was the people that Federated Australia and not any form of Government. “Whereas the people” is neither discriminatory nor racist. Those three words also establish the fact that the people are sovereign over and above any Parliament in Australia.The Annotated Constitution written by Quick and Garran make the following comments; “This opinion approaches near the truth, is the supreme absolute and uncontrollable authority remains with the people.The opening words of the preamble also proclaim that the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia is founded on the will of the people whom it is designed to unite and govern”.

………New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania; those five Colonies now States, decided to unite as the Commonwealth of Australia and although Western Australia was not part of the Commonwealth at the time of the creation of the Constitution Act. They did however decide to become part of the Commonwealth about one month later. Now that all six Colonies have become six States they united to form the Commonwealth of Australia. New Zealand was invited to be part of the Commonwealth of Australia at that time but they declined the offer.

…...have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth; simply means that the six Colonies that became States, then went on to be part of the Federal Commonwealth that could not be split up. There is no provision in either the Constitution Act or the Constitution for any State to split from the Commonwealth.

……under the Crown of the United Kingdom; The words “under the Crown of the United Kingdom” have very significant meaning.The Annotated Constitution written by Quick and Garran make the following comments; “It is a concrete and unequivocal acknowledgment of a principle which pervades the whole scheme of Government; harmony with the British Constitution and loyalty to the Queen of the United Kingdom with its multitudinous peoples and its complex divisions of political power”.

……United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland; The words “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland” simply mean that three Countries formed together. Prior to the Act of Union 1707, United Kingdom consisted of three separate Countries. Those Countries were England, Scotland and Ireland (Wales is part of England). That on 1st May, 1707, the nations of England and Scotland were united into one kingdom by the name of Great Britain and that there should be one Parliament for the whole kingdom. In 1801, in another Act of Union, Great Britain and Ireland formed together to become the United Kingdom.

…..and under the Constitution hereby established; The words, “Under the Constitution,” The Annotated Constitution written by Quick and Garran make the following comments; “The Commonwealth is a political community, carved out of the British Empire and endowed through its Constitution with a defined quota of self-governing powers. Those powers are delegated by and derived from the British Parliament, and they are to be held, enjoyed, and exercised by the people of the Commonwealth in the manner prescribed by the grant, subject;

(1) to the supreme British Sovereignty (under the Crown), and

(2) to the Constitution of the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth is consequently under a double subjection. It is subject in the first place to the British Parliament, which, as the ultimate sovereign authority of the Empire, has the legal power to legislate for the Commonwealth as a part of the Empire, and even to amend or repeal the Constitution of the Commonwealth. The grant of a Constitution to any dependency of the Empire is, however, a practical guarantee that no Imperial legislation conflicting with such grant will be passed except at the express request and with the concurrence of the dependency”

Below we have included part of Covering Clause 5 again with some explanation of the Constitution Act.

Covering Clauses 5. Operation of the Constitution and laws.

(Relevant part only).

“This Act, and all laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution, shall be binding on the courts, judges, and people of every State and of every part of the Commonwealth, notwithstanding (despite) anything in the laws of any State.”

It is this Covering Clause that enables any person to bring the Constitution Act, which includes the Constitution into any court. It would help to support your argument using Covering Clause 5 with some case law.

The Annotated Constitution written by Quick and Garran make the following comments,“No difficulty is suggested by the words, “and all laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution.” The words “under the Constitution” are words of limitation and qualification. Not all enactments purporting to be laws made by the Parliament are binding; but laws made under, in pursuance of, and within the authority conferred by the Constitution, and those only, are binding on the courts, judges, and people. A law in excess of the authority conferred by the Constitution is no law; it is wholly void and inoperative; it confers no rights, it imposes no duties; it affords no protection.The Act itself is binding without limitation or qualification because it is passed by the sovereign Parliament (UK Parliament), but the laws passed by the Parliament of the Commonwealth, a subordinate Parliament, must be within the limits of the delegation of powers or they will be null and void.What is not so granted to the Parliament of the Commonwealth is denied to it. What is not so granted is either reserved to the States, as expressed in their respective Constitutions, or remains vested but dormant in the people of the Commonwealth”

The Constitution.

To understand anything about a Constitution. We must first ask ourselves two questions;

1.   What is a Constitution?

and

          2. Why do we have such a thing?

A Constitution is a document that is full of laws that control the governance of this country.

And what we mean by governance is that there are three distinct and totally separate organs of government in this country, and they are;

a.The Parliament, which consists of the upper and lower houses (someone should tell Queensland about that, and is a very good example of why we should ask question 2 above far more frequently) and it is the Parliament that make, repeal and amend laws by first creating bills, and

b. The Executive, which is headed up by the Governor General and it is one of their responsibilities to give or not to give Royal assent to bills created by Parliament so that they can become laws. The Police are also an integral part of the Executive, and

c. The Judicature, which is headed up by the Chief Justice of the High Court, it is their responsibility to interpret the law and administer justice. The High Court is also an integral part of theJudicature, their primary role is to interpret and uphold the Constitution of the Commonwealth and that of the States.They are not there to defend any form of Government, whether State or Federal, a characteristic that is becoming far too frequent.

Why do we require a Constitution?

As described early in this document the wise men and women of Australia (The humanitarians) were not particularly happy with the way the Colonies were misbehaving. To the extent, that in the eyes ofthe wise men and women a local umbrella body was needed (the Commonwealth Government) that had the ability to restrain the Colonies. It was also realised that the people required a document that would protect the people from that umbrella body. The Constitution was to be that document.

How did the people come by the Constitution?

The Constitution took about thirteen years from conception to completion. In 1888 the wise men of Australia (largely lawyers) were called the framers of the Constitution and they conducted constitutional conventional debates all around the country. The constitutional conventional debates started in1888, and went on for ten years. Then in 1898, and only after the framers were satisfied they had a document that they could put to the people in a referendum (Landowners only), a document to seek their approval, at that point the document would become a Constitution.

That 1898 referendum was unsuccessful, the framers had to go back to the drawing board, talk to the people and readjust the document to better reflect their will, and have another referendum (again landowners only),which they did in 1899. This referendum was successful and now the people had a Constitution, which came into effect on the 1^st January 1901.

After federation, the people were excited about the formation of their new and independent country, all looked well. But it did last very long. Soon after Federation the rot started to set in, the extreme right wing (fascist) governments started to exert their marauding tactics upon the people. Such behaviour has grown considerably worse since Federation and it’s not going to get any better until the people wake up and do something about it.

The appalling behaviour by the three organs of government (parliament, executive and the judiciary) has been going on in this country for many decades, and is only able to take place because not enough people are reading and understanding the Constitution, nor asking the two questions mentioned above. We must also lobby our politicians and to let them know just how angry you are. It can all be summed up quite easily, the framers created the Constitution, the people approved the Constitution and such Constitution is in place to protect the people from the marauding governance.

For that reason, we all must read and understand the Constitution, if not enough of us do that, then the age old saying applies.

“If you keep doing what you have always done (nothing), why would you be surprised if you keep getting what you what you always got?”

ref: http://www.clrg.info/2015/01/constitution-act-the-time-of-federation/

clrg.info 22 Jan 2015

Information that EVERY Australian should be familiar with!

Investigation exposes fraud within taxpayer funded Jobs Services Australia

Agencies assisting jobseekers may only be looking out for themselves. Source: News Limited

 

AN INVESTIGATION has uncovered a massive taxpayer rip-off perpetrated not by “dole bludgers” sponging off the unemployment system — but instead by the agencies tasked with finding people jobs. 

Unemployment in Australia is at 6.4 per cent, its highest rate in 12 years. But an investigation by Four Corners has found that a billion-dollar taxpayer funded scheme created to help job seekers find a work is instead being used to keep the money flowing to employment agencies.

There’s evidence that both private and charity job agencies are “gaming” the Federal Government’s work scheme Job Services Australia, which it spends about $1.3 billion on every year. Some organisations have already had to pay back more than $41 million worth of false claims in the past three years.

The agencies receive money for every person they look after, with thousand-dollar bonuses available if they find the person work. In 1998 the Federal Government essentially privatised the system so in order to keep their unemployment benefits, every jobseeker had to register with a charity or a private job agency.

But with 780,000 people competing in Australia for just 150,000 jobs, there is not enough work to go round and the agencies have found other ways to make money.

‘DISADVANTAGED’ JOBSEEKERS

Jobseekers who have a mental illness, substance abuse problem, or are indigenous, are deemed harder to place in work and agencies make more money from them.

According to Four Corners, job agency employees are encouraged to look into the background of clients and identify those who can be classified into a disadvantaged category.

When they can’t find enough “disadvantaged” jobseekers, at least one agency has been found to fraudulently upgrade them. The value of these jobseekers was highlighted in a 2005 government investigation into the Salvation Army in Victoria, which found clients were fraudulently upgraded to a “highly disadvantage classification”, which increased payments and bonuses for staff.

Following the investigation, the charity was forced to repay $9 million but the government would not say whether anyone was ever prosecuted.

Substance abuse problem? You’re worth more to job agencies. Source: News Corp Australia

 

TRAINING COURSES

Employees are also encouraged to put clients into courses run by the company’s own registered agencies even if jobseekers may not find the training beneficial.

“(It’s) big business, it’s not about the job seeker, it’s about the employment network,” ORS former consultant Brook Purvis told Four Corners.

She said that in some cases money put towards training could have been better spent, for example on helping the client get their driving licence but this wasn’t done because it did not benefit the company.

There has also been evidence of agencies signing up jobseekers to courses that they had no prospect of starting or completing. A 2009 government investigation found one company MAX Employment had enrolled 141 people into a training course, despite the fact its training room could only fit 15 jobseekers at a time.

In the four years to 2010 these training courses cost taxpayers nearly $400 million dollars regardless of whether they benefited the jobseeker.

Rupert Taylor-Price, whose software company analyses government data generated by the program, said he thought only one in 10 people participating in the Job Services Australia scheme enjoys “a better chance of gaining employment”.

FORGERY

Some jobseekers believe other agencies have even forged their signatures and turned in false paperwork. A 2012 audit found only 40 per cent of fees paid to agencies could be verified.

A number of job seekers were shown documentation that they had purportedly signed but did not recognise, and one said he had been asked to sign blank forms for which details would be filled out later.

“I’m shocked because I didn’t fill this in,” said one woman shown paperwork Four Corners had obtained.
One whistleblower from agency ORS Group, which turned over $66 million last year said details on forms were regularly whited out and replaced: “I would say about 80 per cent of claims that come through have some sort of manipulation on them”.

Even if the company is not responsible for finding a jobseeker work it can still claim money from the government if it is able to get the signature of the jobseeker.

“We were sort of told, you know, if the signature’s not on it, get it any way that you can,” former ORS consultant Ms Purvis said.

She said she thought forms from at least half of her caseload at ORS had been tampered with, “I don’t know how they’re still open”.

Another former employee turned whistleblower, who did not want to be identified, said that free Coles Myer vouchers were used to lure clients back so ORS could get their signature, by suggesting to clients they were just signing for the vouchers.

Agencies have been accused of forging signatures. Source: News Limited

 

Former Department of Employment auditor Ian Whitchurch said the government was warned in 1999 that fraud was rife within the scheme

“We found that about a third of ... job matching claims in that period ... the job member had had no involvement in getting the person a job, something that they claimed money off the Commonwealth for,” Mr Whitchurch said.

He estimated about 50,000 claims in the first year were rorted.

An audit of fees a few years ago was able to claw back $6 million worth of taxpayers money despite only examining one type of fee and six months worth of claims.

But former department head Dr Peter Shergold said he could only recall one provider at the time who was “rorting” the system.

“Rorting is taking funds for a false outcome which hasn’t been achieved. I’ve seen truly minimal evidence of that,” Dr Shergold said.

He said of the Jobs Services Australia: “I think it was probably the most innovative measure in terms of public administration that happened during the Howard years.”

CHANGES TO THE SCHEME

Changes to Jobs Services Australia will come into effect in July but these cut red tape rather than increase audit requirements.

When asked why this was a bad thing, a spokesman for JN Solutions said: “In free market red tape is generally a bad thing, (but) this isn’t a free market, this is a government contract. Red tape in this industry is regulation, it’s making sure public funds are accounted for.”

Assistant Employment Minister Luke Hartsuyker said the new system would include better performance monitoring, reporting and quality assurances.

Agencies will undergo more rigorous quality standards to be eligible to deliver services.

“The coalition’s new employment services system will undo Labor’s mistakes and restore greater integrity to the system,” he said in a statement.

The peak body representing non-profit employment organisations, Jobs Australia, said there were legitimate concerns about some factors that underpin the Job Services Australia scheme.

However, its achievements also deserved to be acknowledged.

It said the scheme assists about 800,000 job seekers at any point in time, and that more than a quarter of job seekers find a job and exit JSA within three months.

This was despite the fact that the system was “incredibly complex, with a confusing payment model and thousands of pages of rules that must be interpreted and applied by individual staff”.

 news.com.au 25 Feb 2015

The poor Aussie tax payer has been defrauded by these so called 'Job Network' agencies for many years but nothing has been done about it until now.

When it comes to public funds the government is VERY slow to act, but when people owe money to the Australian Tax Office or are slugged with an (unlawful) 'fine' then the collection agencies are put to work straight away.

Studies linking fluoride in water to health issues prompt Australian review

Have the health benefits of fluoride in drinking water been overstated?

Australian health authorities are reviewing the case for fluoride in drinking water amid concerns scientific evidence supporting the benefits and risks to people's health may have shifted.

While most Australians have been regularly consuming low amounts of fluoride since it was added to drinking water in the 1960s and 1970s to prevent tooth decay, several controversial studies in recent years have suggested the mineral may be linked to lower intelligence in children and thyroid problems that can cause weight gain, fatigue and depression.

On Tuesday, the National Health and Medical Research Council revealed that a 2012 study linking very high levels of fluoride to low IQ among some Chinese children prompted it to commission a review of the health effects of the celebrated public health intervention.

A spokesperson for the NHMRC said while the Chinese study increased concern about the safety of fluoride and potential neurotoxicity for children, it was conducted in a country with very different naturally occurring levels of fluoride that are not seen in Australia, meaning "care needs to be exercised in interpreting the results".

Furthermore, the study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives identified drinking water with fluoride concentrations up to 11.5 mg/L in China. In Australia, the recommended level is 0.6-1.1 mg/L.

Nonetheless, the NHMRC established a fluoride reference group last year and has commissioned Sydney University researchers to assess new evidence by mid 2015. A draft statement on their findings is due by the end of the year.

Until then, the NHMRC says its 2007 review of fluoridation stands, showing it is safe and effective for preventing tooth decay and that there is insufficient evidence to support any other "measurable harm to human health".

"The only potential harm associated with water fluoridation is dental fluorosis [mottles or flecks on the teeth], and this can be minimised by the careful regulation of the concentration of fluoride in fluoridated water at levels aimed to prevent tooth decay," the spokesperson said.

On Wednesday, chief executive officer of the NHMRC Warwick Anderson suggested the review was occurring in line with its commitment to regularly update statements on health matters and was unlikely to change its position on the safety of water fluoridation.

"Based on the work already conducted in the review, NHMRC is expected to maintain its support for fluoridation of water supplies as effective and safe," Professor Anderson said in a statement.

On Tuesday, British researchers called for health authorities to reconsider its water fluoridation program after a new study linked fluoride to higher rates of hypothyroidism - low thyroid function that slows the metabolism down and can cause fatigue, weight gain and depression.

The observational study published in the Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health (a specialist journal published by the British Medical Journal group) reported that GP clinics in areas with fluoridated water were nearly twice as likely to report high rates of hypothyroidism compared with clinics in areas without water fluoridation.

While the researchers did not prove fluoride was causing the illness, they said their results should be "substantial cause for public health concern" and should prompt people to be tested for the condition.
But David Coggon, professor of Occupational and Environmental Medicine at University of Southampton, said the study was highly questionable.

 "As epidemiological evidence goes, this is about as weak as it gets," he said.

"It is quite possible that the observed association is a consequence of other ways in which the areas with higher fluoride differ from the rest of the country. There are substantially more rigorous epidemiological methods by which the research team could have tested their idea," he said.

A spokesman for the Department of Health in Victoria said: "The addition of fluoride to drinking water supplies is universally supported by all leading health authorities."

In Victoria, 90 per cent of the population has access to fluoridated drinking water supplies.

smh.com.au 25 Feb 2015

Studies have been around for quite some time.

Fluoride is banned in Europe.

Why was this not addressed earlier?

Sheriff OHMS

In Victoria, Australia some people may have the pleasure of dealing with a person called the "Sheriff".

This 'person' called the Sheriff, may not be the person he claims to be.

If you are lucky enough to receive a letter from this person from their place of business it could look like this:

Notice on the letter the underlined acronym O.H.M.S.

This stands for On Her Majesty's Service, i.e. the person works on behalf or for the Crown.

But do they really ??? !!! ???

Just another piece of evidence against the criminal actions of the 'sheriff'.

Inbreeding creating retarded criminals

In Australia there is a taboo on reporting the reality of (forced) 'marriage', or rape (according to Australian laws) of minors that are married of to preselected husbands, or even incest.

These so called customs have made their way to Australia from migrant communities not isolated to one particular ethnic background, or even religion.

Something that was instilled in religion or the word of God many centuries ago, science today can verify that inbreeding causes mental and physical deficiencies in the offspring.

The Rothschild and Habsburg dynasties could not continue to prosper with individuals at the helm who had mental impairments, as a result of inbreeding.

See article: http://corpau.blogspot.com.au/2009/04/inbreeding-brought-down-habsburg.html

The English 'royals' the so called 'Windsors' who are the Saxe-Coburg and Gotha even had to thin their bloodline out as a result of inbreeding, so the newer generations could leach from lead the plebs.

It is also written in the 'bible' not to breed or rather 'marry' family relatives.

As an example:

Old Testament Examples

There are several clear cases of incest in the Old Testament.Lot, Abraham’s nephew, begat two sons by his own daughters while in a drunken stupor (Genesis 19:30-35).Moses recorded the sordid act as a matter of history, but there is no sanction of the sin in the sacred text.In fact it is placed in a decidedly negative light.Ruben was intimate with Bilhah, his father’s concubine (Genesis 35:22) — a shameful act that was condemned and penalized (Genesis 49:4). Amnon, one of David’s sons, committed incest/rape against his half-sister, Tamar (2 Samuel 13:7-14), and, as a consequence, was murdered later by the order of Absalom, Tamar’s full brother (2 Samuel 13).

The Levitical Code

The most comprehensive segment of the Old Testament dealing with this offense is in Leviticus 18:6-18.Sexual cohabitation was not permitted between a man and his mother, his sister, a granddaughter, an aunt, etc.The most serious punishment was execution (Leviticus 20:11-17), and in the New Testament era, disfellowship from the local church was enjoined for the offence (1 Corinthians 5:1-5).
 
How does this effect modern Australia?

In Victoria Australia a 'case' example of inbred 'half-wits' creating havoc in the community, as brought to a public forum called a court in the matter of:

R v Selcuk [2006] VSC 447 (29 November 2006)

Some extracts from the case:

CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Intentionally causing serious injury – Affray – Vicious, unprovoked attack with baseball bat on frail victim at tram stop – Guilty plea – One prior conviction - Total effective sentence of imprisonment of 6 years 6 months

---

 

 HER HONOUR:

1 Altaman Selcuk you have pleaded guilty to one count of intentionally causing serious injury and one count of affray.

The offences

2 The person you seriously injured was Ali Duran, your uncle and former father-in-law. In 1999, you married his daughter, your cousin, Sezgin Duran. It was your second marriage, her first.

3 Sezgin left you in January 2005 and moved back home with her parents. From when Sezgin moved out until the day of the offences, 19 February 2005, you made continual attempts to reconcile with Sezgin by contacting her and her family. A week before the offences were committed, on 12 February 2005, you met with Ali Duran in your car near his home. You discussed the breakdown of the marriage.


6 Your brother drove from his home in Flemington to your home in Brunswick. He parked his car at your place, and drove you in your car to a Turkish café in Sydney Road, which Ali Duran attended regularly. This was at around 6:30pm.

7 Asim double-parked outside the café and kept the motor running. You got out of the front passenger door and walked into the café, carrying a wooden baseball bat. You walked to the back of the café, turned around and walked back to the front door. You told patrons that you were looking for "Sydney Ali". Ali Duran was known as "Sydney Ali", because when he first arrived in Australia he lived in Sydney. One patron recalled you saying "I am going to kill him, cut him limb by limb". Another patron recalled you saying words which loosely translated as "I am going to fuck him". You were speaking in Turkish.

8 You left the café and got back in the car. Your brother drove down Sydney Road, towards the city. A short time later, you saw Ali Duran near the intersection of Sydney Road and Edwards/Reynard Street, Coburg. He was on the footpath, waiting at the tram stop. Although only 61 years old, Mr Duran used a walking stick and moved slowly, as a result of previous strokes and ongoing health problems.

9 Asim parked the car near Ali Duran, partially in the intersection, obstructing traffic and a tram. You got out of the car and attacked Mr Duran with the baseball bat. The first blow hit him on the right hand, fracturing his right index finger and knocking him to the ground. You continued your attack, hitting him with extreme force approximately 15 times to the legs, arms, back and head. You were violently abusing him as you did so. Mr Duran tried to protect himself by putting his hands up and curling into a foetal position. The attack took place in broad daylight, in front of many bystanders.

10 You and Asim left the scene hastily, Asim driving the car south down Sydney Road. Witnesses reported the loud revving of an engine and screeching tyres.

11 Mr Duran was attended to by bystanders. A short time later an ambulance arrived and he was taken to hospital. Mr Duran sustained a 15cm laceration to the back of his head that required more than 20 staples. He also suffered a cerebral contusion to that area of his head, fractures to the right shin bone and right index finger, and extreme bruising to his legs, back, buttocks, arms, head, hands and face.

12 Mr Duran died a few days later, on 24 February 2005. The post-mortem revealed the cause of death to be acute cerebral infarction and cerebrovascular disease. The mechanism of death was the swelling of the brain as a consequence of infarct, resulting in internal herniation. You are not legally responsible for Mr Duran’s death, because of his pre-existing health problems and the doctors’ inability to quantify the extent to which your attack may have contributed to his death. I am therefore not sentencing you in respect of Mr Duran’s death.

 ---

Ref:  http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2006/447.html

This is just one example of the criminal trash the Australian 'authorities' import into this country, under the so called "Human Rights" banner.

Also under the "Human Rights" banner you cannot be 'convicted' unless it's before a court of law, so 'fines' are out.

Put that in your argument and see how far you get!

Australia's justice system - ONLY 6.5 years for killing someone.

Could this be a time effective solution for getting rid of 'uncomfortable' people?

Truck driver films argument with highway patrol officer who fined him after ‘estimating’ his speed was over the limit

Man disputes Policeman for estimating his speed.

A TRUCK driver has found out the hard way that you don’t need to be caught by a radar to be booked for speeding in New South Wales. 

Chris Smith was driving a B-Double on the Newell Highway on Saturday when was pulled over by a Highway Patrol officer as part of Operation Drink Drive at about 5.10pm.

Mr Smith began filming his interaction with the officer who told the driver he hadn’t been caught on the patrol car’s radar but had been estimated by the officer to be speeding.

The video, which was posted to the man’s Facebook page, has been viewed more than 1.2 million times since being uploaded less than half an hour after being handed the fine.

MAN ‘BOMBARDED TEENAGE BOY WITH 2500 MESSAGES BEFORE SEX ATTACK’
CRASH OF THE TITANS: FOUR-YEAR BANS LOOM

Man disputes cop for estimating speed

http://media.news.com.au/multimedia/shared/content/nnd-iframes/id1424646700210.html

“So I’m getting booked for not speeding. Is that what you’re trying to tell me?” Mr Smith asks the officer.
“You’re a senior constable...for guessing speed?”

“Expert. I’m an expert in the courts at estimating speed, yes,” the officer tells him.

“Well obviously I think you need a new job,” the truck driver fires back.

When Mr Smith asks the officer if he can see the radar proof that he was speeding, the senior constable says he wasn’t using the radar and had estimated his speed on the highway.

“You need to understand everything is based on my estimations,” he says.

“All the radar does is back up my estimation, that’s all it does.”

Mr Smith wrote on his Facebook page he was checking his speed using his onboard GPS and it hadn’t indicated he was over the limit.

“To set the record straight, I just finished checking the speed on the truck via Tom Tom web fleet and not once did the truck go over the said speed limit,” he wrote.

The policeman laughs when Mr Smith questions whether the officer’s sunglasses put him off and later when he points out the car has a defective front tyre.

The officer said he had estimated the speed of Mr Smith. Picture: Facebook

 

Mr Smith was fined $254 and lost three demerit points. Picture: Facebook

 

Mr Smith continues questioning the highway patrolman who tells him to take the matter to court if he has an issue with the fine or the method it was delivered.

“I will take it to court because I can’t get booked for not speeding,” Mr Smith says.

“You don’t worry mate because I can’t get booked for you guessing a speed.”

But it appears Mr Smith might be wrong.

A NSW Police spokesperson said Highway Patrol officers often use estimation when issuing fines and said the process is part of their training.

“All highway patrol operatives are considered subject matter experts in the eyes of the court in terms of estimating speed,” they said.

NSW Police said Highway Patrol officers are trained to estimate speed and said it was common practice. Picture: Facebook

 

“This is included as a part of the training received by potential highway patrol officers.

“Any LIDAR or radar check that is done has to be reinforced with a valid speed estimation.”

The infringement Mr Smith was issued carries a fine of $254 and three demerit points.

couriermail.com.au 23 Feb 2015


Another instance of corrupt police issuing unlawful fines, and also media misinformation.

At law, when challenged, in a court of competent  jurisdiction, the police in this case have no chance of successful prosecution whatsoever.

The proviso there is that the matter MUST be taken to task.

They (the police) literally do as they please, as they have the guns.

A truly corrupt police operating in Australia.

NOTHING to do with road safety but rather revenue raising, where the officer's promotion is based on how many tickets are written.

Victorian police officer charged with stealing thousands of dollars, trafficking meth

A Victorian policeman has been accused of stealing money from people in return for allowing them to go free, and of trafficking methamphetamine.

Nicholas John Powell, who was stationed at Fitzroy police station, has been charged with theft, drug-trafficking, dealing with the proceeds of crime and misconduct in public office.

A second member from the police region, Brendan Nolan, has been charged with the same offences. Both men have been suspended without pay.

Do you know more about this story? Email investigations@abc.net.au

 

Court documents show that in May 2012, Powell allegedly took $3,000 from a man at Fitzroy police station in exchange for the man's freedom.

He has also been charged with handling the proceeds of crime, on the basis that the cash was suspected to be the proceeds of crime.

The documents show that a month later, in June, Powell allegedly stole methamphetamine from Fitzroy police station, swapping it for a cutting agent he seized from a criminal.

Powell then allegedly arranged for the methamphetamine to be sold.

It is also alleged that in July that year, Powell stole $2,300 worth of Crown Casino chips from a woman at Fitzroy police station.

The two officers were arrested following an investigation by Taskforce Keel, which was set up by police command to probe the leak of thousands of police documents to people, including some with links to bikie gangs.

Taskforce Keel has focused on Fitzroy police station.

A number of police officers from the station having been suspended or charged with various offences.

Another officer formerly stationed at Fitzroy, David Branov, was sentenced to more than four years in prison in December after pleading guilty to theft, drug and misconduct charges.

 abc.net.au 24 Feb 2015

Another instance of a majorly corrupt police force.

There is also a huge presence of corrupt police in Melbourne's north, north-west, where police are involved in extortion, drugs and theft.

Lets see how long it will take to bring these criminals to 'justice'.

Criminal activity IS being reported to 'authorities, against police, but NO ACTION is taken.

Affidavit Declaration of Service Form 6A

Please Note:

For the purpose of this post, the validity of law, in Victoria, Australia is put aside, where the MAGISTRATES' COURT GENERAL CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES 2010 are used in this instance.

Also noting that 'rules' are not law whereas Acts are.

The AFFIDAVIT DECLARATION OF SERVICE (Form 6A) from the Magistrates' Court of Victoria is available for download in MS Word 97-2003 (.doc) format at:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B21_coIgIYu2MkNuc0N2MUZvRHM/view?usp=sharing

or in jpg format:

also,

A DECLARATION OF SERVICE (on a company by post) is available in jpg format:

 

Do not forget to add the year number where the units digit needs to be filled in.

Also the MAGISTRATES' COURT GENERAL CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES 2010 can be downloaded (470pp, 2MB) at

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B21_coIgIYu2aXZaNDZ2Tk12WTA/view?usp=sharing

 

Police Ignorance of the Law – Should They Have More Legal Training?

Police are supposed to uphold and maintain the law, but a recent court case shows that in some instances, officers do not even understand the charges that they are pressing against members of the public.

The misapplication of criminal charges can lead to people being arrested and detained for no legal reason, as well as potentially having to go through the distress of court proceedings unnecessarily.

A magistrate in the ACT said police might need to have more legal training on what constitutes various criminal offences after a woman was arrested and detained on the wrong charge in Canberra last year.

The details of the case

The woman was arrested at a bus interchange in May 2013, capsicum sprayed, and charged with two counts of obstructing or resisting a public official, and another charge of breaching the peace.

The woman was alleged to have kicked a bus stop sign and shouted loudly, and when police told her to stop she allegedly walked away and began hitting a glass window.

Police then tried to arrest her, fearing that if left to go home alone she would breach the peace. When the woman resisted arrest, police used capsicum spray to restrain her.

The defence argument

The defendant’s lawyer in court earlier this month that the woman had been wrongly charged with breaching the peace as her behaviour did not fit into the definition required, and therefore not only was the charge against her inappropriate, police attempts to arrest her were also illegal, which meant that she could not reasonably be convicted of resisting arrest.

Although it was accepted that the officers had acted in good faith and hadn’t used any unnecessary force when arresting the woman, the charges were dismissed by the magistrate, who also suggested to the prosecution that further police training might be necessary.

The woman reported feeling scared and shaken after the incident. She is said to be considering an official complaint to ACT Policing, but is unable to start civil proceedings as there is a six-month time limit.

The lack of an official complaint also means that there has been no investigation undertaken by police.

What is the legal definition of breaching the peace in NSW?

Breaching the peace is not of itself an offence in NSW but under the Law Enforcement Powers and Responsibilities Act 2002 (LEPRA), police are allowed to arrest or detain a person to prevent a breach of the peace occurring.

As the term “breach of the peace” is not defined in LEPRA, this can lead to a range of different interpretations and misunderstandings.

It is generally understood that for a breach of the peace to occur, there need to be other members of the public present.

A breach of the peace can encompass violent behaviour, loud noise and other disruptive activities.

In the case of the woman in Canberra, it was successfully argued that as nobody else was around, her behaviour couldn’t be classed as a breach of the peace.

Wrongful arrests in NSW

ACT police are not the only ones who get things wrong.

Over the last few years there have been a number of well-publicised cases of the NSW Police Force making wrongful arrests, or overstepping their powers.

In one case last year, a NSW woman sued the police for wrongful arrest after she was arrested in 2010 and charged with conspiracy to murder. The charges against her were later dropped, but the woman had already been humiliated and intimidated in custody, and she asserted that threats had been made against her.

The matter was settled in the NSW District Court in October last year for an undisclosed amount.

On a wider scale, a class action was undertaken in NSW last year against the police service for the wrongful arrest and imprisonment of young people.

The consequences of police misinterpreting or misunderstanding the law can be serious, and can lead to distress and humiliation for members of the public, not to mention the stress, anxiety, inconvenience and expense of having to go through court proceedings.

If you have been wrongfully arrested or detained by police, it’s important that you speak to an experienced criminal lawyer as soon as possible.

A good defence lawyer may be able to get your charges withdrawn and recover your legal costs, and even take further action against police where appropriate.

By Ugur Nedim

criminallaw.com.au 19 Feb 2015

Is it really the case of ignorance police not knowing the law, or is it more like criminal cops and thug cops extortion racket against the masses?