Slain gangland boss Carl Williams' daughter to receive Victorian Government payout

 

Photo: Melbourne crime figure Carl William was bashed to death in prison in 2010.

The daughter of slain gangland boss Carl Williams is set to receive a payout from the Victorian Government over her father's prison bashing death.

Williams was bludgeoned to death by fellow inmate Matthew Johnson at the maximum-security Acacia Unit in Barwon Prison in 2010, and in 2012 his family sued the state of Victoria for failing to protect him.

Williams' father George, daughter Dhakota and former wife Roberta claimed authorities failed in their duty of care because they should have been aware of the risk Johnson posed and properly monitored the unit.

The two parties have reached an out-of-court settlement, a week before the matter was due before the court.

She's still a minor and it's not appropriate to engage in commentary that would cause further distress to her.

Martin Pakula, Victorian Attorney-General

George and Roberta Williams have withdrawn their claim for damages, but the Government has reached a settlement with teenager Dhakota, who was nine years old when her father was killed.

Attorney-General Martin Pakula issued a statement on Tuesday evening saying the terms of the settlement were confidential and subject to Supreme Court approval.

 Photo: Dhakota Williams was nine-years-old when her father was killed in 2010. (AFP: Scott Barbour)

"The Victorian Government will not pay any compensation to George or Roberta Williams," he said.

"The Government denies any liability regarding Mr Williams' death in 2010 and the terms of settlement reflect this."

Mr Pakula did not say how much money Dhakota Williams would receive.

"Any funds paid to a minor are held in a court trust fund, supervised by the senior master of the Supreme Court, until the minor turns 18," he said in the statement.

Shadow attorney-general John Pesutto said the Premier must ensure that "not a single cent" of the compensation is able to be used, directly or indirectly, for the personal benefit of any adult member of the Williams family.

"The Victorian public is owed a full and honest explanation from Daniel Andrews on why he's agreed to pay out this compensation when he is saying the state of Victoria has no liability to do so," he said.

Mr Pakula said the Government had a responsibility to avoid "unnecessary and expensive litigation wherever possible".

"It needs to be remembered that Dhakota Williams, at the time of her father's death was nine years old," he said.

"She's still a minor and it's not appropriate to engage in commentary that would cause further distress to her.

"She was and remains an innocent person in this matter."

The family claimed Williams' killer had a history of attacking other inmates, including with parts of an exercise bike, and the state should have known of his heavy involvement with the notorious Prisoners of War jailhouse gang.

They also claimed they had lost financial benefits they expected in return for Williams' cooperating with police.

abc.net.au  15 July 2015

The Victorian government SHOULD be sued to the eyeballs.

As stated on national television, by the current Speaker of the House, Bronwyn Bishop: 

"The first job of a government is to look after the safety of its people".

Since the government failed to "look after the safety" of Carl Williams, it is an OBLIGATION of the Williams family to sue.

The validity of the Australian Constitution according to the Parliament of Australia

We may have our views on the Australian Constitution and its legal / lawful standing.

Some may say that it did not get Royal Assent.

Some may say  that Queen Victoria, went blind and did not sign off on it.

Some may even say that because she was a 'root rat' she contracted syphilis and lost the plot.

One thing is definitely true that being that her great great grand children are married and fornicated to produce offspring by the names of Charles, Anne, Andrew and Edward.

In inbred breeding program was not confined to the Isles, but also included the mainland of Europe.

Blood 'thinners' the like of Dianna, Mary and Kate ensured the retard factor was kept at bay.

But back to the topic at hand.

Irrespective of the 'corporate' status of this 'default' government, the Australian Constitution is recognised in official documentation.

A current print (15 July 2015) from the PARLIAMENT of AUSTRALIA's web site address of:

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Work_of_the_Parliament/Forming_and_Governing_a_Nation/parl

is available for download (3 pp and 107KB) at:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B21_coIgIYu2Rms3aU5TM3loTWM/view?usp=sharing

Containing the following information:

Parliament An Overview

• The Parliamentary System
• Separation of Powers
• The Commonwealth Parliament
  • Governor-General
  • The Senate
  • The House of Representatives
• Executive Government
• Federal Judicature
• Further Information

The Parliamentary System

The Australian Constitution of 1901 established a federal system of government. Under this system, powers are distributed between a national government (the Commonwealth) and the six States (three Territories - the Australian Capital Territory, the Northern Territory, and Norfolk Island have self-government arrangements). The Constitution defines the boundaries of law-making powers between the Commonwealth and the States/Territories.
The Constitution: Full Description (HTML version)| PDF]

The Commonwealth Parliament

The Parliament is at the very heart of the Australian national government. The Parliament consists of the Queen (represented by the Governor-General) and two Houses (the Senate and the House of Representatives). These three elements make Australia a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy.
There are five important functions of parliament:

• to provide for the formation of a government;
• to legislate;
• to provide the funds needed for government;
• to provide a forum for popular representation; and
• to scrutinise the actions of government.

Proposed laws (known as Bills) have to be passed by both Houses and be assented to by the Governor-General before they can become Acts of Parliament. With the exception of laws relating to revenue and taxation (which must be introduced in the House of Representatives), a proposed law can be introduced in either House.

Changes to the Constitution involve action by Parliament and the people. Both Houses of Parliament must agree on a proposed change, or if agreement cannot be reached, the Governor-General can present a proposal to the people. For a proposal to succeed, it must be favoured by a majority of voters in a majority of the states, and by a majority of voters overall.

[House of Representative Infosheet No. 7 - Making Laws | Senate Brief No. 8 - The Senate and Legislation]

The Governor-General

The Governor-General is appointed by the Queen on the advice of the Prime Minister. The Governor-General performs a large number of functions which are defined by the Constitution, but fall roughly into three categories: constitutional and statutory duties, formal ceremonial duties, and non-ceremonial social duties. On virtually all matters, however, the Governor-General acts on the advice of the Ministry.

The Senate

The Senate has 76 Senators - 12 are elected for each of the 6 states, and 2 each for the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory. State Senators are elected for 6 year terms, territory Senators for 3 year terms.

Historically, the Senate has been regarded as a State's House: the States enjoy equal representation in the Senate, regardless of their population, and State matters are still important to Senators.

The modern Senate is a very powerful Chamber. Bills cannot become law unless they are agreed to in the same terms by each House, except in the rare circumstances of a double dissolution followed by a joint sitting of both the houses

The Senate has a highly developed committee system and Senators spend much of their time on committee work.

The House of Representatives

The House of Representatives has 150 Members - each representing a separate electoral division. Members are elected for terms of up to 3 years.

The most distinctive feature of the House is that the party or group with majority support in the House forms the Government. The accountability of the Government is illustrated every sitting day, especially during Question Time.

Members have many other functions. They are involved in law making, committee work and in representing their electors.

Executive Government

The Prime Minister is appointed by the Governor-General, who by convention under the Constitution, must appoint the parliamentary leader of the party, or coalition of parties, which has a majority of seats in the House of Representatives. This majority party becomes the government and provides the ministers, all of whom must be members of Parliament.

The Federal Executive Council, referred to in the Constitution, comprises all ministers, with the Governor-General presiding. Its principal functions are to receive ministerial advice and approve the signing of formal documents such as proclamations, regulations, ordinances and statutory appointments.
Australia operates under a Cabinet system of government. The Cabinet, not mentioned in the Constitution, is the key decision-making body of the government and comprises senior Government Ministers. The decisions of Cabinet are given legal effect by their formal ratification by the Federal Executive Council.
[Australian Commonwealth Government]

Federal Judicature

The Constitution provides for the establishment of the High Court of Australia and such other courts as Parliament may create. The judges of the High Court are appointed by the Governor-General in Council (acting on advice of the Federal Executive Council).

The functions of the High Court are to interpret and apply the law of Australia; to decide cases of special federal significance including challenges to the constitutional validity of laws; and to hear appeals, by special leave, from Federal, State and Territory courts.

Policeman charged by Taskforce Salus

Detectives from Taskforce Salus have today charged a policeman with sexual offences.

The sergeant, who is based in the Southern Metro Region, has been charged with sexual penetration of a child under the age of 16 years and indecent act with a child under the age of 16 years.

The investigation relates to alleged incidents in 1997 when he was a constable.

He will appear in Melbourne Magistrates’ Court on 31 July and has been suspended without pay.

Taskforce Salus was set up in November 2014 to investigate complaints of sexual harrassment, sexual predatory behaviour and sex discrimination within Victoria Police.

Victoria Police Media Unit
41443

vicpolnews.com.au 14 Jul 2015

Another corrupt piece of garbage criminal abusing this position.

There are more crooked cops than there are honest ones.

Lets see how lenient the judicature is on this one.

Why is HIS name not mentioned in the 'media'?

Criminals protecting their own.

Corporate Slavery 101 - operating in the community

Some Australian 'researchers' may say that 'we the people' are 'sovereign'.

Others may say that 'we the people' are subjects of Her Majesty.

Others may say that we are 'citizens' - a term that actually means people of a republic.

Whatever 'you' think is 'your' reality, one fact is true for sure.

All registered 'persons' are pure and simply corporate slaves.

Here is one piece of the puzzle you may want to keep for you 'research', called an "Application for a Victorian Marriage Certificate".

Pay attention to List 2 - Evidence of operating in the community

The scanned page in question is page 3 as seen in illustration below:

P.S. The actual 'Marriage Certificate' you sign is null and void and has no lawful status whatsoever.

Note the actual validity of the Marriage Act (1961) is put aside.

Northern Territory's paperless arrests are unprecedented: High Court submission

The Northern Territory's controversial "paperless arrests", which gives police unprecedented powers to arrest people for minor offences without a warrant, are being challenged in the High Court for bypassing a fair judicial process.

Police are currently able to detain a person for up to four hours for offences including drunkenness, swearing or even "failing to keep a front yard clean" and "playing a musical instrument as to annoy". The arrest can be made if police believe the person has committed, was committing or was about to commit the offence.

No warrant is given and the person may not have the right to apply for bail or contact a lawyer.

In a submission lodged with the High Court by the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency, it says the legislation is taking away people's rights and allowing police to essentially punish people on suspicion of committing a crime.

"The new powers conferred on NT Police are unprecedented in Australia and in the common law world," it says.

According to documents from a freedom of information request, there have been 731 arrests from January to March this year under the new law, of which 525 arrests were of Indigenous people. In May, Kwementyaye Langdon, a 63-year-old Indigenous man, died in police custody in May after being arrested for drinking in public. His death was blamed on the paperless arrests.

The Australian Labor Party, Australian Greens and the Australian Human Rights Commission have voiced their concern over the sweeping laws, saying they undermine people's rights in a state that has the highest incarceration rates in the country.

But NT Attorney-General John Elferink defended the legislation, saying it was not reasonable to expect police officers to do "two and a half to three hours of paperwork" for minor offences that will "very likely lead to a guilty plea".

"What a paperless arrest does is enable a truncated police procedure," he told Fairfax Media. "Trial and determination of guilt or innocence is left entirely to a court or to the person who has received the notice," he said.

"It is very unlikely that a police officer would lock someone up because they think they're about to swear," he said. "That's just absurd. How can you tell if someone is about to swear?"

Mr Elferink, a former police officer, introduced the laws in October last year, saying he encouraged police to make use of their new arrest powers as often as possible.

"I want police to be able to clearly demonstrate to the people of the Northern Territory that they are in control of the streets," he told Parliament.

When asked whether he was concerned about the disproportionate number of Indigenous people now being arrested under these laws, Mr Elferink replied: "I'm concerned that people are being incarcerated on a daily basis irrespective of their race, because when people are arrested it is indicative of issues in our community."
But Labor's Indigenous affairs spokesman Shayne Neumann disagreed, saying the laws had a "disproportionate impact on Aboriginal people."

"Combating crime is an important priority for any government but we cannot abandon the longstanding checks and balances of the criminal justice system," he said.

Greens spokeswoman on Indigenous affairs Rachel Siewert said the laws were left to the discretion of the police officers, which was setting a dangerous precedent.

"It's hugely concerning," she said. "We already have the appallingly high incarceration rate in the Northern Territory and in Western Australia … and we're trying to address that and this does need a national response."

President of the Human Rights Commission, Professor Gillian Triggs, told an audience at the Law Institute of Victoria that the paperless arrests "exacerbated" the disproportionate amount of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders being held in detention.

She said such powers permitted detention for several hours without the person being brought to court for offences that "in many cases do not even attract the sanction of imprisonment".

Professor of law George Williams said the law was "remarkable" given the long history of powers being misused by public officials in the Northern Territory. 

"I'm deeply concerned by the law, it's impact, and it is repeating some mistakes such as the mandatory detention scheme on the late 1990s," said Professor Williams, from the University of NSW.

"It led to suicide in jail and a big impact on the Aboriginal community before it was used."

Indigenous people comprise more than 85 per cent of the prison population in the Northern Territory despite making up only 30 per cent of the general population.

The case will go before the High Court in September.

canberratimes.com.au 12 Jul 2015

 

Australia is truly a rouge police state.

 

This policy of "paperless arrests" is the mentality of a government running a penal colony and NOT a 'democratic' society, as we are led to believe we live in.