Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Balancing the scales of justice

By Michael Bosscher - posted Wednesday, 19 October 2005


Second, we have taken numerous steps in recent times to limit the ability of an accused person to attack the credit and character of a complainant or of other witnesses giving evidence in the process. Let’s balance that by allowing an accused person to call evidence of good character without the artificial restrictions that are currently imposed. If on the one hand we are going to limit, and some believe appropriately, an attack on character then we should balance that by allowing an accused person to lead evidence of good character in an unfettered way.

Third, we should reimburse the costs of a person acquitted of a criminal offence.

Explaining to a client the whole “social contract” theory after they have been acquitted, and why they cannot recover their costs, if not their reputation, and often their relationships, is the most hollow speech in the world. To them it just seems the ultimate insult and grossly unfair. They have done nothing wrong and have been dreadfully punished. Often the expenses they have been forced to incur have been ruinous, and they should be put back into the same position, at least financially, before the process started.

Advertisement

These are just three practical examples of things that could be done to go someway to realign the balance.

A victim is entitled to feel that they are being treated with dignity, respect and compassion. Many of the legislative changes that have occurred have gone someway to assist in this process. An accused person should also be in a position where they feel that they are being treated with dignity, respect and fairness.

We do not need to diminish those steps that have been taken to assist the victims of crime, what we do need to do is take positive and proactive steps to realign the balance.

The scales of justice illustrate my point. It’s all about the balance.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

13 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Michael Bosscher is managing partner of Brisbane-based national criminal defence law firm Ryan & Bosscher Lawyers.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Michael Bosscher

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Michael Bosscher
Article Tools
Comment 13 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy