Legal community warns Tony Abbott's comments could prejudice future trial
The Prime Minister's office says the Australian Federal Police (AFP) Commissioner gave Tony Abbott "prior consent" to directly quote in Parliament from evidence in a Sydney terrorism case, but some members of the legal community say it could still prejudice a future trial.
Yesterday the Prime Minister read from a transcript of a video, which was seized when two men were arrested in Sydney earlier this week, and charged with plotting an imminent terrorist attack.
A spokesman for Mr Abbott said "the Prime Minister quoted the translation with the prior consent of the Commissioner of the AFP, Andrew Colvin".
President of the New South Wales Bar Association, Jane Needham SC, said public commentary about the case could have serious consequences for the legal process.
"What could happen is that the court could find it impossible to have a jury empanelled who was not affected by the comments," she said.
"And that could mean that the men could not receive a fair trial, because the jury had already made up their minds, or that their trials might be
stayed, and that has happened in the past where comments made in Parliament have been the basis of a stay application later."
Ms Needham said police and prosecutors should be allowed to get on with their job.
"Well I note that the Prime Minister says that he had the prior consent of the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police, but the prosecutions of these men should be left, in the Association's view, to take their proper course, and not to have the kind of commentary that has been attached to the transcript of the film," she said.
Prominent Australian barrister Robert Richter QC also said he believed the Prime Minister's comments could be prejudicial.
"To make those sorts of inflammatory utterances is calculated to influence the judicial process and it's being done for a political purpose," he said.
The information Mr Abbott read to Parliament is contained in the statement of facts police present to court as part of the case. That information has not yet been made public.
"I take no position on whether a left or right coalition can govern Australia better – whether Australia needs a revolt from within the ruling coalition or a national election victory by the left," he wrote in conclusion. "But a country that for decades has punched above its weight on nearly every international issue surely can do much better for a prime minister than Tony Abbott."
(12/2/2015 Sydney Morning Herald)
Abbott的笑話不勝枚舉，馬航M17在烏克蘭上空被擊落後，38個澳洲人遇難。Abbott被問及怎樣向Putin交涉，他竟然誇口要在G20峯會跟Putin「講手」(I am going to shirt front Mr Putin)。總理可能忘了Putin是KBG出身，柔道黑帶。一國領袖真的捲起衫袖恐怕也不是人家對手，又何必講這些幼稚話，就算是亞諾舒華辛力加這種筋肉人，國際糾紛就憑「隻揪」解決？別笑死人好了。Abbott頭腦簡單得可憐，影響了澳洲的國際形象。
Yesterday the Prime Minister read from a transcript of a video, which was seized when two men were arrested in Sydney earlier this week, and charged with plotting an imminent terrorist attack.
A spokesman for Mr Abbott said "the Prime Minister quoted the translation with the prior consent of the Commissioner of the AFP, Andrew Colvin".
President of the New South Wales Bar Association, Jane Needham SC, said public commentary about the case could have serious consequences for the legal process.
"What could happen is that the court could find it impossible to have a jury empanelled who was not affected by the comments," she said.
"And that could mean that the men could not receive a fair trial, because the jury had already made up their minds, or that their trials might be
stayed, and that has happened in the past where comments made in Parliament have been the basis of a stay application later."
Ms Needham said police and prosecutors should be allowed to get on with their job.
"Well I note that the Prime Minister says that he had the prior consent of the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police, but the prosecutions of these men should be left, in the Association's view, to take their proper course, and not to have the kind of commentary that has been attached to the transcript of the film," she said.
Prominent Australian barrister Robert Richter QC also said he believed the Prime Minister's comments could be prejudicial.
"To make those sorts of inflammatory utterances is calculated to influence the judicial process and it's being done for a political purpose," he said.
The information Mr Abbott read to Parliament is contained in the statement of facts police present to court as part of the case. That information has not yet been made public.
(13/2/2015 ABC news)
在世界政治舞臺，澳洲從John Howard和布殊稱兄道弟開始，開了新局面，似乎舉足輕重。到了Tony Abbott上場，這個總理爆出的笑話實在太多，一次又一次嘆為觀止。單是昨日在國會的發言，就有兩則。澳洲沒有人權法，但也有人權委員會，該會近日發表報告，批評澳洲政府對難民兒童的覊押不人道，Abbott竟然可以這樣回應：
Prime Minister Tony Abbott yesterday attacked the Australian Human Rights Commission over its report into children in immigration detention, saying "the Human Rights Commission should be ashamed of itself".(13/2/2015 The Age)
辭令欠政治人物的風範不在講，由本國人權委員會作人道對待難民孩童的呼籲，免除他們的覊押，又怎會使其 'ashamed of itself' 呢？總理大可以自圓其説，講澳洲已人道對待難民，而另一方面也不會變成鼓勵為經濟利益而非真正尋求庇護的人來澳。
最近悉尼拘捕了兩名伊斯蘭激進分子，指他們策動在街上斬頭的恐怖活動，他們已被帶上庭，進入司法程序。拘捕過程中同時檢獲一些錄影帶，顯示其中一個被告涉及使用暴力的指控，總理昨日在國會讀出影帶謄本(transcript)的部份內容，怪不得大律師公會指責他的言論會影響日後審訊的公正性，我相信辯方可藉此申請永久終止聆訊，日後這影帶若被法庭判令不能呈堂的話，總理豈不是先走了後門，把證據呈給國民，先入為主，公審被告。
不要以為總理不懂法律所以胡謅，他是悉尼大學法律系畢業的，之後還考取了Rhodes Scholarship，獲錄取入牛津，故此並非目不識丁的人。當然就算有學問也未必懂政治，不是我對他有偏見，美國智庫(think tank)最近的報告指Abbott是民主工業國家領袖中最無能的人，不妨引述幾段報導來看下：
A leading United States think tank has published a piece posing the question, "Is Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott the most incompetent leader of any industrialised democracy?" and answering, quite comprehensively, in the affirmative.
Published on the Council on Foreign Relations website before Mr Abbott survived a spill motion on Monday, the piece argues that he has proven so "shockingly incompetent" that he deserved to lose his job.
"Abbott hahs proven so incapable of clear policy thinking, so unwilling to consult with even his own ministers and advisers, and so poor at communicating that he has to go," wrote the CFR senior fellow Joshua Kurlantzick, a US specialist in south-east Asian politics.
Prime Minister Tony Abbott yesterday attacked the Australian Human Rights Commission over its report into children in immigration detention, saying "the Human Rights Commission should be ashamed of itself".(13/2/2015 The Age)
辭令欠政治人物的風範不在講，由本國人權委員會作人道對待難民孩童的呼籲，免除他們的覊押，又怎會使其 'ashamed of itself' 呢？總理大可以自圓其説，講澳洲已人道對待難民，而另一方面也不會變成鼓勵為經濟利益而非真正尋求庇護的人來澳。
最近悉尼拘捕了兩名伊斯蘭激進分子，指他們策動在街上斬頭的恐怖活動，他們已被帶上庭，進入司法程序。拘捕過程中同時檢獲一些錄影帶，顯示其中一個被告涉及使用暴力的指控，總理昨日在國會讀出影帶謄本(transcript)的部份內容，怪不得大律師公會指責他的言論會影響日後審訊的公正性，我相信辯方可藉此申請永久終止聆訊，日後這影帶若被法庭判令不能呈堂的話，總理豈不是先走了後門，把證據呈給國民，先入為主，公審被告。
不要以為總理不懂法律所以胡謅，他是悉尼大學法律系畢業的，之後還考取了Rhodes Scholarship，獲錄取入牛津，故此並非目不識丁的人。當然就算有學問也未必懂政治，不是我對他有偏見，美國智庫(think tank)最近的報告指Abbott是民主工業國家領袖中最無能的人，不妨引述幾段報導來看下：
A leading United States think tank has published a piece posing the question, "Is Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott the most incompetent leader of any industrialised democracy?" and answering, quite comprehensively, in the affirmative.
Published on the Council on Foreign Relations website before Mr Abbott survived a spill motion on Monday, the piece argues that he has proven so "shockingly incompetent" that he deserved to lose his job.
"Abbott hahs proven so incapable of clear policy thinking, so unwilling to consult with even his own ministers and advisers, and so poor at communicating that he has to go," wrote the CFR senior fellow Joshua Kurlantzick, a US specialist in south-east Asian politics.
...........
(12/2/2015 Sydney Morning Herald)
Abbott的笑話不勝枚舉，馬航M17在烏克蘭上空被擊落後，38個澳洲人遇難。Abbott被問及怎樣向Putin交涉，他竟然誇口要在G20峯會跟Putin「講手」(I am going to shirt front Mr Putin)。總理可能忘了Putin是KBG出身，柔道黑帶。一國領袖真的捲起衫袖恐怕也不是人家對手，又何必講這些幼稚話，就算是亞諾舒華辛力加這種筋肉人，國際糾紛就憑「隻揪」解決？別笑死人好了。Abbott頭腦簡單得可憐，影響了澳洲的國際形象。
權力使人腐化，政治使人傻頭傻腦。
回覆刪除傻頭傻腦的人踏上政治之路就更加傻了。
刪除他不傻, 这件事是他可利用的筹码.
刪除當真，恐怕他離下台不遠。
刪除