September 9th, 2006 at 12:30am
Good morning John,
It’s been a very sad week with the loss of Steve Irwin and Peter Brock, and now more bombings in India, and I’m sure plenty of people will talk to you about that, so I might talk about a few other things instead.
Firstly, have you ever thought about all the paper that 2UE uses for things which are only ever read out on-air once (like this email for instance), well Xerox have shown off a prototype of reusable paper. The basic principle is that you print on it with UV light, and then the document fades away after about 16 hours, so you can print on it all over again…imagine how much paper could be saved worldwide…sounds like an idea worth pursuing to me.
I noticed yesterday that the unnamed teenager who stabbed Rowan Barker last year has been released on a two year suspended sentence after being convicted of a crime which carries a maximum ten year gaol sentence…it’s just not right John, I feel very sorry for Rowan, and I sincerely hope the Director of Public Prosecutions appeals the sentence and wins. These overly lenient sentences are driving me nuts John, I’m sick of them…why can’t judges hand down decent sentences any more, it seems like everyone gets away with serious crimes these days. Rowan was nearly killed by this thug, he should not be allowed back out into society.
On a related note, ACT Opposition Leader and Shadow Attorney General, Bill Stefaniak is calling for the double jeopardy laws to be re-worked , he claims they are an anachronism in modern times, and I agree with him. As he points out, if new evidence (such as DNA evidence) can be used to acquit someone, why shouldn’t it be possible to use it to convict someone? Certainly we would need safeguards, but I see nothing wrong with new evidence being presented on appeal. It works in the UK, and it would appear that the New South Wales government are considering it, sounds good to me!
I think Bill sums it up nicely in his press release:
The reforms in the UK which are being considered by the NSW Government mean the Crown may pursue further action where there has been an acquittal for murder, manslaughter or offences attracting life imprisonment where fresh and compelling evidence is now available, (eg. DNA analysis) or where there was a ‘tainted’ acquittal, (eg. where a key witness committed perjury in the trial or people gave false evidence under duress.)
Anyway, I’ll end this email on a light note with a quick joke…
Q: Why did the indecisive chicken cross the road?
A: To get to the other side…er, no — to go shopping…no, not that either…
Enjoy the morning John, and a big hello to Charity, Irene, Georgie and all of the lovely listeners!
Entry Filed under: Talkback Emails