Drink driving busts roll on

Said it before on such posts. Please give me one reason why, if someone has been convicted multiple times for drink driving then we don’t crush their car.

There should be mandatory seizure of the vehicle for every DUI offence, for the duration of the suspension of licence. If it is not their vehicle, then the owner should make an application to the court to have it returned to them, on the condition it is not loaned to the person guilty of the offence.

If Rhys was obeying the conditions set upon him he would not have been driving and A family would not be devastated.

Nobody said Rhys was drink driving – however, he doesn’t have a very clean past though does he? Please Miss, tell us WHY he even got into the car that day???? Why does he seem to be above the law? What is his excuse there?

Miss_Opinionated said :

Sue Refshaugi? Grow a brain! He didn’t make it as a Supreme Court judge by accident. He knows the ins and outs of all legal jurisdiction, has successfully handled a countless number of appeals, is well known and highly regarded and didn’t decide Rhys’ fate light-heartedly – mths of deliberation. As I said before, educate yourselves before submitting what u “speculate” to have happened, it’s just a waste of your time. Go shampoo your hair or something instead hay!

Instead of publishing half a blog, why dont you tell the whole story and not just your dependant view.
For example;
1. How did the former Director of the ACT DPP, which at the time he was director, was reported as having the lowest conviction rate in the country of any DPP, make it as a Supreme Court Judge ?
2. You forgot to mention the numerous unsuccessfull appeals and court cases that he ran with when he was the Director.
3. Why did he, in 2006, choose not to proceed with a particular appeal, in the Supreme Court, in which he was granted the opportunity to appeal, under certain conditions, in relation to a ruling that was made by a Supreme Court Judge, to set aside a Magistrates decision to proceed to trial on a matter that was ruled to have been pursued, by his office of the DPP, under his watch, unfairly and without proper procedure being followed. He argued that it was proper and lawfull to proceed to Trial in the Supreme Court with a “basher Inquiry” instead of a proper committal hearing ever being heard. The matter was ordered back to the Magistrates Court for a committal. He refused to proceed with this appeal, only after he was ordered to pay the defendants costs, weather he win or lose.He then allowed the time frame for his appeal to lapse and stated that, he did not agree that the Supreme Court had the Jurisdiction to make such a condition, in relation to costs, but did concede that to proceed with such an appeal would be negligent.
4. Who is he held with such high regards? (certainly not myself)

5. and finally what brand of shampoo do you suggest?

Tooks said :

Miss_Opinionated said :

Apparently it was proved he was in the wrong place doing the wrong thing was it? Your telling the story, however were you even in the court room on Tuesday? No so shut up. If he was proved wrong why is he being let out in less than a week?! Again, uneducated opinions do not impress me. Comment on an issue you actually have knowledge about if you wish for it to be acknowledged.

He was convicted, was he not? The fact is he is a recidivist traffic offender who shouldn’t have been on the road. Why’s he being let out? Do you know nothing about the court system?

Oh, and how’s this: To make matters worse he was nabbed in the driver’s seat of a car twice more in the three months following Mr Keenan’s death.

Your friend/family member/partner or whatever he is, is an imbecile.

+1

Instead of Miss Opinionated, perhaps Miss Informed or Miss IngThePoint would have been a more apt nom de plume?

Miss_Opinionated said :

Apparently it was proved he was in the wrong place doing the wrong thing was it? Your telling the story, however were you even in the court room on Tuesday? No so shut up. If he was proved wrong why is he being let out in less than a week?! Again, uneducated opinions do not impress me. Comment on an issue you actually have knowledge about if you wish for it to be acknowledged.

He was convicted, was he not? The fact is he is a recidivist traffic offender who shouldn’t have been on the road. Why’s he being let out? Do you know nothing about the court system?

Oh, and how’s this: To make matters worse he was nabbed in the driver’s seat of a car twice more in the three months following Mr Keenan’s death.

Your friend/family member/partner or whatever he is, is an imbecile.

Miss_Opinionated said :

Apparently it was proved he was in the wrong place doing the wrong thing was it? Your telling the story, however were you even in the court room on Tuesday? No so shut up. If he was proved wrong why is he being let out in less than a week?! Again, uneducated opinions do not impress me. Comment on an issue you actually have knowledge about if you wish for it to be acknowledged.

So, the newpaper reported that he was convicted incorrectly?

I am only going on the facts presented in the newspaper article, while I do accept that there may be some discrepencies I find it hard to believe that the fact he was unlicenced at the time & there was enough evidence to be convicted later would be made up. Also that Mr Refshauge has not overturned his convition, just reduced his sentence. So are these facts incorrect?

I do realise I dont have all the facts in front of me, dont get me wrong. Please post up the links to the original court findings & the basis of appeal & I will have a read. I have no doubt that it will give me a clearer understanding of the case & how the law has been interpreted/twisted.

I still dont think it will change the facts above.

Miss_Opinionated said :

Kb1971: please read prior posts before commenting. Rhys was never done DUI.

How about you read my posts?

I have not said he did, I made two unconnected posts which adressed two different points. Neither of them insinuated that he was drunk at the time.

Kb1971: please read prior posts before commenting. Rhys was never done DUI.

Dub: in future trying using a bit of an intelligence when responding

Apparently it was proved he was in the wrong place doing the wrong thing was it? Your telling the story, however were you even in the court room on Tuesday? No so shut up. If he was proved wrong why is he being let out in less than a week?! Again, uneducated opinions do not impress me. Comment on an issue you actually have knowledge about if you wish for it to be acknowledged.

Miss_Opinionated said :

Sue Refshaugi? Grow a brain! He didn’t make it as a Supreme Court judge by accident. He knows the ins and outs of all legal jurisdiction, has successfully handled a countless number of appeals, is well known and highly regarded and didn’t decide Rhys’ fate light-heartedly – mths of deliberation. As I said before, educate yourselves before submitting what u “speculate” to have happened, it’s just a waste of your time. Go shampoo your hair or something instead hay!

My post was actually trying to extract some educated opinions on the subject as I do not know the full ins & outs of the judicial system.

So far I have not been enlightened.

Your ramblings still do not refute the fact that Rhys was in that place at that time doing something he should not be & he was found guilty of it. If he “had grown a brain” then maybe someones grandfather would still be alive today.

That is not defamation 😉

Miss_Opinionated said :

“Drink driving busts roll on” – well of course this is the case and will continue to be the case until Canberra’s government finally has the bright idea to improve public transport by funding more buses, buses servicing more areas and buses running past 1130pm at least two nights a week. Yes yes yes this all costs money…. But couldn’t our rapidly increasing registration fees cover it? I get 3 mths rego at a time and every 3 mths I am faced with a higher registration fee than the last. So my extra cost every 3 mths plus the rest of Canberra driver’s with their increasing registration fees would cover the cost about 10 times more than needed. Also, if the government improved this area of public transport, then at least they will finally have a valid reason, or any reason at all, for Canberra’s heavily increasing vehicle registration.

How is someone drinking & then deciding to get behind a wheel the goverments fault?

It it too hard for someone to plan their evening; “Ohh, I am going to get pissed tonight, I might LEAVE THE CAR AT HOME & get a taxi or a mate to drive me” (provided they are sober). Its not rocket science & it is not a new concept.

Maybe you should “grow a brain”…………….

Well if he was blind enough to hand in his licence and riding into oncoming traffic it’s probably 50/50 he would be dead.

Miss_Opinionated said :

Regarding Rhys and the dead cyclist…. Uneducated opinions don’t impress me. I’m very close to him and sat through all court proceedings. Louis Andrews from the CanberraTimes had very creative and catching articles, but that’s all they were…. He forgot to include any actual facts. For starters, Rhys was never done DUI and wasn’t serving time for the cyclist’s death. Also, cyclist had recently stopped driving due to increasingly bad eyesight…. Was his eyesight better on a bicycle? I doubt it. Both the Magistrate and Supreme Court Judge agreed the cyclist was also at fault. I cannot believe that Louis Andrews and others in similar media roles can actually add untruths and wrong facts to a story just so it gets more readers. The moral of this story: at least educate yourself so that your even entitled have an opinion.

He was suspended and shouldn’t have been driving. End of story.

Awesome, I can see this thread taking off in a big way.

Let’s start with, not supposed to be driving but did anyway and then killed a cyclist.

Discuss.

This.

When an accident happens an one of the people was breaking the law, I tend to immediately dump a fair bit of the blame on them, even if they didn’t necessarily cause it. We do this with drunk drivers, speeding drivers, etc.

If he hadn’t been driving, the dude wouldn’t be dead, QED.

Miss_Opinionated said :

”
What is a defamatory publication?…

…An inference that casts a defamatory imputation is enough to bring an action….

…if only life could be that black and white hay?!***

Want to score some easy money? 🙂
What is the deal with “hay” in your posts? This makes me think that you are either a horse, hungry for hay, or a Queenslander? Looking fwd to your reply.

Mwah. 🙂

“I wonder if a judge could be sued for such a decision??

The only person in this situation who is entitled to sue anyone is Rhys. The following FACTUAL information confirms how this is so:

What is a defamatory publication?

Material that could be found to be defamatory includes that which has the tendency to lower the person in the estimation of others, or that would tend to result in the person being shunned or avoided or that is likely to expose the person to hatred, contempt or ridicule (trivial ridicule or good natured humour is less likely to be problematic than derisory ridicule).

In its 1996 report on defamation law, the A.C.T. Community Law Reform Committee outlined defamation as follows:

“Defamation is the publication of words or images to a person that damages the reputation of another [‘slander’ if spoken words, ‘libel’ if written words or images]. A defamatory statement is one that is likely to cause ordinary, reasonable people to think less of the person about whom the words or images are published. An inference that casts a defamatory imputation is enough to bring an action.

For a defamation action to be successful, it must be established that the communication:
• was published to a third person, i.e. to at least one person other than the plaintiff
• identifies the plaintiff, for example, by name or by a reference to a small group of people
• contains a defamatory statement or imputation (whether intentionally published or not).

Information obtained from http://www.efa.org.au

***Its easier for human emotions to place blame or hold someone responsible when a death involving another occurs. Unfortunately accidents can just happen, through no fault or equal fault of both parties depending on the situation. There is not ALWAYS a villan and hero, if only life could be that black and white hay?!***

Sue Refshaugi? Grow a brain! He didn’t make it as a Supreme Court judge by accident. He knows the ins and outs of all legal jurisdiction, has successfully handled a countless number of appeals, is well known and highly regarded and didn’t decide Rhys’ fate light-heartedly – mths of deliberation. As I said before, educate yourselves before submitting what u “speculate” to have happened, it’s just a waste of your time. Go shampoo your hair or something instead hay!

Regarding Rhys and the dead cyclist…. Uneducated opinions don’t impress me. I’m very close to him and sat through all court proceedings. Louis Andrews from the CanberraTimes had very creative and catching articles, but that’s all they were…. He forgot to include any actual facts. For starters, Rhys was never done DUI and wasn’t serving time for the cyclist’s death. Also, cyclist had recently stopped driving due to increasingly bad eyesight…. Was his eyesight better on a bicycle? I doubt it. Both the Magistrate and Supreme Court Judge agreed the cyclist was also at fault. I cannot believe that Louis Andrews and others in similar media roles can actually add untruths and wrong facts to a story just so it gets more readers. The moral of this story: at least educate yourself so that your even entitled have an opinion.

“Drink driving busts roll on” – well of course this is the case and will continue to be the case until Canberra’s government finally has the bright idea to improve public transport by funding more buses, buses servicing more areas and buses running past 1130pm at least two nights a week. Yes yes yes this all costs money…. But couldn’t our rapidly increasing registration fees cover it? I get 3 mths rego at a time and every 3 mths I am faced with a higher registration fee than the last. So my extra cost every 3 mths plus the rest of Canberra driver’s with their increasing registration fees would cover the cost about 10 times more than needed. Also, if the government improved this area of public transport, then at least they will finally have a valid reason, or any reason at all, for Canberra’s heavily increasing vehicle registration.

carnardly said :

oops – sorry folks.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/cyclists-death-driver-guilty/2182791.aspx

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/serial-traffic-offender-gets-an-early-release/2367371.aspx?storypage=1

This gives me the sh!ts a bit. Mr Refshauge didn’t find Mr Wilkins not guilty in the appeal but decided to reduce the terms of sentencing anyway? Despite a long history of disqualified driving & the potential to do it again?

Sounds like Mr Refshauge felt he must have had to make a change to the sentencing for the sake of it. I live in Tuggers & drive that area regularly, is Mr Refshauge going to look after me if I encounter this bloke in an accident situation?

I wonder if a judge could be sued for such a decision?

Please educate me……….

oops – sorry folks.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/cyclists-death-driver-guilty/2182791.aspx

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/serial-traffic-offender-gets-an-early-release/2367371.aspx?storypage=1

carnardly said :

Not specifically related to drink driving, but look at Rhys Wilkins as a prime example.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/lo … 82791.aspx

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/lo … torypage=1

The guy that was under strict bail conditions prohibiting him from driving… (I thought the suspended licence was supposed to do that in the first place!).

But he chose to drive and he killed an innocent man through is actions.

Then his defence lawyer tried to blame the cyclist.

This guy blew all his chances when he chose to disregard every penalty applied to him.

4 months in jail doesn’t seem much for a human life with a string of offences behind you.

If you read this Rhys – grow up, and please think about others and not just yourself in future.

links don’t work….

Not specifically related to drink driving, but look at Rhys Wilkins as a prime example.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/lo … 82791.aspx

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/lo … torypage=1

The guy that was under strict bail conditions prohibiting him from driving… (I thought the suspended licence was supposed to do that in the first place!). But he chose to drive and he killed an innocent man through is actions. Then his defence lawyer tried to blame the cyclist.

This guy blew all his chances when he chose to disregard every penalty applied to him. 4 months in jail doesn’t seem much for a human life with a string of offences behind you.

If you read this Rhys – grow up, and please think about others and not just yourself in future.

Every time ACTP conducts RBT- most of the caught drivers, as it turns out, were previously caught.Fines do not deter them from re-offending.
Perhaps, it is time for drastic measures- pull those d**kheads out of a car , put them on their knees by the kerb , one shot in the back of the head.
I don’t see any other way these people can be educated and others warned of dangers of DUI .:-/