Unrecorded convictions.

This week a twenty-one year old female student was before the court, trying to convince a magistrate to apply an " unrecorded conviction " to her act of stupidity - which cost a mining company $ 900,000 in lost production.

This student - and three others - trespassed on the work site of the Dendrobium coal mine and chained themselves to machinery forty metres above the ground. They refused to release their chains - the police were called - and after several hours the rescue people cut them loose and arrested them

During this " demonstration " the mine was shut down and the safety of miners underground put at risk. The reason for this act of vandalism ? The demonstrators are opposed to coal mining because the burning of coal contributes to global warming.

As a result of this sabotage the four were fined a mere $ 1,500 between them and were convicted. They now object to the recorded conviction on the grounds that others previously charged with similar offences - in some instances were given " unrecorded convictions ".

So - what is the difference between a " recorded " and an " unrecorded conviction " ?

A recorded conviction means that the person has a permanent criminal record - and that may be taken into account when applying for employment, and in some cases will automatically reject that person from further employment consideration.

For instance, a criminal would not be considered for entry into the Police academy or for some government employment avenues, or to become a member of the armed services.

This young woman and her friends knowingly committed a criminal act because they considered that their personal opinions were above the law. They caused disruption to other people's working lives - and monetary loss of near a million dollars.

The magistrate gave the right decision when he rejected their appeal - and commented that " They got what they deserved ! "