The ultimate horror for any man is to be falsely accused of rape - and then named and shamed in the national media. That is exactly what happened to a thirty-four year old man who had the misfortune to be the only other occupant of a train carriage with a seventeen year old girl.
This girl went to station staff at Strathfield rail station and claimed that the man had forced her off the train and taken her to a disabled toilet - where he had raped her. The police were called, cctv footage examined and the alleged attacker identified - and promptly arrested.
He spent four nights in Silverwater prison as the case began to unravel. On Sunday, the police withdrew their objection to bail and this was granted. When the accused was placed before a magistrate it was revealed that there were " significant changes to the police case " - and subsequently all charges were dropped. The accused walked free.
Days earlier another young woman claimed a car pulled up beside her and a man tried to abduct her. She gave a vivid description of her assailant and the police began a search of cctv footage - and quickly found this to be a false story. The cctv coverage revealed the accuser standing in a nearby lane having a smoke when this claimed abduction was happening.
Making a false claim is a crime but the police are unable to say whether charges will be laid in either of these two cases. If this seventeen year old girl is charged the fact that she is classed as a juvenile will see her name and photograph barred from media publication. Her victim was not so lucky !
Rape is a horrible crime and a rapist deserves public vilification, but even when complete innocence is proven, the stigma sticks in the eyes of some people. It can hover in the background and affect career prospects - and in some cases ruins marriages.
Many people will wonder why we are seeing a surge of false accusations. Is it a feminist act of revenge against men ? Is it an attempt to attract publicity in the hope that this may launch a media career ? Is it sheer boredom - and an attempt to liven things up ? Is it a mental derangement caused by drugs ?
It will certainly do a disservice to women. The next time a victim cries rape or some other type of sexual attack there will be a doubt in many people's minds. It is essential that the police pursue all false reports of crime with vigour. Only then do the full details get an airing in the media - which helps to clear those falsely accused - but it also brings home to the accuser the price they will pay for this type of senseless action.
If these cases are quietly dropped - a false accuser gets all the benefits they hoped for - without a penalty !
Friday, 31 January 2014
Thursday, 30 January 2014
When love turns to hate !
The news that the bodies of a thirty-five year old man and his four year old daughter have been found side by side in sand dunes will chill the hearts of many separated couples who share access rights to the children of their former union. This man was supposed to return his daughter to her mother on January 11 after an access visit and their disappearance sparked a huge search by police and SES workers. Nineteen days later their badly decomposed bodies were found near the handover location.
The safety of such children comes close to paranoia to many people. Relationships between parents often end bitterly and both parties can be guilty of using a child as a pawn in an ongoing war. Usually, a court grants custody of the child to one parent and grants visiting access to the other, and this can be the point of friction that lights the fuse of revenge.
It is not unknown for one parent to abscond with the child and disappear into an overseas country. Religious laws in some parts of the world are used to gain protection and it is not unusual for a suspicious parent to have a child's name and details entered into a customs embargo to prevent their child from being processed outward at an Australian airport.
This is not always successful if the absconder is a wealthy person. Many will remember a Prince from a northern neighbouring country who spirited his children overseas on a luxury yacht while here on an access visit. He clearly broke Australian law and his country not only refused extradition, but also ignored the Hague convention which required stolen children to be repatriated. That mother only regained access when her children reached the age to make their own legal decisions.
Shared access is fraught with friction. Many separated couples continue to play the blame game. Most genuinely love their children, but love is a double edged sword. It can become a weapon to deprive the other partner of his or her emotional empathy and union with the child - as the ultimate form of revenge - or it can become a self centred obsession that leads to murder/suicide as the only way out of a situation that this person rejects.
Fortunately, only a small fraction of child sharing turns so deadly. Many separated people continue to bicker, but the vast majority put their lives in order and children seem to possess an uncanny ability to adapt to the middle ground between warring parents. In many instances, it is the children who are the peace makers.
Unfortunately, news of this tragic event will send an undercurrent of fear through many people's minds. Many will wonder at the mental stability of their former partner - probably quite irrationally - and dread the timing of the next access visit. There will be a tendency to refuse access - and that can only make a difficult situation worse.
The safety of such children comes close to paranoia to many people. Relationships between parents often end bitterly and both parties can be guilty of using a child as a pawn in an ongoing war. Usually, a court grants custody of the child to one parent and grants visiting access to the other, and this can be the point of friction that lights the fuse of revenge.
It is not unknown for one parent to abscond with the child and disappear into an overseas country. Religious laws in some parts of the world are used to gain protection and it is not unusual for a suspicious parent to have a child's name and details entered into a customs embargo to prevent their child from being processed outward at an Australian airport.
This is not always successful if the absconder is a wealthy person. Many will remember a Prince from a northern neighbouring country who spirited his children overseas on a luxury yacht while here on an access visit. He clearly broke Australian law and his country not only refused extradition, but also ignored the Hague convention which required stolen children to be repatriated. That mother only regained access when her children reached the age to make their own legal decisions.
Shared access is fraught with friction. Many separated couples continue to play the blame game. Most genuinely love their children, but love is a double edged sword. It can become a weapon to deprive the other partner of his or her emotional empathy and union with the child - as the ultimate form of revenge - or it can become a self centred obsession that leads to murder/suicide as the only way out of a situation that this person rejects.
Fortunately, only a small fraction of child sharing turns so deadly. Many separated people continue to bicker, but the vast majority put their lives in order and children seem to possess an uncanny ability to adapt to the middle ground between warring parents. In many instances, it is the children who are the peace makers.
Unfortunately, news of this tragic event will send an undercurrent of fear through many people's minds. Many will wonder at the mental stability of their former partner - probably quite irrationally - and dread the timing of the next access visit. There will be a tendency to refuse access - and that can only make a difficult situation worse.
Wednesday, 29 January 2014
Respecting our flag !
Purists are appalled at the way we treat the Australian flag at events such as Australia day. Not only is it worn as an item of clothing but some drape it over their shoulders like a cape and it is not unusual to see it spread on the ground and used as a rug at picnics. Australia day brings a sea of flags and these include those fluttering from the radio masts of cars to flags used as window ornaments in apartment blocks.
There are strict protocols that apply to national flags. They should only be flown on flag poles between sunrise and sunset and etiquette applies whenever they appear on social occasions. This even dictates how they should be arranged when used as a mark of respect on the coffin at a funeral. Entire books have been written detailing the customs and procedures that apply to flags.
We once despaired that Australians had turned their backs on our national flag. Early in the last century it was the Union Jack that flew on most public occasions and many lamented that the flag poles of Australian cities were bare on national days. At war, Australian soldiers were more likely to be fighting under the Union Jack than the Australian flag, and in many cases our flag was unknown to those from other countries.
Australian tourists visiting the United States were amazed at the reverence with which the " Stars and Stripes " was held in that country. The flag was everywhere - outside citizens homes and proudly flying from most public buildings. It seemed that Americans identified with their flag in a way that had not taken hold here in Australia.
That changed several decades ago. It was probably Australian sporting successes that created a desire in spectators to show their identity, but suddenly Australian flags began to appear in the crowd at the Davis cup and at the cricket. Years later - both the Australian flag and the " Boxing Kangaroo " became a crescendo of flag waving when the Americas cup victory became a national event - and from there it was unstoppable !
The purists may grumble, but this is a country that has always disdained the rules and regulations handed down by those who consider themselves the elite. The Australian custom of addressing others by their given name shocked the class conscious people of Britain and our early beginnings required the tradition of " helping a mate " for sheer survival in this new country.
The way we " show the flag " is the Australian way - and it shows no disrespect. Rather than flying the flag on a remote flag pole, the individual bearing the flag as a painted ornament on their face or as something they wear or carry is proclaiming to the world their origin. Our flag has taken it's place amongst the flags of the world - and anyone seeking to change it would suffer a huge backlash.
The more it becomes the flag of the Australian people, the less likely to suffer change if we ever become a Republic.
There are strict protocols that apply to national flags. They should only be flown on flag poles between sunrise and sunset and etiquette applies whenever they appear on social occasions. This even dictates how they should be arranged when used as a mark of respect on the coffin at a funeral. Entire books have been written detailing the customs and procedures that apply to flags.
We once despaired that Australians had turned their backs on our national flag. Early in the last century it was the Union Jack that flew on most public occasions and many lamented that the flag poles of Australian cities were bare on national days. At war, Australian soldiers were more likely to be fighting under the Union Jack than the Australian flag, and in many cases our flag was unknown to those from other countries.
Australian tourists visiting the United States were amazed at the reverence with which the " Stars and Stripes " was held in that country. The flag was everywhere - outside citizens homes and proudly flying from most public buildings. It seemed that Americans identified with their flag in a way that had not taken hold here in Australia.
That changed several decades ago. It was probably Australian sporting successes that created a desire in spectators to show their identity, but suddenly Australian flags began to appear in the crowd at the Davis cup and at the cricket. Years later - both the Australian flag and the " Boxing Kangaroo " became a crescendo of flag waving when the Americas cup victory became a national event - and from there it was unstoppable !
The purists may grumble, but this is a country that has always disdained the rules and regulations handed down by those who consider themselves the elite. The Australian custom of addressing others by their given name shocked the class conscious people of Britain and our early beginnings required the tradition of " helping a mate " for sheer survival in this new country.
The way we " show the flag " is the Australian way - and it shows no disrespect. Rather than flying the flag on a remote flag pole, the individual bearing the flag as a painted ornament on their face or as something they wear or carry is proclaiming to the world their origin. Our flag has taken it's place amongst the flags of the world - and anyone seeking to change it would suffer a huge backlash.
The more it becomes the flag of the Australian people, the less likely to suffer change if we ever become a Republic.
Tuesday, 28 January 2014
Ten Pound Poms !
There are a lot of people living in Australia who think they are Australian citizens - until they need a passport to have a cruise or take a holiday in Bali - and find that their status remains merely that of a " permitted resident " !
It all harks back to the days after the end of the second world war when the Australian government adopted the " Populate or perish " theme and urgently installed what became known as the " Ten Pound Pom " offer. People holding British citizenship were invited to migrate to Australia with the Australian government paying their fare in exchange for their contribution of ten English pounds for each adult. Children travelled free and between 1945 and 1969 80,000 people arrived on our shores.
This offer contained conditions that did not apply to other immigrants from Europe. People from Britain were granted all the rights that native born Australians take for granted. They were immediately able to vote in Federal, state and council elections, stand for parliament and access social services on equal terms. Most saw no difference and assumed that this included citizenship, hence few bothered to start the process of applying for citizenship in Australia.
Many who arrived as little children - and some who were actually born on board the boat during the journey - grew up and went to school believing they were normal Aussie kids. Today - many of them are approaching old age and have families of their own, born in this country and therefore legal citizens. It comes as a shock to learn that their own status is not so secure.
Should one of these " Ten Pound Poms " commit a serious crime that results in a gaol sentence, upon release the Australian government could deport that person back to England by cancelling the " permitted resident " status. This has happened on occasion, much to the dismay of those who thought they were enjoying all the protection and safety of Australian citizenship - only to find that this was not so. !
Many people who have lived here their entire adult lives have had no reason to question their citizenship. It is usually when need for a passport arises that they discover that they are denied this document and must apply to a country which to them is completely " foreign ".
Those finding themselves in that situation would be well advised to rectify the omission - and lodge a citizenship application !
It all harks back to the days after the end of the second world war when the Australian government adopted the " Populate or perish " theme and urgently installed what became known as the " Ten Pound Pom " offer. People holding British citizenship were invited to migrate to Australia with the Australian government paying their fare in exchange for their contribution of ten English pounds for each adult. Children travelled free and between 1945 and 1969 80,000 people arrived on our shores.
This offer contained conditions that did not apply to other immigrants from Europe. People from Britain were granted all the rights that native born Australians take for granted. They were immediately able to vote in Federal, state and council elections, stand for parliament and access social services on equal terms. Most saw no difference and assumed that this included citizenship, hence few bothered to start the process of applying for citizenship in Australia.
Many who arrived as little children - and some who were actually born on board the boat during the journey - grew up and went to school believing they were normal Aussie kids. Today - many of them are approaching old age and have families of their own, born in this country and therefore legal citizens. It comes as a shock to learn that their own status is not so secure.
Should one of these " Ten Pound Poms " commit a serious crime that results in a gaol sentence, upon release the Australian government could deport that person back to England by cancelling the " permitted resident " status. This has happened on occasion, much to the dismay of those who thought they were enjoying all the protection and safety of Australian citizenship - only to find that this was not so. !
Many people who have lived here their entire adult lives have had no reason to question their citizenship. It is usually when need for a passport arises that they discover that they are denied this document and must apply to a country which to them is completely " foreign ".
Those finding themselves in that situation would be well advised to rectify the omission - and lodge a citizenship application !
Monday, 27 January 2014
The " Power " game !
Our entire society is governed by use use of " power " to control the way we live. The government has the power to enact laws that dictate what level of taxes we will pay. The police enforce the laws that control personal behaviour across the broad spectrum of our daily lives. The " Boss " dictates the rules we must follow in whatever job delivers us a pay check. This same " power " decides everything from the way we drive a car on the road to what constitutes an illegal substance that we are forbidden to possess.
It has become abundantly clear that the baton of power in the education system has passed from the hands of the teaching profession and now is firmly controlled by the students. In almost every incidence of disharmony between teacher and student, the education department sides with the student and often this ends with the teacher being reprimanded - or dismissed from his or her job.
There is simply no check on what students choose to do in the classroom. If they answer calls on their mobile phone or decide to make outward calls during the lesson the teacher is restricted to politely asking that the phone be handed over. If the student refuses - the teacher must accept that refusal, despite further phone traffic interrupting the class lesson for other students.
If a student punches a teacher or in any way delivers violence, the teacher is at fault for any defensive action. One teacher who put such a student into a headlock was dismissed from further service and is now taking legal action against the education department. The only punishment available to a school for disruptive behaviour by a student - is suspension from classes for a period of time.
Students can be insolent, deliberately disruptive, manipulative, violent - and often totally supported by coddling parents who are quick to run to the media with complaints against any form of threatened discipline. Today's kids have access to a wide band of social media. They may be disinterested in learning English and maths - but they are very interested to learn their " rights " - and astute in developing ways of using those rights to their advantage.
They have learned that the threat to claim " sexual misconduct " is a very powerful weapon, and even the suggestion that they have been " inappropriately touched " by a teacher will have immense consequences for that person. In most cases, the education department will stand down that person from active teaching while the matter is investigated - and even if the claim is dismissed, it will have a long term effect on further promotional prospects.
This passing of the baton of power has resulted in a failed education system. We are churning out a proportion of students without the skills to hold down a paying job and this is developing into an underclass to the detriment of our society.
If removing those who refuse to learn is the only way of restoring excellence to our education system - then so be it ! It is essential that power be restored to those tasked with guiding students in their studies and that those with aspirations to a better life have access to education that is not disrupted by a noisy minority.
Education is a privilege that costs the taxpayer a lot of money. Those same taxpayers have a right to a system that rewards parents who encourage their children to obey the rules and learn in an environment where they have every chance of success. Sadly, those that reject that opportunity have no place disrupting the achievements of the many and there is no point in forcing their attendance at school.
If they are destined to fall by the wayside in life - it is by their personal choice !
It has become abundantly clear that the baton of power in the education system has passed from the hands of the teaching profession and now is firmly controlled by the students. In almost every incidence of disharmony between teacher and student, the education department sides with the student and often this ends with the teacher being reprimanded - or dismissed from his or her job.
There is simply no check on what students choose to do in the classroom. If they answer calls on their mobile phone or decide to make outward calls during the lesson the teacher is restricted to politely asking that the phone be handed over. If the student refuses - the teacher must accept that refusal, despite further phone traffic interrupting the class lesson for other students.
If a student punches a teacher or in any way delivers violence, the teacher is at fault for any defensive action. One teacher who put such a student into a headlock was dismissed from further service and is now taking legal action against the education department. The only punishment available to a school for disruptive behaviour by a student - is suspension from classes for a period of time.
Students can be insolent, deliberately disruptive, manipulative, violent - and often totally supported by coddling parents who are quick to run to the media with complaints against any form of threatened discipline. Today's kids have access to a wide band of social media. They may be disinterested in learning English and maths - but they are very interested to learn their " rights " - and astute in developing ways of using those rights to their advantage.
They have learned that the threat to claim " sexual misconduct " is a very powerful weapon, and even the suggestion that they have been " inappropriately touched " by a teacher will have immense consequences for that person. In most cases, the education department will stand down that person from active teaching while the matter is investigated - and even if the claim is dismissed, it will have a long term effect on further promotional prospects.
This passing of the baton of power has resulted in a failed education system. We are churning out a proportion of students without the skills to hold down a paying job and this is developing into an underclass to the detriment of our society.
If removing those who refuse to learn is the only way of restoring excellence to our education system - then so be it ! It is essential that power be restored to those tasked with guiding students in their studies and that those with aspirations to a better life have access to education that is not disrupted by a noisy minority.
Education is a privilege that costs the taxpayer a lot of money. Those same taxpayers have a right to a system that rewards parents who encourage their children to obey the rules and learn in an environment where they have every chance of success. Sadly, those that reject that opportunity have no place disrupting the achievements of the many and there is no point in forcing their attendance at school.
If they are destined to fall by the wayside in life - it is by their personal choice !
Sunday, 26 January 2014
Australia Day !
Australia Day means different things to different people. For most of us, it is an opportunity to reflect on how Australia has evolved into a world country with a steadily growing population and think of what remains to be done in the years ahead. To some of our original Aboriginal citizens it is a day of sorrow. They regard our arrival in 1788 as "Invasion Day " and consider Australia their " lost land " !
Unfortunately, some Aboriginal activists chose to vent their spleen by conducting a racist graffiti attack on the place where Captain Cook landed and on the historic Captain Cook's cottage in Melbourne. It is not possible to turn back the clock and it is totally impossible to right the wrongs of the past - and we accept that our early settlers ran roughshod over the rights of those that preceded them.
The arrival of Europeans brought change to many other continents. The opening up of America to migration saw it's native people herded into reservations. The Spanish conquest of the entire continent of South America resulted in it's native people forced to adopt both the Spanish language and the Catholic religion. The Europeans had a huge advantage in that they had mastered the art of building wooden ships and using the wind to take them to far places - and their use of gun powder gave them a weapon far superior to the spear or arrow.
To all the native people of the world, they have the choice of two options. They can look back and resist the inevitable tide of history that brought an ever expanding world - or they can look forward to the opportunities that our fast developing society can deliver to them and their children.
Those who choose to look back and sullenly resent the presence of non Aborigines are destined to the misery of a life of protest. There is no going back to the life that existed 226 years ago. Change is constant and every living Australian has to cope with the relentless flow of new technology and lifestyle change. It is not possible to swim against that tide.
Fortunately, many Aboriginal people have accepted that the newcomers are here to stay and have grasped the opportunities they bring with them. Many have chosen to live in cities and adopt the lifestyle that pays the bills and creates personal wealth. Their educated children are making their mark in life and are an integral part of modern society.
This Australia Day seems to be an opportunity for decision. The graffiti rejecting integration between Aboriginal and non Aboriginal brings this subject to the fore. Aboriginal people need to decide whether they belong in the new Australia of today - or if they see their place as trying to return to a past that no longer exists.
Hopefully, that decision will be to join the vast multicultural Australia that is taking this country to new heights !
Unfortunately, some Aboriginal activists chose to vent their spleen by conducting a racist graffiti attack on the place where Captain Cook landed and on the historic Captain Cook's cottage in Melbourne. It is not possible to turn back the clock and it is totally impossible to right the wrongs of the past - and we accept that our early settlers ran roughshod over the rights of those that preceded them.
The arrival of Europeans brought change to many other continents. The opening up of America to migration saw it's native people herded into reservations. The Spanish conquest of the entire continent of South America resulted in it's native people forced to adopt both the Spanish language and the Catholic religion. The Europeans had a huge advantage in that they had mastered the art of building wooden ships and using the wind to take them to far places - and their use of gun powder gave them a weapon far superior to the spear or arrow.
To all the native people of the world, they have the choice of two options. They can look back and resist the inevitable tide of history that brought an ever expanding world - or they can look forward to the opportunities that our fast developing society can deliver to them and their children.
Those who choose to look back and sullenly resent the presence of non Aborigines are destined to the misery of a life of protest. There is no going back to the life that existed 226 years ago. Change is constant and every living Australian has to cope with the relentless flow of new technology and lifestyle change. It is not possible to swim against that tide.
Fortunately, many Aboriginal people have accepted that the newcomers are here to stay and have grasped the opportunities they bring with them. Many have chosen to live in cities and adopt the lifestyle that pays the bills and creates personal wealth. Their educated children are making their mark in life and are an integral part of modern society.
This Australia Day seems to be an opportunity for decision. The graffiti rejecting integration between Aboriginal and non Aboriginal brings this subject to the fore. Aboriginal people need to decide whether they belong in the new Australia of today - or if they see their place as trying to return to a past that no longer exists.
Hopefully, that decision will be to join the vast multicultural Australia that is taking this country to new heights !
Saturday, 25 January 2014
The fear factor !
This week a seventeen year old girl was forced off a Sydney train and raped in a station toilet. The fact that this happened in broad daylight on the busy inner city line has brought public outrage and a demand for more police and Transit officers to patrol the rail network.
There will never be enough security people to absolutely guarantee safety on the rail system. On that same day, hundreds of thousands of other passengers travelled by train without incident. This complete stranger was the other occupant of a carriage with the girl and struck up a conversation. When the train stopped at Strathfield station at 1 pm he forced the victim to leave the carriage and took her to a disabled toilet on the platform - and there she was subjected to a rape ordeal that took half an hour.
Immediately he departed she alerted station staff and security swung into action. Train carriages and rail stations are covered by the cctv network and both the victim and the attacker were quickly identified. The attacker was in handcuffs and off to a cell in a paddy waggon minutes later.
These events will play out in a law court when the offender faces a judge. Rape is a horrible crime, feared by all women. Some will contend that the victim should have screamed and resisted but this ignores the disabling influence of fear - and in the past week a story had circulated about a woman someone tried to abduct - and whose screams were ignored by others. It follows that this was a fake and designed to attract media attention - but it certainly could have had an influence on this victim's state of mind.
Perhaps the most pertinent benefit arising from this crime is the swiftness and certainty of retribution. Being alone in an otherwise vacant carriage with a victim presents opportunity - and the illusion of safety for the offender. Sheer economics limit the number of security people who can be tasked with guarding the rail system, but the ubiquitous camera eye is everywhere these days - and that is now the main limiting factor to crime on the rail network.
The security system has done it's job and nabbed the offender. Now it is up to the judiciary to ram home the the consequences for the attacker. No doubt the defence will get out the violins and claim all sorts of excuses in the aim for a light sentence, but the two things that dissuade the criminal mind when opportunity offers - is the high risk of getting caught - and the inevitable heavy penalty that will follow.
There will always be a risk when we travel on a train. That can never be totally eliminated - only reduced to a reasonable level of acceptance by rail passengers !
There will never be enough security people to absolutely guarantee safety on the rail system. On that same day, hundreds of thousands of other passengers travelled by train without incident. This complete stranger was the other occupant of a carriage with the girl and struck up a conversation. When the train stopped at Strathfield station at 1 pm he forced the victim to leave the carriage and took her to a disabled toilet on the platform - and there she was subjected to a rape ordeal that took half an hour.
Immediately he departed she alerted station staff and security swung into action. Train carriages and rail stations are covered by the cctv network and both the victim and the attacker were quickly identified. The attacker was in handcuffs and off to a cell in a paddy waggon minutes later.
These events will play out in a law court when the offender faces a judge. Rape is a horrible crime, feared by all women. Some will contend that the victim should have screamed and resisted but this ignores the disabling influence of fear - and in the past week a story had circulated about a woman someone tried to abduct - and whose screams were ignored by others. It follows that this was a fake and designed to attract media attention - but it certainly could have had an influence on this victim's state of mind.
Perhaps the most pertinent benefit arising from this crime is the swiftness and certainty of retribution. Being alone in an otherwise vacant carriage with a victim presents opportunity - and the illusion of safety for the offender. Sheer economics limit the number of security people who can be tasked with guarding the rail system, but the ubiquitous camera eye is everywhere these days - and that is now the main limiting factor to crime on the rail network.
The security system has done it's job and nabbed the offender. Now it is up to the judiciary to ram home the the consequences for the attacker. No doubt the defence will get out the violins and claim all sorts of excuses in the aim for a light sentence, but the two things that dissuade the criminal mind when opportunity offers - is the high risk of getting caught - and the inevitable heavy penalty that will follow.
There will always be a risk when we travel on a train. That can never be totally eliminated - only reduced to a reasonable level of acceptance by rail passengers !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)