Australian legal system made for lawyers and rich criminals

• Report rights infringement
• published: 14 Feb 2014
• views: 959

Evan Whitton Australian legal system made for lawyers and rich criminals Why white collar criminals ❤ judges Evan Whitton 1 November 2012, 12:01am 3 CrimeLaw 1 0 Delicious Add 0 inShare Legal historian Evan Whitton says white collar criminals in England and its colonies have been a protected species since 1275. ONE OF our better judges, the Hon Ray Finkelstein QC, noted in an Australian Tax Office organ, Targeting Tax Crime (March 2012): 'As a general rule the judge's rationale in sentencing [white-collar criminals] is different from sentencing TRUE criminals ... imprisonment, when available, is regarded as a last resort.' That need not surprise. Over the centuries, quite a number of common law judges seem to have been white collar criminals — for example, Sir Garfield Barwick. Organised white collar crime in England dates from 1066, when William the Bastard (1027-87), became king. He franchised 90 per cent of the country to 300 "magnates" (the "great men of the realm"), and instituted a feudal system of trickle-down extortion. The magnates franchised land to freemen and extorted goods and services from them. The freemen in turn franchised land to its original owners, now peasants, and extorted from them. His son, William II (c. 1056-1100) institutionalised white collar crime in the trade of authority. Professor John Gillingham said every public office was for sale; investors in turn extorted bribes from people who dealt with the office. He said the system was still operating in the reign of Edward I (1272-1307). Judges and lawyers thus tended to be white collar criminals after the common law began in 1166 ― you bribed the king to become a judge and then extorted from litigants. Lawyers were the natural bagmen for extorting judges. Judging is different from lawyering, but common law judges have never been trained as judges. They are lawyers trained in sophistry -- a technique of lying by false arguments, trick questions (and so on) -- one day and then judges the next. Professor Alan Dershowitz said '...lying, distortion, and other forms of intellectual dishonesty are endemic among judges.' Justice Russell Fox said the common law was originally designed to benefit landowners, and was 'later adjusted to the requirements of the wealthy and the powerful'. In 1275, Edward I made it a crime, Scandalum Magnatum, to accuse the magnates of vile practices, such as extortion. This form of libel law was enlarged in 1378 to protect judges, prelates and certain officials, many of whom were also white collar criminals. Judges initially controlled evidence. On a fixed wage (plus the graft), they had no incentive to prolong the process; trials took a few hours. Lawyers do have an incentive -- $5 plus a minute today -- to spin the process out. The civil adversary system dates from 1460, when judges began to lawyers control civil evidence. The criminal adversary system dates from the 18th century, when lawyers first began to defend criminals. Covering up a crime is a crime in itself ― the perversion of justice. Since 1792, judges have invented five rules which hide evidence and make it difficult to charge -- let alone convict -- white collar and other rich criminals. http://www.independentaustralia.net/life/life-display/why-white-collar-criminals-judges,4666 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZmyGqFXWP8&feature;=player_embedded