Gone is innocent until PROVEN guilty, Gone is freedom of association, Gone is the ability to have a family BBQ without having to prove it was harmless, GONE, GONE, GONE...Section 9 is unbelievably insane (yes, I am going to use that word to describe this law) in that it says that "For the avoidance of doubt" (can't have a thing like reasonable doubt getting the way can we) " it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that the defendant associated with another person for any particular purpose ". It absolutely floors me that stuff like this can even be printed and held up as a legal document. What do they mean "not neccessary for the prosecution to prove..."? How can anyone be safe from a law like this? It really is time for people to stand up against this madness (yes, I have alluded once again to the "insane" word). I have highlighted the crazy bits (well some of them) for easy viewing. I also have not mentioned that the word "bikie", "gang", etc. does not even appear in this act.
A snippet from SOCCA shown below
Part 5—Offences
35—Criminal associations
(1) A person who associates, on not less than 6 occasions during a period of 12 months,
with a person who is—
(a) a member of a declared organisation; or
(b) the subject of a control order,
is guilty of an offence.
Maximum penalty: Imprisonment for 5 years.
(2) A person does not commit an offence against subsection (1) unless, on each occasion
on which it is alleged that the person associated with another, the person knew that the
other was—
(a) a member of a declared organisation; or
(b) a person the subject of a control order,
or was reckless as to that fact.
(3) A person who—
(a) has a criminal conviction (against the law of this State or another jurisdiction)
of a kind prescribed by regulation; and
(b) associates, on not less than 6 occasions during a period of 12 months, with
another person who has such a criminal conviction,
is guilty of an offence.
Maximum penalty: Imprisonment for 5 years.
(4) A person does not commit an offence against subsection (3) unless, on each occasion
on which it is alleged that the person associated with another, the person knew that the
other had the relevant criminal conviction or was reckless as to that fact.
(5) A person may be guilty of an offence against subsection (1) or (3) in respect of
associations with the same person or with different people.
(6) The following forms of associations will be disregarded for the purposes of this
section unless the prosecution proves that the association was not reasonable in the
circumstances:
(a) associations between close family members;
(b) associations occurring in the course of a lawful occupation, business or
profession;
(c) associations occurring at a course of training or education of a prescribed
kind between persons enrolled in the course;
(d) associations occurring at a rehabilitation, counselling or therapy session of a
prescribed kind;
(e) associations occurring in lawful custody or in the course of complying with a
court order;
4.9.2008—Serious and Organised Crime (Control) Act 2008
Offences—Part 5
[4.9.2008] This version is not published under the Legislation Revision and Publication Act 2002 21
(f) associations of a prescribed kind.
(7) Without derogating from subsection (6) but subject to subsection (8), a court hearing a
charge of an offence against this section may determine that an association will be
disregarded for the purposes of this section if the defendant proves that he or she had a
reasonable excuse for the association.
(8) In proceedings for an offence against this section, subsection (7) does not apply to an
association if, at the time of the association, the defendant—
(a) was a member of a declared organisation; or
(b) was a person the subject of a control order; or
(c) had a criminal conviction (against the law of this State or another jurisdiction)
of a kind prescribed for the purposes of subsection (3).
(9) For the avoidance of doubt, in proceedings for an offence against this section, it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that the defendant associated with another person for any particular purpose or that the association would have led to the commission of any offence.
(10) If a police officer has reasonable cause to suspect that 2 people are or have been
associating with each other and that at least 1 of those people is—
(a) a member of a declared organisation; or
(b) the subject of a control order; or
(c) a person who has a criminal conviction referred to in subsection (3),
the police officer may require 1 or both of those people to state all or any of their
personal details.
(11) For the purposes of this section—
(a) a person may associate with another person by any means including
communicating with that person by letter, telephone or facsimile or by email
or other electronic means; and
(b) a person is a close family member of another person if—
(i) 1 is a spouse or former spouse of the other or is, or has been, in a
close personal relationship with the other; or
(ii) 1 is a parent or grandparent of the other (whether by blood or by
marriage); or
(iii) 1 is a brother or sister of the other (whether by blood or by
marriage); or
(iv) 1 is a guardian or carer of the other.
(12) In this section—
close personal relationship has the same meaning as in Part 3 of the Family
Relationships Act 1975;
spouse—a person is the spouse of another if they are legally married.
Regards,
Craig Hendry
Policy Coordinator - FREE AUSTRALIA PARTY
Main Branch Office
166 Smart Road, St. Agnes
South Australia 5097
Office: (08) 8396 3355
Mobile: 0408 811 824
FREE AUSTRALIA PARTY is now on face book. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Adelaide-Australia/FREE-AUSTRALIA-PARTY/76089178715
Website: http://www.freeaustralia.org
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar