N.B. This webpage is written on my own initiative, I am not being directed by Derry Hinch or anyone connected to him to write anything here, it is all my own commentary and views. I find it to be an outrage that a Magistrate in Victoria could pass a sentence like that received by Derry Hinch. In a democracy, criminal trials are supposed to be open and public. Under the previous Victoria Labor government and Attorney General Robert Hulls, suppression orders were being used to protect those proven guilty of crimes, usually against children. Suppressing information on court hearings, http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/sec ... 5820136736 Secret trails in the secret police state. Derryn has tried to get this case before the High Court. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victor ... 5898920846
The Australian Hight Court hears cases on the Constitution and their decision were made clear in two famous cases. Australian Capital Television v The Commonwealth 1992 The Judges ruled that there was a right to freedom of political communication implied by the Constition. In Nationwide News v Wills 1992. The Australian published an article with the Heading "Advance Australia Fascist". Judges ruled that the Arbitration's being characterised as "corrupt labor law judges" was allowed so as not to infringe on rights of political communication implied by the Constitution. I hope I will not be arrested for bringing the courts into disrepute, but Magistrate Rozencwajg looks like he got his law degree without acquiring any knowledge of Human Rights laws. Advance Australia silenced by a lowly Magistrate Rozencwajg.
Is Magistrate Rozencwajg acting ultra vires, beyond his powers, my amateur legal opinion is that he has breached a duty of care to ensure in sentencing that Derry does retain rights to speak about anything except the names of pedophiles. This is against all common law rights to a fair trial open to the public and it is an abomination to prevent common law cases becoming public knowledge and to further suppress an individual from speaking about anything is breaching United Nations Human Rights declarations. Every prisoner sentenced has a right to petition and plead their case, to further appeal to the courts and media if they so wish. Where the hell did Magistrate Rozencwajg get his law degree? That is not a rhetorical question! Appeal against this wrong decision, appeal to the County Court and the Human Rights Commission and UN . This is the result of the Australian Labor party running over common law rights with legislation and harsh Magistrates acting ultra vires. One brave journalist has stood against these suppression orders for many years. Derry started exposing child abusers in the mid 1980's and he has previously served a brief time in jail for naming and shaming child abusers. Most recently Derryn though gravely ill now has been sentenced to five months silence for naming two Pedophiles. Magistrate Rozencwajg will have him jailed immediately if he says anything to anyone, but at least in jail he could speak up, but he is so ill, to jail him might kill him, so this sentencing decision has to rate as one worthy of an Old Bailey judge sentencing someone to death or silence. This sentence is a gross breach of Derryn's fundamental human rights. Magistrate Charlie Rozencwajg silenced Hinch from expressing any opinion in the media, including Twitter, and from "causing others to act in a manner that would contravene those conditions".
LET me repeat again, that I am writing this because I am outraged that Derry has been effectively silenced because his health does not allow a "go to jail option" but still retain free speech. Derryn is being discriminated against. How do other decisions and sentences of Magistrate Rozencwajg compare to other Magistrates? It seems the Magistrate criticized Derryn's view of home detention orders as if he were a hated enemy and was lucky to get home detention especially as Derryn campaigned against it. This sentence should be slapped down by a superior court and Magistrate Rozencwajg sent back to law school to brush up on Human Rights and fairness in sentencing. Derry is not allowed to say anything to anyone, this is like a medieval stocks sentence with a silence or die option, an effective death sentence in jail if Derryn speaks out.
Derryn is a journalist of long standing, he has just had a liver transplant is is very unwell, this sentence by Magistrate Rozencwajg not only sentences Hinch unfairly, it arrogantly removes a fundamental right Derry has to express himself. The sentence is so broad and vague, it should be much more narrow to allow any person rights to free speech http://www.hereticpress.com/wikileaks/index.html#rights
Article 19 UNDHR states "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers".How can a magistrate make such a broad order to prevent someone speaking up. I feel sure that Derryn if he was in good health would rather be locked up than silenced in this fashion when he is uncertain how long he has to live. If he were locked up he would still be able to speak up, write and communicate his ideas. In this case Hinch was unfairly silenced for breaching an anti-democratic law used to hide the identity of the worst criminals.
The Australian Hight Court hears cases on the Constitution and their decision were made clear in two famous cases. Australian Capital Television v The Commonwealth 1992 The Judges ruled that there was a right to freedom of political communication implied by the Constition. In Nationwide News v Wills 1992. The Australian published an article with the Heading "Advance Australia Fascist". Judges ruled that the Arbitration's being characterised as "corrupt labor law judges" was allowed so as not to infringe on rights of political communication implied by the Constitution. I hope I will not be arrested for bringing the courts into disrepute, but Magistrate Rozencwajg looks like he got his law degree without acquiring any knowledge of Human Rights laws. Advance Australia silenced by a lowly Magistrate Rozencwajg.
Is Magistrate Rozencwajg acting ultra vires, beyond his powers, my amateur legal opinion is that he has breached a duty of care to ensure in sentencing that Derry does retain rights to speak about anything except the names of pedophiles. This is against all common law rights to a fair trial open to the public and it is an abomination to prevent common law cases becoming public knowledge and to further suppress an individual from speaking about anything is breaching United Nations Human Rights declarations. Every prisoner sentenced has a right to petition and plead their case, to further appeal to the courts and media if they so wish. Where the hell did Magistrate Rozencwajg get his law degree? That is not a rhetorical question! Appeal against this wrong decision, appeal to the County Court and the Human Rights Commission and UN . This is the result of the Australian Labor party running over common law rights with legislation and harsh Magistrates acting ultra vires. One brave journalist has stood against these suppression orders for many years. Derry started exposing child abusers in the mid 1980's and he has previously served a brief time in jail for naming and shaming child abusers. Most recently Derryn though gravely ill now has been sentenced to five months silence for naming two Pedophiles. Magistrate Rozencwajg will have him jailed immediately if he says anything to anyone, but at least in jail he could speak up, but he is so ill, to jail him might kill him, so this sentencing decision has to rate as one worthy of an Old Bailey judge sentencing someone to death or silence. This sentence is a gross breach of Derryn's fundamental human rights. Magistrate Charlie Rozencwajg silenced Hinch from expressing any opinion in the media, including Twitter, and from "causing others to act in a manner that would contravene those conditions".
LET me repeat again, that I am writing this because I am outraged that Derry has been effectively silenced because his health does not allow a "go to jail option" but still retain free speech. Derryn is being discriminated against. How do other decisions and sentences of Magistrate Rozencwajg compare to other Magistrates? It seems the Magistrate criticized Derryn's view of home detention orders as if he were a hated enemy and was lucky to get home detention especially as Derryn campaigned against it. This sentence should be slapped down by a superior court and Magistrate Rozencwajg sent back to law school to brush up on Human Rights and fairness in sentencing. Derry is not allowed to say anything to anyone, this is like a medieval stocks sentence with a silence or die option, an effective death sentence in jail if Derryn speaks out.
Derryn is a journalist of long standing, he has just had a liver transplant is is very unwell, this sentence by Magistrate Rozencwajg not only sentences Hinch unfairly, it arrogantly removes a fundamental right Derry has to express himself. The sentence is so broad and vague, it should be much more narrow to allow any person rights to free speech http://www.hereticpress.com/wikileaks/index.html#rights
Article 19 UNDHR states "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers".How can a magistrate make such a broad order to prevent someone speaking up. I feel sure that Derryn if he was in good health would rather be locked up than silenced in this fashion when he is uncertain how long he has to live. If he were locked up he would still be able to speak up, write and communicate his ideas. In this case Hinch was unfairly silenced for breaching an anti-democratic law used to hide the identity of the worst criminals.
For Comments on this article
