Rainy day. I have a garbage bag to wear so that I am not going to get wet. But I was given a raincoat in 2006 so my situation is worse than 2006.
I put a request form in today stating: 'I need a court attire for my Federal Court case against the Minister for Immigration on 21 December. Dark suits and dark shoes are preferred. However, any business style is acceptable.' I saw some detainee men walking in suits from time to time so there must be something for court for men. Then why don't they have something for women?
My Japanese friend here went to the local court today as a witness for the police. She came back and asked me what happened in her court case. How could I know? I didn't attend the court.
According to her, she went to the court and waited in front of the court room with another witness and a police officer. The defendant did not turn up as usual and just tendered a medical certificate. Then another witness received a phone call. She is a worker of a ladies shelter who witnessed the defendant attacking my Japanese
friend. She told my friend that everything was over and he would go to jail.
My answer was, 'if everything is over, then the magistrate must have dismissed the charge. The defendant was discharged, free to go.' She said that the person from the ladies shelter had told her that he would go to jail. Then I told her that the magistrate might have revoked the bail and issued an arrest warrant. She said she had not heard a word 'revoke' so that that was not what happened. Ok. I do not think that there was a summary trial in the absence of the defendant and a witness gave evidence to the magistrate over the phone in front of the courtroom but that was the only option left.
My Japanese friend belatedly learned English words relevant to the possible situation and telephoned the police station to ask. The police station normally speak to her over the phone but this time, refused. She started worrying about being deported on the next day since she had not obtained any contact details of the persons to whom
she was supposed to be able to ask for help while in Japan. She said she would ask someone who was supposed to give her the contact details to hurry up.
At the midnight, someone knocked on my door. It was her. The Immigration told her that she would go at 5am next day. She was not happy with that.
I guess the charge against her ex-partner was just a breach of AVO, not domestic violence even though she believed it was some kind of assault and that charge was probably dropped. The Police and/or the Immigration asked the ladies shelter person whom she trusted to lie to her. They took advantage of her ignorance. Then the Immigration will deport her.
In essence, she was locked up for no good reason. There was no trial against her ex-partner. Everybody worked to protect the Australian man who broke her bones for twice causing her to get admitted to the hospital twice and eventually locked her up home for months without allowing her to even go to the toilet. Because she escaped from that violent man and made a complaint, she was punished by the Police and the Immigration which are "protecting the Australian community" by being imprisoned in Villawood for five months. What a marvellous legal system. Another good example of the Australian peculiar rule of law!
Anyway, I wonder whether the police and the Immigration worked in the same way, had her ex-partner not been a white but an Indian, Sudanese, Iranian etc. I will not be able to sleep tonight.
I put a request form in today stating: 'I need a court attire for my Federal Court case against the Minister for Immigration on 21 December. Dark suits and dark shoes are preferred. However, any business style is acceptable.' I saw some detainee men walking in suits from time to time so there must be something for court for men. Then why don't they have something for women?
My Japanese friend here went to the local court today as a witness for the police. She came back and asked me what happened in her court case. How could I know? I didn't attend the court.
According to her, she went to the court and waited in front of the court room with another witness and a police officer. The defendant did not turn up as usual and just tendered a medical certificate. Then another witness received a phone call. She is a worker of a ladies shelter who witnessed the defendant attacking my Japanese
friend. She told my friend that everything was over and he would go to jail.
My answer was, 'if everything is over, then the magistrate must have dismissed the charge. The defendant was discharged, free to go.' She said that the person from the ladies shelter had told her that he would go to jail. Then I told her that the magistrate might have revoked the bail and issued an arrest warrant. She said she had not heard a word 'revoke' so that that was not what happened. Ok. I do not think that there was a summary trial in the absence of the defendant and a witness gave evidence to the magistrate over the phone in front of the courtroom but that was the only option left.
My Japanese friend belatedly learned English words relevant to the possible situation and telephoned the police station to ask. The police station normally speak to her over the phone but this time, refused. She started worrying about being deported on the next day since she had not obtained any contact details of the persons to whom
she was supposed to be able to ask for help while in Japan. She said she would ask someone who was supposed to give her the contact details to hurry up.
At the midnight, someone knocked on my door. It was her. The Immigration told her that she would go at 5am next day. She was not happy with that.
I guess the charge against her ex-partner was just a breach of AVO, not domestic violence even though she believed it was some kind of assault and that charge was probably dropped. The Police and/or the Immigration asked the ladies shelter person whom she trusted to lie to her. They took advantage of her ignorance. Then the Immigration will deport her.
In essence, she was locked up for no good reason. There was no trial against her ex-partner. Everybody worked to protect the Australian man who broke her bones for twice causing her to get admitted to the hospital twice and eventually locked her up home for months without allowing her to even go to the toilet. Because she escaped from that violent man and made a complaint, she was punished by the Police and the Immigration which are "protecting the Australian community" by being imprisoned in Villawood for five months. What a marvellous legal system. Another good example of the Australian peculiar rule of law!
Anyway, I wonder whether the police and the Immigration worked in the same way, had her ex-partner not been a white but an Indian, Sudanese, Iranian etc. I will not be able to sleep tonight.