Justice Denied in Victorian Courts.

 

Pictured Left is the Car Park of a Gym & Leisure Centre where the Defendant had been a paid up Member for Over 10 Years, The use of this Centre became the Subject of a Victorian Intervention Order in Dec 2001, after The Defendant' s Ex -in-law's issued an Intervention Order in A Victorian Magistrate's Court. Normally this never Create's a Problem but in This case it Did after the final order was made.

The applicant claimed that Technically a Part of one end of the Leisure Centre fell within 200 Metre's Of Their Property's Back Fence, So every time the defendant used the Centre, His Ex Mother-in-law called the Police saying the Defendant was Breeching an Intervention Order because he was within 200 metres by being in the Centre. The defendant Could Not Drive Into the Carpark of the Centre Via the street Pictured Left, because he would also be within 200 Metres of hix Ex- Mother-in-laws House,despite the Fact he didn't have to actually drive past The House. The Complainant's Knew when the Defendant attended the Centre and The Rego Number of his car In The Car Park Which led to the Them Unnecessarily calling The Police.

A legal representative said the Easy way to solve this problem was to go to The Magistrate's Court to Vary the order to a Distance of 150 Metre's, so there would be no Technical Breeches of the Intervention Order

After The defendant Applied to vary this order, a Very good Friend of His Ex Mother-in-law also then applied to The Magistrate's Court for an Intervention Order against The Defendant.




Because The Woman Lived in the Street Pictured above, her Intervention Order Then made it a Breech of an Intervention order for The defendant to drive Into The Leisure Centre's Car Park from the other side of The Leisure Centre as well.

 What Led to this added unnecessary application?? To avoid his Ex-in-laws Complaining to the Police that he was technically within 200 metres from the House when the Defendant was using the Leisure Centre. He Parked His Car in Conway Court and then he walked up this street into the Carpark Of the Leisure Centre and Then Into The Leisure Centre Itself, the only problem was he had to walk past his ex- Mother-in-laws Best friend's place to get There.

The Statement of Complaint by The Friend Read, The defendant is Parking Not Far from My House and is Stalking Me. In effect all the Defendant was doing was walking to the Gym, the applicant didn't even use the Leisure Centre Herself, as she was in her 70's.




The Defendant had driven up and Down this street above over 3000 Times over a period of over 10 years when he was a member at the centre, but his normal routine was now a criminal Offence because of the Court's Interim order.

The Defendant now had to Contest Or vary 2 Different Intervention Orders on either Side of the Leisure Centre.To make his task even more Difficult, the Defendant had to appear before Magistrate Denise O'Reilly. The Family Law Portfolio Committee in Victoria is made up of mainly Female Victorian Magistrate's including Denise O'Reilly.

So ANY male that appears In a Victorian Magistrate's Court has Virtually No Chance of Justice, because you are in a Court For Women, Run By Women and administered by a group of Mostly Female Magistrate's and their certainly is a very Authoritarian Gender Bias against Men in regards to Intervention Order applications.

So In This case, the Defendant was Fighting Against Intervention Orders that were basically Being used as Roadblocks to stop The defendant accessing or using the Leisure Centre, The Defendant Couldn't Drive into The car park of The leisure Centre with out Technically Breeching an Intervention Order. The Defendant in his application before Magistrate Denise O'Reilly stated that he had been a Member at the Centre for over Ten Years, attending there 3 or 4 Times a week.

Magistrate Denise O'Reilly then replied by saying "SO WHAT". What she was really saying was that as you are the Defendant in an Intervention Order case, I am not really Interested in your Evidence or application whatsoever, regardless of how trivial the application for the Intervention Order Might Be....... This is what I call Rough Justice. The Defendant's Barrister's Belief was, The Magistrate's Decision had been made long before any Evidence had been Given.

Magistrate Denise O'Reilly in Her decision on this Matter said This.

The Leisurecentre is in fact within 200 metres, At least in part. Had the evidence been that you see them at the leisurecentre and leave immediately, then I might have made a different decision, but the fact is you see them and you don't leave. They end up leaving. Now they're the ones who have taken out the orders against you. They are not subject to orders. There is nothing that prevents them coming up to you and speaking to you, but you must not approach them. If they speak to you, you ought not be speaking to them, because they won't go to jail for speaking to you, but you will Go to jail if it can be construed that you have approached them, or that you have had a conversation which has preceded to develop into any behavior that could be called harassing or intimidating to them.

So Magistrate Denise O'Reilly made Her Decision To Bar the Defendant from Using the Leisure Centre on a Technicality, that was Based on The distance  Between a Back Fence on his Ex-Mother-I laws House and a Small area Of the Leisure Centre, possibly as little as ten Metres, that covers one end of a 50 Metre Swimming Pool, despite The Fact that the Defendant had a Legitimate reason to Attend The Leisure Centre. .  The Variation to the order was sought to stop the applicant ringing the Police when the Defendant used The Centre, The Defendant Only saw his Ex- In-laws There on the odd occassion when both Parties were at the Leisure Centre.Hardly a Serious Offence, to say The Least.The Application was to vary the Exclusion Distance to 150 Metres From 200 Metres.

Magistrate Denise O'Reilly also made it Clear that it was OK For the Ex-in-laws to Speak to
the Defendant because they weren't Subject to an Intervention Order but if the Defendant Spoke to his Ex-in -Laws that would be a breech of The Intervention order Because The Defendant was Subject to an Intervention Order. How UNJUST is that.!!!! Technically it was also Physically impossible for the Defendant to get to his mother-in-laws House because there were a Number of Properties between the Leisurecentre & The Back Fence, the only way the defendant could physically get to the front of the house was by Road and that was over 250 Metres by Road....the problem is The Intervention Orders do not actually state how the 200 Metres is actually measured.

Magistrate's Courts In Melbourne are making Decisions based on These Types of  Trivialities and Technicalities,This Can Lead to Intervention orders that can last for 12 years or more depending on Which Magistrate you appear before even though the Original Complaint is of a Trivial Nature.

Recently Magistrate Len Brear had a case Between two Arguing Brothers in their Late Fiftes, Early Sixties. The Dispute was non Violent because Evidence was given that there was No Violence Involved. So even Though the Dispute did Not Involve Their parents. Magistrate Len Brear handed Down an Intervention Order that Included Days & Times that each of the Brothers Could Seperately Visit Their Parents!!!!!. How Stupid Is That.!!!. If you Go and Visit your parents at a Time not listed on an Intervention Order, You Could Be Breeching an Intervention Order.!!!!

On March the 5th 2013. A Defendant appeared before Magistrate Len Brear and sought Leave of the Court to end an Intervention Order that had been in place for 11 Years and 3 Months, The Defendant had no Contact with His ex Brother-in-law for many,Many, Years.

 On a previous application, the Defendant had appeared before Magistrate Marc Sargent who declined the Defendant's application even Though the Evidence was The Defendant & His Ex Brother-in-law had no Contact in some Years. Marc Sargent Declined the application because he said The Intervention Order created "NO IMPEDIMENT" to The Defendant's Day to day life. So Magistrate Marc Sargent said he Couldn't Vary or Revoke The order!!!!.

Magistrate Len Brear Declined the defendant's application because he said no new Evidence had been Presented in The application!!!!!. How The Defendant could Produce any Further Evidence simply because he had not seen his Ex Brother-In-Law In Many Years is beyond Comprehension.?? What evidence can you bring if you have not seen your Ex-in-Law in Years.!!!!

What makes Magistrate Len Brear's Decision even stranger than it is. On a Previous occassion I was Sitting in Courtroom 8 and a woman had applied to Extend Her intervention against an Ex Partner who at That Time was In Jail because of Armed Robbery Charges and she Told Magistrate Marc Sargent that she was in Fear of Her Ex Partner, but for some odd Reason Magistrate Sargent ruled that her Ex partner should be able to Contest Her application even though the Defendant was in Jail. It was then explained to The Woman that the Matter would be adjourned to ANOTHER Court because this Court did not have a Video Facility to hear the matter from The Jail!!!!.

The Woman was surprised at the Decision Handed down by Marc Sargent, The Woman Told me her Ex Partner was Contesting her application just to get a day Out Of Jail.

The Next Case before Magistrate Len Brear was a 23 year Old Male stopped by Police for Driving without a License, Police Searched The Car and Found a Knife and a Plastic Imitation Firearm. He was before the Court over a series of Charges. The Defendant received a $1000 Fine and had to go to a RACV Driving Course. A Very Lenient sentence Compared to the intervention order Variation Application.????.

If anybody can Explain these decisions By Magistrate Len Brear, LET ME KNOW. On March the 15th in Courtroom 7 he stated from the Bench that Litigation was a game Of Chance and that the Courts Should not over ly interfere in People's Lives. It was for the Parties to sort out their Differences.

So while Magistrate Denise O'Reilly has Issued Meaningless Intervention Orders Over the disappearance of a Woman's Cat Bowls for 5 Years (Pictured Left) and then Magistrate Marc Sargent Waste's Court Time hearing a woman seeking Clarification on Which Shopping Centres  she Can go to without Breeching an intervention Order, and Magistrate Len Brear then issuing an order on what times Disputing Brothers can Visit their parents.  These types of orders are wasting valuable court time.



With Court Registry's In Melbourne Courts issuing Intervention Order's By the Bucketload against People who should NEVER Appear at Court. Let's Look at the real world of whats also happening in Victoria's Disgraceful Legal System.

 

  Antonio Lougauncio's Crimes are Described as Too Sadistic to be made public and has Committed Far more outrages dating back to 1991 that could be proved by a Court. In 1998 he was sentenced to 12 Years Jail For 6 Counts of Rape, 11 Assault, 6 Intentionally causing Injury and 4 Threat to Kill among other Charges..... during the prosecution the Victim's Parent's House was fire - Bombed.

Despite these Criminal Actions Lougauncio was Released from Prison On parole having served 8Years and 11 Months!!!!!. Over 3 Years Early!!!!!!!!.In 2008 he was again jailed on Weapons Offences and was released in 2012 on a Supervision order. In early 2013, He was  Charged again with assaulting Police and Drugs & weapons offences and he is alleged to have assaulted his Girlfriend. WHY WAS THIS GUY WALKING THE STREETS OF MELBOURNE!!!. The end Result was a Long Siege in Glenroy where Logauncio Shot And Killed Himself.

 Would an Intervention Order issued By Either Magistrate Len Brear, Denise O'Reilly, Nunzio Larosa, Max Cashmore, Marc Sargent, Greg Mcnamara, Jillian Crowe or Doug Bolster Protect People From Antonio Loguancio. The Answer Is NO!!!!!!!!!!.

State Coroner Judge Jennifer Coate found that Intervention Orders were Broken in a high Number of Fatal Domestic Incidents in Victoria, The Coroners Court Of Victoria found that before 8 Homicides the perpetrator was the Subject of an Intervention Order. the Study also looked at 11 Incidents where the Perpetrator had Contact with the Justice System Within 6 Months of The Death. An Intervention order does not result in an End To Violence. What an Understatement that is!!!!.

I went to My sister-in-laws Coronial Inquest after she was murdered by my Brother-in-law in a Murder Suicide and Detectives Stated that They Believed My Brother-in-law Obtained A Shotgun, after being Released from Jail for a Breech of an Intervention Order, My Brother-in-law was given an address by another inmate to go and Pick Up a Shotgun. He Broke into my Sister-in-laws Home and waited for her to come Home, He Shot and Killed Her and then committed Suicide.

Unfortunately in Victorian Magistrate's Courts Today, Magistrate's & Registrar's have Lost sight of the Big Picture by handing out Trivial & Meaningless Intervention Orders, as was the Case before Magistrate Denise O'Reilly. I Have been wrongly Branded as a Trouble maker because I point out these Ridiculous Misuses of Intervention Orders in a Particular Magistrate's Court in Melbourne......If It saves one person being Murdered or Seriously Hurt then my efforts will be worth it.

   One Day I came Home from the Gym and Drove to my Local Supermarket, to my Shock & Horror This is what I Saw. ( Pictured Left ). To think a Woman was Doused by Petrol and Set Alight and later Died was Unthinkable. What is the Courts Solution to these Disgusting Events???........ Just Issue intervention Orders to any body that asks for them....This Supermarket is 400 Metres from My Home, and i am reminded of this every Time I Shop There.

 So what Should The Melbourne Courts Priorities be, Issue Intervention Orders as Magistrate Denise O'Reilly Did Over The disappearance of a Woman's Cat feeding Containers or Women who are punched or doused with petrol and Set alight, The police officer who i spoke with at the Court stated that Intervention Orders do Not stop Crazy Individuals. So there are dangerous Criminals Out there and we have Magistrate's issing Meaningless & Trivial intervention Orders Over Cat Feeding Containers.

What Magistrate's Like Denise O'Reilly, Len Brear, Greg McNamara, Max Cashmore, Nuncio Larosa, Doug Bolster and the like need to Realize is The Intervention Order Process is for the Prevention of harm to those who are Really in Danger and not Just a Made Up Version of The Jerry Springer Show, Where people  make up Some Complaint and the Registrar doesn't really Care what the Complaint is.

As Magistrate Jillian Crowe said from the Bench in Courtroom 8, People have a distorted View of What Intervention Orders will Do,..... If only other Magistrate's Thought exactly the same and Stopped this Intervention Order Circus in Melbourne Courts and concentrated on Real Criminals.

Real family Violence is Not a Game Of Chance, where the Aim is to Just hand anybody & Everybody an Intervention Order , At the end of the Day. The Magistrates, the police won't be immediately coming to your Aid Nor will it Be Tracey or anybody Else......it will be you against your attacker. If you don't Believe Me read the Newspapers, look at what happened to Jill Meagher, as just one Example.

Magistrates should be running it as a Court of law rather than a McDonalds Franchise, where everybody get the order they requested...... The Balance of probabilities is treated as...... We'll give you an order anyway & if the respondent doesn't like it he can appeal to the County Court.... This only leads to more wasted Court time.