Melbourne BLM protest charge 'mangled'

November 24, 2022 11:21 AM AEDT | By AAPNEWS
Image source: AAPNEWS

Wording in a charge laid against two Black Lives Matter protesters is so confusing it might as well have been written by a Martian, a Melbourne magistrate has declared.

Meriki Onus and Crystal McKinnon are accused of breaching the Chief Health Officer's COVID-19 directions by arranging the protest in June 2020.

Police applied to amend the wording of the charge, laid against them a year after the protest, but their lawyers have successfully argued against it.

Magistrate Andrew McKenna found the way the charge was worded was not the only viable or even reasonable interpretation of it.

"It is deficient in a number of different ways," he said on Thursday.

Patrick Doyle SC had argued the wording of the charge was mangled and inaccurate because it alleged the women breached a direction or requirement by meeting with 20 or more people who they lived with.

He said the charge did not say who made the direction, only referred to Chief Health Officer exemptions.

Mr McKenna agreed the wording of the charge had misconstrued something and was "mangled in a frightful way".

"Those words ... might as well be made by a Martian," he said.

He suggested if an accused cherrypicked pieces of the charge they might be able to form a collage to give the charge good sense.

But he questioned if it was proper that an accused person should have to try the options, mix them up and work out something that was sensible.

"Even intelligent, highly educated accused would be mighty perplexed by it," he said.

His experienced eye had to read it "over and over" to try to get the reasonable meaning, and that was not how a recipient of a charge was forced to contend with it, he said

Francesca Holmes, for the chief commissioner, said it was unfortunate the charge used the words "that they reside with" and acknowledged the charge involved "terrible grammar, terrible drafting".

But she maintained the original charge did properly disclose the nature of the offence they allegedly committed.

The amendment was merely to include the precise direction that was breached, she said.

A later application to also amend the dates - from the date of the protest to a period leading up to the protest - was also rejected.

Mr Doyle said a fresh application to have the charges struck out would be made.

The women have previously fought to have the charge withdrawn, after their lawyers were notified in June this year that the case would be dismissed because charges were "fatally flawed".

Ms Holmes said prosecutors would need to consider if the charges would be withdrawn, but said no decision could be made on Thursday.

The matter will return to court next year.


Disclaimer

The content, including but not limited to any articles, news, quotes, information, data, text, reports, ratings, opinions, images, photos, graphics, graphs, charts, animations and video (Content) is a service of Kalkine Media Pty Ltd (“Kalkine Media, we or us”), ACN 629 651 672 and is available for personal and non-commercial use only. The principal purpose of the Content is to educate and inform. The Content does not contain or imply any recommendation or opinion intended to influence your financial decisions and must not be relied upon by you as such. Some of the Content on this website may be sponsored/non-sponsored, as applicable, but is NOT a solicitation or recommendation to buy, sell or hold the stocks of the company(s) or engage in any investment activity under discussion. Kalkine Media is neither licensed nor qualified to provide investment advice through this platform. Users should make their own enquiries about any investments and Kalkine Media strongly suggests the users to seek advice from a financial adviser, stockbroker or other professional (including taxation and legal advice), as necessary.
The content published on Kalkine Media also includes feeds sourced from third-party providers. Kalkine does not assert any ownership rights over the content provided by these third-party sources. The inclusion of such feeds on the Website is for informational purposes only. Kalkine does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of the content obtained from third-party feeds. Furthermore, Kalkine Media shall not be held liable for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in the content obtained from third-party feeds, nor for any damages or losses arising from the use of such content.
Kalkine Media hereby disclaims any and all the liabilities to any user for any direct, indirect, implied, punitive, special, incidental or other consequential damages arising from any use of the Content on this website, which is provided without warranties. The views expressed in the Content by the guests, if any, are their own and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Kalkine Media. Some of the images/music that may be used on this website are copyrighted to their respective owner(s). Kalkine Media does not claim ownership of any of the pictures displayed/music used on this website unless stated otherwise. The images/music that may be used on this website are taken from various sources on the internet, including paid subscriptions or are believed to be in public domain. We have made reasonable efforts to accredit the source wherever it was indicated as or found to be necessary.
This disclaimer is subject to change without notice. Users are advised to review this disclaimer periodically for any updates or modifications.


AU_advertise

Advertise your brand on Kalkine Media

Sponsored Articles


Investing Ideas

Previous Next
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.