Australia gets it wrong.

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by RetiredGySgt, Aug 26, 2009.

  1. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,508
    Thanks Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,920
  2. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    10,774
    Thanks Received:
    2,361
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +3,283
    That actually sounds reasonable, groups tend to engage in group think and having an impartial judge makes sense to me.
     
  3. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,508
    Thanks Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,920
    The Courts Martial system HAS independent Judges. Australia went from an Independent military court system to one beholding to the chain of command. THAT is why the Court threw it out.

    The way Courts martials work is through an independent Judicial branch in the Military. Usually called the Judge Advocate branch. Totally separate and beyond the control of other military commands and units. All the local commands can do is prefer the charges. They have no control over who the Judge or defense and prosecution will be. They have no control over the Lawyers and Judges at all. All they provide is the information and a pool for the Court to pick jurors from.
     

Share This Page