Category: General

Journey’s End

Charlotte Clinckers / / General, Innovation & Enterprise, Projects, Teamwork & Leadership

This semester, I was in a Drama class, in which our goal was to eventually perform a play. The play that we were performing was called Journey’s End, a 1928 realistic  play set in the trenches near Saint-Quentin, Aisne, towards the end of World War 1. The story takes place in the officer’s dugout of a British Army infantry company from the 18th of March 1918 to the 21st of March 1918. This play provides insight into the lives of the officers in the last few days prior to Operation Michael. As this play is extremely long and we did not have much time to work on it, many scenes had to be cut in order to make things easier for all of us.

I played two characters: the Colonel, and Madge. Madge is the sister of the main character, Raleigh, and the girlfriend of the Captain, Stanhope. As the story is set in the trenches, Madge doesn’t interact with any of the other characters, and only appears in one scene (it may be important to note that Madge does not appear in the original play and is only mentioned by name. We added this appearance in our adaptation to show that the war did not just affect the soldiers fighting in it, and to construct more relationships between characters). In Madge’s scene, she reads out a letter to her written by her brother Raleigh, who has just arrived at the trenches to find that Stanhope, his childhood friend, and sister’s boyfriend, is his company commander. In the letter, Raleigh tells Madge about his journey to the trenches before filling her in on how her partner is doing.

The Colonel is Stanhope’s immediate superior. In our adaptation of this play, the Colonel only appears in one scene, in which the Colonel tells Stanhope to expect the big German attack on the 21st of March. He also informs Stanhope of the high-ranking general’s decision to raid the German trenches before the attack.

This production was a great way for me to work on and improve my movement techniques in a practical environment, especially considering the fact that I was playing two very different characters. As the Colonel is a man of high status, I was careful to make sure I was not dragging my feet when I was walking, and that I maintained good posture and kept my head held high during my scene. There is a point in the scene where Stanhope asks the Colonel to sit next to him. As the Colonel is not an equal to Stanhope, I ensured that I was sitting close enough to maintain a professional image for the Colonel, but not so far away that I made it seem as if he thought badly of Stanhope. At one point in the scene, the Colonel is trying to convince Stanhope that it is a good idea to send Raleigh to the raid of the German trenches. Stanhope, wanting to protect Raleigh, states that ‘it is rotten to send a fellow who’s only just arrived!” to which the Colonel responds, ‘All to the good – his nerves are sound.’ with his hands on his hips, signalling to Stanhope that the Colonel knows he will get his way.

I also appreciated the opportunity to work on my vocal techniques, one of which being emphasis. An example of this is during the scene in which the Colonel is informing Stanhope of the big German attack that is to come, and asking Stanhope to help him choose two officers to lead a raid of the German trenches. Stanhope suggests that they send a sergeant, to which the Colonel responds with, “No, I don’t think so. The men expect officers to lead a raid.” I put emphasis on the word ‘officers’ and gave Stanhope a look that expressed the Colonel’s disapproval of Stanhope’s suggestion. As the camera we were using to record was not very close to me, I had to make sure that I was projecting my voice so it would be loud enough for the camera to pick it up. This look also shows that the Colonel shows great respect towards the rules, and intends to follow them. Another vocal technique that I used in my portrayal of the Colonel was the way I manipulated my articulation, putting emphasis on the vowel sounds (using received pronunciation) to show that he was of a high rank.

Overall, this class was a great learning experience, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Even though we didn’t get to perform in front of an audience due to the unfortunate injuries of some cast members, we still got to perform and film our play in class time. A clip of this performance is attached, and it is an excerpt from the scene in which the Colonel is informing Stanhope of the big German attack expected soon.

Year 9 OLP 2021

Charlotte Clinckers / / General, Teamwork & Leadership

In Term 3 of this year, I went on Year 9 OLP to Kalbarri, where we spent 5 days hiking and camping in tents. We were in charge of pitching our tents, preparing our food, tidying our campsites and packing up our tents. We chose our own cooking groups where we all had different roles towards making our meals, and each day our entire camp group would switch between different roles to keep us together. These roles were things like ensuring the team had water, being leaders and getting the group together, arranging the food for each day and hygiene leaders. This OLP was an amazing opportunity for me to further develop my teamwork and leadership skills, as I was in charge of getting everything I needed done. Responsibility was a very important skill to have on this camp, because for the most part, the kids were in charge. It was great to have a break from electronics and spend some time outside with my friends, and although all the changes were difficult at times, it was worth it to get some fresh air and exercise.

Andrew Mallard

Charlotte Clinckers / / General, Projects

The principles of justice are rules that must be upheld in court in Australia to ensure fairness in the legal system. They are: everyone is equal before the law, everyone has the right to a fair trial, the judiciary is independent/impartial and everyone has the right to a reasonable appeal. There are many cases in which the principles of justice are disregarded, one of which being the case of Andrew Mallard. Andrew Mallard, a British-born Australian man, was wrongfully accused of the murder of Perth woman Pamela Lawrence. Ms Lawrence received several blows to the head on May 23rd, 1994 at her jewellery shop in Mosman Park, and died in hospital hours later. Following her death was a manhunt, with an initial 136 suspects, one of which being Andrew Mallard. He was living on the street after having a mental breakdown and attempting a burglary in which he tried to impersonate a police officer. This attempted burglary landed him in Graylands Psychiatric Hospital, where he caught the attention of police. After several police interviews, Mr Mallard was arrested for murder after speculating how the victim could have died, and drawing a picture of a wrench that police said was the weapon Mr Mallard used to kill Ms Lawrence. Andrew protested, saying the police fed him information to say back to them, but instead the police handled it as a confession, and he received a sentence of life in prison.

The evidence shown in court was heavily manipulated against Mr Mallard. One of the pieces of “evidence” that resulted in his conviction was a video of the last 20 minutes of an interview performed by the police. In this video, Mr Mallard theorises how the murderer could have killed Ms Lawrence, speaking of the killer in the third person. The police disregarded the fact Mr Mallard was speaking in the third person and instead claimed that it was a confession. This among many other instances of tampered “evidence” broke the principle that everyone has the right to a fair trial, as this trial was certainly unfair.  

Andrew Mallard was interviewed by police many times during the search for Ms Lawrence’s killer, and most of these interviews were not recorded. One of these interviews was conducted after Mr Mallard had spent a majority of the previous night at a nightclub where he had been beaten and was running on very little sleep. The police conducted this interview knowing what had happened to him the night before. This interview was unrecorded and lasted 3 hours. Normally an interview would not be conducted when the interviewee had such little energy and was not in a good state, which was extremely unfair and definitely disregarded the principle that everyone is equal before the law.

The Court of Criminal Appeal handled the situation very poorly. They said that Mr Mallard had stated 15 things in his “confession” that only the killer could know, even though they were common pieces of information to those handling the case, and they also disregarded a large amount of important evidence. A forensic pathologist did an experiment with a wrench (the weapon police believed Mr Mallard had used in the murder) and a pigs head to see whether or not a wrench could inflict the same injuries that were found on Ms Lawrence’s body, and found that a wrench could not have caused those injuries because it would inflict blunt/crushing injuries, and the injuries found on Ms Lawrence’s body were far more intense. The court ignored this evidence. This disregarded the principle that the judiciary is independent and impartial.

Clearly, this case was handled very poorly and failed to uphold the principles of justice. After his sentence was removed, Mr Mallard said that he was unable to live in Perth anymore because members of the public still treated him as if he was a murderer. This injustice followed Mr Mallard around until the day he died, and his life was ruined by selfish police officers.