In this project, we learned about the principles of justice. The principles of justice are made to ensure every person affected by the Australian Legal system is treated fairly and equally but in many cases, these are not upheld to the highest standards. Some examples of principles of justice are; the right to a impartial and unbiased judge, the right to high-quality evidence, and All individuals are equal before the law
On the 26th of June 2010, 21-year-old Josh Warneke was found dead on the side of Old Broome Road early in the morning. Police identified many suspects, one of which being Gene Gibson, as he was known to have driven down that part of the road. He became a major suspect when another suspect reported hearing him talk about stealing a car that night of the fatal attack. On the 10th of July 2012, Gene was arrested under suspicion of manslaughter, and later at the pretrial charged with the murder of Josh Warneke. In April 2014, a contested hearing took place and everyone involved in the case was cross-examined. Both defense and prosecution presented witnesses and a translator for Gibson, also the translator who originally helped interview Gibson was examined. They began to question Gibson’s comprehension of the case and his rights. In July a judge had declared that the 2 main interviews used as evidence would not be used as sufficient evidence as they did not follow protocols and the law. On the 22nd of October 2014, Gibson’s Lawyers told Gibson to plead guilty to manslaughter, so he agreed and was sentenced to 7 years and 6 months in prison. On the 20th of June 2016, Gene filed a notice of Appeal as he claimed he didn’t understand what he was doing and he withdrew his guilty plea. And finally, on the 12th of April 2017, the Western Australian Court of Appeals overturned the outcome of Gene Gibson, who at that point had spent nearly 5 years in prison after pleading guilty to the manslaughter of Josh Warneke. The state then gave Gene $1.3 Million in compensation.
The principle that All Individuals are Equal before the law was not upheld in Gene Gibson’s Case. Equality before the law states that all people are treated equally, no matter physical appearance, mental capacity, income level, race, ethnic background or sex. This principle includes being treated equally by police, court personnel, and all legal authorities. It outlines that we should all have equal access and usage of the law and court systems. In the case of Gene Gibson, his right to be equal in the face of the law was not upheld. Gene was interrogated many times, but 2 major events of interrogation disobeyed the law. On the 16th of August, Gene was interviewed by Mr Pring, a detective on the case. Gibson was interrogated for 3 long hours and notes were kept, but no recording of events. While Gene Gibson may have grown up in Australia, he grew up in a rural Aboriginal town deep into the outback, and his primary language was Pintupi. While Mr Gibson was read his rights, no translator was acquired and therefore he could not comprehend his rights or any question asked him as the English he understood was minimal. This act of not acquiring a translator broke yet another law. During the interview Gene Gibson made a statement that was inconsistent with his earlier statements, this led police to believe Gene assaulted Josh that fateful night. In this interview, it was said that Gene admitted to this offence, later taking back the statement, but as there is no recordings, there is no proper evidence of this. Only after this interview was Gene able to use his right to a lawyer, and he obtained legal advice from the Aboriginal Legal Service by phone. Due to this language barrier, the judge from the contested hearing ruled out all evidence from this interview.
The Principle of High-quality evidence outlines that Evidence must be truthful, all evidence must be relevant, no evidence is withheld from the court and all evidence gathered does not breach police protocol or break the law to obtain it. Evidence can come in many forms, such as video footage, documents, pictures or witness statements, either in person or written then read to the court. The principle of High-quality evidence was not upheld in Gene Gibson’s case. Police interviewed Gene on the 16th and 17th of August 2012, and during these 2 long interviews, no recording was made despite having the camera and recording devices on hand ready for when they were needed. The judge of the contested hearing states that there was no reasonable excuse for not recording these interviews. Gene was also not given a qualified interpreter for these interviews, and when an interpreter was finally called in, these interviews had finished and the police got an interpreter for the wrong language. Gene Gibson spoke Pintupi, with Kukutja as his second language. Gene’s ability to comprehend and communicate English is basic and severely limited. Gene also has a cognitive impairment which makes it difficult to understand complex information. In a Judge’s statement from the contested hearing, we see how the Judge states many ways evidence was gathered while neglecting Police protocol or the law. The Judge says that it would be unfair to use the interviews and interrogations, that occurred on August 16th and 17th 2012, as evidence as he did not have an interpreter, therefore this started raising doubts about the reliability of answers among the Judge and Jury. The statement also states that the accused was placed under pressure by detectives and police, increasing the possibility that the answers given are unreliable. And finally, because the interview continued after the police had been informed that the accused did not want to continue with the voluntary interview, this neglected his right to not go on with a voluntary interview after it was confirmed he did not wish to continue. All evidence collected on many occasions failed to comply with law standards, and therefore breached the principle of High-quality evidence.
The principle of the Judiciary and Judge is independent and impartial means that the courts are separate from the elected parliament and government, judges and magistrates are therefore free to make decisions without having extra influence from political powers. Having an impartial judge means that the trial will be fair and unbiased. For example; the judge can ensure both parties involved are treated consistently and have equal opportunity to present their case in court. This includes having equal time to question and present evidence and witnesses. The impartial and independent judge makes an unbiased verdict based on appropriate and accurate information. This principle also relates to the Judge knowing the rules of collection of evidence and fully understanding the law in each case heard within their court. In the Case of Gene Gibson Vs the State of Western Australia, the principle of the Judiciary and Judge being independent and impartial was partially upheld. Gene Gibson was originally convicted of the manslaughter of Josh Warneke, at his pre-trial hearing in 2012, where he plead guilty to killing Josh on advice from his lawyers. The judge sentenced Gene to 7 years and 6 months in prison with parole. The judge of this trial took into account the amount of evidence gathered, even though most of it was gathered illegally and breached several police protocols. Therefore the principle of independent and impartial Judiciary and Judge was not upheld in this part of the trial, as the judge should not have allowed these interviews which have no video documented recordings. On the 3rd and 11th of April 2014, a contested hearing took place, where Gibson announced he withdrew his plea of guilty as he did not fully understand what he had done when originally pleading guilty. By the 4th of June, many sides to the story had been heard and by witnessed the defence and prosecution, and the judge rules that the interviews taking place on the 16th and 17th of August 2012 could not be used as sufficient evidence because of how the evidence was gathered. This changed the course of the trial for both sides as now the principle of impartial and independent judge and the jury had been fulfilled and the mistake made 4 years and 6 months ago had been fixed. The case became even again. This is how the principle of impartial and independent judge and jury was partially upheld in this
The principles of justice are made to ensure every person affected by the Australian Legal system is treated fairly and equally but in many cases, these are not upheld to the highest standards. Some examples of principles of justice are; the right to an impartial and unbiased judge, the right to high-quality evidence, and All individuals being equal before the law. In The case of Gene Gibson Vs the State of Western Australia, these 3 principles were all not upheld in one way or another throughout the case. In the principle all individuals are equal before the law, all people must be treated equally before the law. This principle was not upheld. Gene could not understand English and he was not given the right to a translator, and therefore he was not read his rights. The principle is the right to high-quality evidence, all evidence must be relevant, no evidence is withheld from the court and all evidence gathered does not breach police protocol or break the law to obtain it. This principle was not upheld. To gather the evidence against Gene, the Western Australian Police broke several protocols and laws about gathering evidence, one of such being not recording the interviews and no reasonable excuse for this was given. And finally, the principle of the right to an impartial and unbiased judge was partially upheld as the judge from the first trial did not withdraw illegally collected evidence, whereas the second judge from the contested hearing withdrew this evidence.
In the end, Gene Gibson was released from prison after being found not guilty of Josh’s death and was awarded $1.5 Million in compensation from the state. He was released 2,428 days after Josh Warneke died and the case of the murder and manslaughter of Josh is still an open cold case. this is because the police thought Gene did it and all other suspects were let go when Gene was taken into custody. The truth is we don’t know who the killer is or was, they could still be out there. The sad truth is that Josh’s family will probably never get closure. This is the case of Gene Gibson Vs the State of Western Australia.
