I came across a news article today on www.news.com.au about moves by the State Labor New South Wales(NSW) Government to start controlling art content and removing elements of the judicial system which allows for a fair trial. In this case, child sex laws.
I shall break up elements of the article here with responses which must make all of us not only concerned, these proposed changes should make us very scared.
Article - 'Artists told: prove it's not porn'
"PAINTERS and photographers will no longer be able to rely on a defence of artistic merit defence under an overhaul of child pornography laws."
Politicians, police and judges will be deciding what is and is not art. Do you want to see politicians deciding what we as people, define at being art? They claim it is child pornography driven yet this is the same argument for Internet Censorship which will filter every website with words including sex, breast, penis, orgasm, etc. How many websites for Sex Education, medical information, student research, etc will be blocked for being evil material?
One must ask just how much art will be banned as many forms of artwork including medieval Christian art has the naked form such as on the Cathredal at Notre Dame, France. Then are artworks by artists such as, Anne Geddes who has always used images of naked children.
Photo Artwork by, Anne Geddes
Then there is, May Gibbs, an infamous Australian artist, born in Surrey(UK) who used naked children in her artwork as well.
Above two artwork by, May Gibbs
"Mr Hatzistergos said the proposed laws would cover the production, distribution and possession of child pornography.
"The fact that it is art cannot be used as a defence. The report recommends that once such material has been found to be unlawfully pornographic, whether or not it is intended to be art is irrelevant," he said."
An admittance that this is not about artwork but stopping all mediums of nudity beginning with children where opposers to will be labelled as pedophiles just as the Rudd Government labels those who are against internet censorship as pedophiles. Yes, your baby photos will need to be fully dressed.
"The working party, headed by District Court judge Peter Berman, also examined the use of photographs depicting nudity in a news context.
"Mr Hatzistergos said the new laws would ensure the rights of photographers to publish pictures - such as the iconic Vietnam war photograph of a nine-year-old girl running naked on a street after being burned by napalm - would not be infringed."
So, it is alright to show on tv, bodies that have been freshly burnt, their naked twisted bodies on your tv during dinner time via the news but the sight of a natural naked body is clearly an act of pedophilia. Is it just me, or is Australia being run by some very sick and twisted people?
Government Approves the above image!
Government declares this photos to be of concern for pedophilia
"The Government will seek feedback from victims' groups..."
Organisations including, 'Bravehearts' run by angry zealots like Hetty Johnson who parades the sexual assault of her daughter like some flag to push her cause has the ear of government. Hetty Johnson has publicly pushed for the system where government issues licences to be an artist and that government decides what is and isn't art.
The twisted zealot, Hetty Johnson.
And now, read the final part of this news article carefully;
"The report also recommends the introduction of laws making it easier for police to investigate child pornography and for juries and court staff to participate in trials for these offences. This suggestion follows concern within the legal fraternity of the impact that the viewing of child pornography evidence has on jury members, many of whom find the process distressing.
"The working party has recommended the law be changed so jury members, prosecutors and court staff are able to view only a sample of images during the trial process."
In a move to abolish the concept of a 'Fair Trial', the above states that the prosecution could make any allegation they like against the Accused without having to demonstrate their evidence to back their claims on the lie of, "It might make some on the Jury cry".
I have sat on two juries, both of them being charges on Child Related sex crimes. The second trial was ruled a mistrial due to a police officers making a serious judgement of error, the first saw the Jury return a verdict of 'Not Guilty' on every count as the evidence presented by the Prosecution, did not back up their claims. In fact, their evidence contradicted the Prosecutions claims.
Call me paranoid if you wish but I see here an opportunity for the prosecution, especially when politicians seek to scape goat someone, to run a Kangaroo Court where the Accused has not got a hope in hell of having a fair trial with allegations being denied true justice by not allowing the Defense Council from challenging and the Jury from viewing the evidence.
My oh my, what will Australia be doing next?
0 comments:
Post a Comment