Part 40(G) Australia’s “irrelevant” Crimes against humanity. Still more state and territory criminal laws that Centrelink’s staff are not not to violate.

Australia’s “irrelevant” crimes against humanity happen because the training of Centrelink staff does NOT include the following state and territory MURDER laws.

The short link URL for this posting is:  http://wp.me/p1n8TZ-L7

No matter which state or territory welfare recipients live in, public servants who enforced the unconstitutional, human rights violating “No Show, No Pay” laws found in Section 42C of the Social Security (Administration Act), risk criminal charges, e.g. An Act of Reckless endangerment. Where fatalities occur, the charge is MURDER.

The crucial question therefore is, how many people has Australia’s welfare penalties murdered?skill-certified

Centrelink administrators are directly responsible for concealing the number of victims of Australia’s “No Show, No Pay” breaching laws. Given the penalties outlines below, it is no surprise that these deaths are “not collected” by Centrelink’s top management.

An excuse that may be used by politicians, government lawyers and Centrelink staff that making such a threat or causing it to be received was reasonable by the standards of an ordinary person.

 However, ignoring the constitution, violating human rights treaties and deliberately depriving impoverished people of the means to survive, and then dismissing any subsequent fatalities as “irrelevant” is not the act of a “reasonable person”, it is an Abuse of Public Office, a crime that6 contains similar wording in both state and federal criminal codes, e.g. Queensland and the Commonwealth criminal codes.

 Queensland Criminal Code: 92A Misconduct in relation to public office

(1) A public officer who, with intent to dishonestly gain a benefit for the officer or another person or to dishonestly cause a detriment to another person—

(a) deals with information gained because of office; or

(b) performs or fails to perform a function of office; or

(c) without limiting paragraphs (a) and (b), does an act or

makes an omission in abuse of the authority of office;

is guilty of a crime.

Maximum penalty—7 years imprisonment.

Commonwealth Criminal Code Act.

‘Abuse of Power’ – Sections 142 (1)(b)(i) & (ii) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code Act (1995).

“A Commonwealth public official is guilty of an offence if (b) the official does so with the intention of:

(i) dishonestly obtaining a benefit for himself or herself or for another person; or: (ii) dishonestly causing a detriment to another person.

Penalty: Imprisonment for 5 years

MURDER MOST FOUL

The following murder laws provide compelling reasons for Assitant Secretary Neil Skill’s statement that “Centrelink does not collect Post Breaching terminal Outcome Statistics”.

Northern Territory

166     Threats to kill

    (1)     Any person who, with intent to cause fear, makes, or causes any person to receive, a threat to kill any person which threat is of such a nature as to cause fear to any person of reasonable firmness and courage, is guilty of a crime and liable to imprisonment for 7 years.

    (2)     It is a defence to a charge of a crime defined by this section to prove that making such a threat or causing it to be received was reasonable by the standards of an ordinary person similarly circumstanced to the accused person.

NOTE: (2) above may be used by politicians, government lawyers and Centrelink staff a

 Division 3A  Recklessly endangering life and serious harm, negligently causing serious harm and related offences involving vehicles

Subdivision 1     Interpretation 174B     Danger of death or serious harm

    (1)     For this Division, conduct that may give rise to a danger of death or serious harm includes exposing a person to the risk of catching a disease that may give rise to a danger of death or serious harm.

    (2)     For this Division, conduct gives rise to a danger of death or serious harm if it is ordinarily capable of creating a real, and not merely a theoretical, danger of death or serious harm.

    (3)     Conduct may give rise to a danger of death or serious harm whatever the statistical or arithmetical calculation of the degree of risk of death or serious harm involved.

    (4)     In the prosecution of an offence under Subdivision 2, it is not necessary to prove that a person was actually placed in danger of death or serious harm by the conduct concerned.

Subdivision 2     Offences 174C     Recklessly endangering life

A person is guilty of a crime if:

        (a)     the person engages in conduct; and

        (b)     that conduct gives rise to a danger of death to any person; and

        (c)     the person is reckless as to the danger of death to any person that arises from the conduct.

Maximum penalty:     Imprisonment for 10 years or, for an aggravated offence, 14 years.

174D     Recklessly endangering serious harm

A person is guilty of a crime if:

        (a)     the person engages in conduct; and

        (b)     that conduct gives rise to a danger of serious harm to any person; and

        (c)     the person is reckless as to the danger of serious harm to any person that arises from the conduct.

Maximum penalty:     Imprisonment for 7 years or, for an aggravated offence, 10 years.

174E     Negligently causing serious harm

A person is guilty of a crime if:

        (a)     the person engages in conduct; and

        (b)     that conduct causes serious harm to another person; and

        (c)     the person is negligent as to causing serious harm to the other person or any other person by the conduct.

Maximum penalty:     Imprisonment for 10 years.

 TASMANIA

  1. Special cases of homicide

A person is deemed to have killed another in the following cases where his act or omission is not the immediate, or not the sole, cause of death:

(a) where he causes bodily injury to the other which requires surgical or medical treatment, and such treatment causes death, if such treatment is applied in good faith, and with reasonable knowledge and skill, but not otherwise;

(b) where he causes bodily injury to the other which causes death, though it would not have caused death if the other had submitted to proper treatment or had observed proper precautions;

(c) where by actual violence, or threats, or intimidation of any kind, or by deceit, he causes the other to do an act or make an omission likely to cause death, and which he knows, or ought to have known, the other would be likely to do, and which causes the death of the other;

(d) where by any act or omission he hastens the death of another who is suffering under any disease or injury which would itself have caused death;

(e) where his act or omission causes death, but would not have caused death unless it had been accompanied by the acts or omissions of the person killed or of other persons.

 Culpable homicide

(1) Homicide may be culpable or not culpable.

(2) Homicide is culpable when it is caused –

(a) by an act intended to cause death or bodily harm, or which is commonly known to be likely to cause death or bodily harm, and which is not justified under the provisions of the Code;

(b) by an omission amounting to culpable negligence to perform a duty tending to the preservation of human life, although there may be no intention to cause death or bodily harm; or

(c) by any unlawful act.

(3) The question what amounts to culpable negligence is a question of fact, to be determined on the circumstances of each particular case.

(4) For the purposes of this chapter it is unlawful –

(a) to cause death in the manner described in section 154(c);

(b) to wilfully frighten a child of tender years; or

(c) to wilfully frighten a sick person knowing such person to be sick.

  1. Cases in which culpable homicide is murder

(1) Culpable homicide is murder if it is committed–

(a) with an intention to cause the death of any person, whether of the person killed or not;

(b) with an intention to cause to any person, whether the person killed or not, bodily harm which the offender knew to be likely to cause death in the circumstances, although he had no wish to cause death;

(c) by means of any unlawful act or omission which the offender knew, or ought to have known, to be likely to cause death in the circumstances, although he had no wish to cause death or bodily harm to any person;

(d) with an intention to inflict grievous bodily harm for the purpose of facilitating the commission of any of the crimes hereinafter mentioned or the flight of the offender upon the commission, or attempted commission, thereof;

(e) by means of administering any stupefying thing for either of the purposes mentioned in paragraph (d); or

(f) by wilfully stopping the breath of any person by any means for either of such purposes as aforesaid–

although, in the cases mentioned in paragraphs (d), (e), and (f), the offender did not intend to cause death, and did not know that death was likely to ensue.

(2) The following are the crimes referred to in paragraph (d) of subsection (1) – Piracy, and offences deemed to be piracy; murder; escape or rescue from prison or lawful custody; resisting lawful apprehension; rape; forcible abduction; robbery with violence; robbery; burglary; arson.

 Murder

Any person who commits murder is guilty of a crime, and is liable to imprisonment for the term of the person’s natural life or for such other term as the Court determines.

Charge: Murder.

 Written threat to murder

Any person who, knowing the contents thereof, wilfully, and with intent thereby to intimidate or influence any person, causes such person to receive any writing threatening to kill him or any other person, is guilty of a crime.

  •  This charge is particularly relevant to Australia’s “No show, no pay” provisions in Section 42C of the Commonwealth’s Social Security Act. Paragraph 47 of the 2002 Welfare Reform discussion Paper states the purpose of a welfare benefit: Assistance is targeted to those most in need. People with no other means of support are assisted with their basic costs of living.

  • The unconstitutional, human rights violating “No show, no pay” law is a recklessly dangerous law because it intentional deprives people of “their basic costs of living”, i.e. any “No show, no pay” threat is a statement of intent to deliberately deprive people of the ability to live. Logically, if a person is deprived of the ability to live, they have a very high probability of dying. You do not have top a High Court judge to work out that any “No show, no pay” deaths are murders caused by a criminally reckless indifference to the consequences of the human impact of the “No show, no pay” penalties.

 QUEENSLAND & WESTERN AUSTRALIA

(These states have many identical laws under different section numbers, e.g. [302] in Qld is [279] in WA)

302 Definition of murder

(1) Except as hereinafter set forth, a person who unlawfully kills another under any of the following circumstances, that is to say—

(a) if the offender intends to cause the death of the person killed or that of some other person or if the offender intends to do to the person killed or to some other person some grievous bodily harm;

(b) if death is caused by means of an act done in the prosecution of an unlawful purpose, which act is of such a nature as to be likely to endanger human life;

(c) if the offender intends to do grievous bodily harm to some person for the purpose of facilitating the commission of a crime which is such that the offender may be arrested without warrant, or for the purpose of facilitating the flight of an offender who has committed

or attempted to commit any such crime;

(d) if death is caused by administering any stupefying or overpowering thing for either of the purposes mentioned in paragraph (c);

(e) if death is caused by wilfully stopping the breath of any

person for either of such purposes;

is guilty of murder.

(2) Under subsection (1)(a) it is immaterial that the offender did

not intend to hurt the particular person who is killed.

(3) Under subsection (1)(b) it is immaterial that the offender did

not intend to hurt any person.

(4) Under subsection (1)(c) to (e) it is immaterial that the offender

did not intend to cause death or did not know that death was

likely to result.

 316 Stupefying in order to commit indictable offence

Any person who, with intent to commit or to facilitate the commission of an indictable offence, or to facilitate the flight of an offender after the commission or attempted commission of an indictable offence, administers, or attempts to administer, any stupefying or overpowering drug or thing to any person, is guilty of a crime, and is liable to imprisonment for life.

 328 Negligent acts causing harm

(1) Any person who unlawfully does any act, or omits to do any act which it is the person’s duty to do, by which act or omission bodily harm is actually caused to any person, is guilty of a misdemeanour, and is liable to imprisonment for 2 years.

(2) The offender may be arrested without warrant.

 VICTORIA

20 Threats to kill

A person who, without lawful excuse, makes to another person a threat to kill that other person or any other person—

                         (a) intending that that other person would fear the threat would be carried out; or

                         (b) being reckless as to whether or not that other person would fear the threat would be carried out—

is guilty of an indictable offence.

  • Level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum).

21 Threats to inflict serious injury

A person who, without lawful excuse, makes to another person a threat to inflict serious injury on that other person or any other person—

                         (a) intending that that other person would fear the threat would be carried out; or

                         (b) being reckless as to whether or not that other person would fear the threat would be carried out—

is guilty of an indictable offence.

  • Level 6 imprisonment (5 years maximum).

 Conduct endangering life

22 A person who, without lawful excuse, recklessly engages in conduct that places or may place another person in danger of death is guilty of an indictable offence.

Penalty: Level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum).

 23 Conduct endangering persons

A person who, without lawful excuse, recklessly engages in conduct that places or may place another person in danger of serious injury is guilty of an indictable offence.

Penalty: Level 6 imprisonment (5 years maximum).

 Negligently causing serious injury

A person who by negligently doing or omitting to do an act causes serious injury to another person is guilty of an indictable offence.

Penalty: Level 6 imprisonment (5 years maximum)

 Extortion with threat to kill

A person who makes a demand of another person—

(a) with a threat to kill or inflict injury on a person (other than the offender or an

accomplice of the offender); or

(b) with a threat in circumstances where, if the threat were carried out, the life of a person (other than the offender or an accomplice of the offender) would be endangered—

is guilty of an indictable offence.

Penalty: Level 4 imprisonment (15 years maximum).

 NEW SOUTH WALES

Division 1 Homicide

18 Murder and manslaughter defined

(1) (a) Murder shall be taken to have been committed where the act of the accused, or thing by him or her omitted to be done, causing the death charged, was done or omitted with reckless indifference to human life, or with intent to kill or inflict grievous bodily harm upon some person, or done in an attempt to commit, or during or immediately after the commission, by the accused, or some accomplice with him or her, of a crime punishable by

imprisonment for life or for 25 years.

(b) Every other punishable homicide shall be taken to be

manslaughter.

(2) (a) No act or omission which was not malicious, or for which the

accused had lawful cause or excuse, shall be within this section.

(b) No punishment or forfeiture shall be incurred by any person who kills another by misfortune only.

 19A Punishment for murder

(1) A person who commits the crime of murder is liable to imprisonment for life.

(2) A person sentenced to imprisonment for life for the crime of murder is to serve that sentence for the term of the person’s natural life.

No matter which state or territory welfare recipients live in, enforcing the unconstitutional, human rights violating “No Show, No Pay” laws found in Section 42C of the Social Security (Administration Act), is a criminal act of Reckless endangerment. Where fatalities occur, the charge is MURDER.

The crucial question therefore is, how many people has Australia’s welfare penalties murdered?

 

Ronald Medlicott – A Christian lay activist for Justice in Australia.

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in crimes against humanity, Human Rights violations, News and politics, Political, Uncategorized, Welfare rights and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Part 40(G) Australia’s “irrelevant” Crimes against humanity. Still more state and territory criminal laws that Centrelink’s staff are not not to violate.

  1. Magdalena says:

    Hi Ronald, can I email you my question regarding an adult paranoid schizophrenic who is threatening others? If so where do I write?
    Thank you,
    Magdalena

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s