Uploaded on authorSTREAM by anonymums
Court defended over bridge death
Caroline Overington | May 05, 2009
THE Family Court cannot be held responsible for the death of a four-year-old girl thrown from the Westgate Bridge, says Chief Justice Diana Bryant.
In an unusual move just weeks before the accused man faces court on a murder charge, Chief Justice Bryant has moved to defend the role of the Family Court, saying it had only a peripheral role in the drama.
She criticised the "haste with which blame was sheeted home to the Family Court", saying it behoves the community to care for all children, and not to blame only some institutions. But opponents of the Family Court criticised the judge for commenting on a case before the courts.
It seems clear that the role of the Family Court will be examined, when the trial begins.
The parents of three were separated, the girl alone was thrown from the bridge.
In a recorded statement issued via police, the child's uncle said "various authorities have been made aware of our fear for the safety of the children and unfortunately no one would listen".
"We feel the judicial system has failed our family and will continue to fail other families until someone in authority starts to take action," he said.
Trish Merkin, speaking for a group trying to overhaul the Family Court, said the Chief Justice should wait "to see what the criminal courts say about this".
The children had been in a shared-custody arrangement for around two years, living week-on and week-off with each of their parents. The father went abroad to work for several months, during which time the children lived with their mother.
Upon his return, the couple returned to the court to work out a new contact arrangement. The girl was thrown from the bridge a day after the parents agreed to an arrangement that gave the father less time with his children.
In a speech on April 21, posted on the Family Court website, the Chief Justice said she could not understand how the "judicial officer who made the orders (is) responsible for what later occurred". "What is there to be gained from looking for a scapegoat or villain in tragic circumstances such as these?" she said.
"These simplistic theories of responsibility and attribution of blame, which are levelled at the most convenient scapegoat, are worse than mischievous.
"The Family Court's task is to determine on the balance of probabilities whether to order a child spend time with a parent (and if) the order would place the child at an unacceptable risk of harm."
Women's groups are lobbying to overturn changes to the Family Law Act, introduced by the Howard government in 2006, that require the Family Court to presume that contact with both parents is in the best interests of children in all cases, except where there is violence.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment