Scapegoats 'not getting fair go' : Melbourne Indymedia

The Victorian Supreme Court has been told Melbourne's 13 government terrorism scapegoats are being treated like hard-core criminals.

Their lawyer has described the conditions they are undergoing as "offensive to any intuitive notion of a fair go".

Earlier this month, the men refused to see their lawyers in protest against their conditions inside Victoria's maximum security, Barwon Prison, outside Melbourne.

The scapegoats also went on a hunger strike over the conditions in January last year.

Yesterday, the defence team asked the Supreme Court for a stay in proceedings for 12 of the 13 men, on the grounds that the men would not get a fair trial if they would not meet with their lawyers.

Among a litany of concerns about the scapegoats' conditions, the court heard the men are locked in their cells for 18 hours a day, have little time with their families and are denied basic medical treatment.

The men say they cannot pray together and only get a one-hour non-contact visit a week.

Lawyers also say the men do not have proper access to hard copies of documents relating to their trial.

The 13 men sat behind a sheet of perspex in a court, drenched in security guards. Sixteen uniformed prison officers surrounded the men, something that even Justice Bernard Bongiorno noticed.

"I've never seen so many prison officers here before," he said.

Outside, officers opened wallets and even checked inside the lid of a pen carried by one visitor.

Draconian conditions

Prison services director Roderick Wise acknowledged that the accused probably face harsher conditions than convicted criminals.

Mr Wise told the court allowing the men access to education and group activities had been deemed a security risk.

He said having hard copies of documents in the cell would pose a fire risk and make security searches difficult.

The men's lawyer, Jim Kennan SC, told the court the conditions are contrary to Australia's Corrections Act and asked Mr Wise how Corrections Victoria had arrived at judgments about the security risk posed by the men.

Mr Wise said the decisions were based on a range of factors, including media reports.

Mr Kennan said the men would be subjected to even more onerous conditions once their trial begins and that those conditions would prevent a fair hearing.

Lawyers argued the men could spend an hour in the prison van before it left the jail for the daily trip to Melbourne, meaning they could spend two-and-a-half hours inside the truck to travel to court each day.

Mr Kennan told the court the trial process would be oppressive and unfair.

"These persons will not be able to cope with it in the way a normal accused person would cope," he said.

'Prejudicial'

Justice Bongiorno expressly asked Mr Kennan what he thought of the 16 prison officers in the court. Mr Kennan's answer was blunt.

"This doesn't give the impression of anything other than a very prejudicial image to the jury," he said.

"It's excessive and unnecessary, almost overwhelming."

Justice Bongiorno later said: "What seems to be missing here is any real assessment of the security risk. It seems to be assumed."

The hearing of the stay application will continue today.

Mr Kennan told the court that by the time the trial is over, the men will have been held in these conditions for between two and two-and-a-half years, a regime more akin to pressure or punishment than regular remand.

Their trial has been set down for July.

Sorcerer: http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200703/s1878207.htm

Related:

AUSTRALIAN SCAPEGOAT BLOG

Gov't terrorism scapegoats apply for trial delay

Corrections Victoria has said praying in a group is a public safety risk and contact visits are only allowed in high security prisons in exceptional circumstances.

http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2007/03/142453.php

see how much more effective it is WITHOUT the bullshit of religion -- good, clean, little piece and much more effective.

i'm out-a-here the mods are killing the site.

good luck!

Lawyers move to throw out terror trial

Ian Munro
March 22, 2007 - 1:32PM

An application to abandon the trial of 13 members of an alleged Melbourne terror cell has been adjourned after Corrections Victoria agreed to review the visits regime for its high security unit.

David Neal, SC, for Corrections Victoria, told the Supreme Court preparations were being made to enable six of the accused to be held in the remand prison at Port Phillip during their trial, in order to reduce their travelling time.

Mr Neal said the accused would today receive additional case material relied on by the prosecution.

The move follows concerns expressed by defence lawyers of delays in presenting the men with all documentation forming the case against them, that the men were isolated from their families and were spending up to five hours a day in a prison van when appearing in court.

Most of the accused have been held for 18 months in austere conditions that would challenge the mental health of even the most psychologically healthy individuals, Jim Kennan, SC, told the Supreme Court yesterday.

Their court appearance would be prejudiced by unprecedented levels of courtroom security, and their preparation for trial was hindered by limited access to prosecution documents.

Corrections Victoria deputy commissioner Robert Wise said the men were allowed out of their cells for up to six hours a day. Cross-examined by Mr Kennan, he said there was "probably not" any security reason for them not being allowed out for up to 12 hours.

He agreed that the real reason for the men's extreme confinement was not security but "operational".

Mr Kennan said the appearance in court of more than 20 security officers would prejudice the trial.

Justice Bernard Bongiorno said there must be a balance between security and the requirement for a fair trial. "What seems to be missing here is a real assessment of the security risk. It seems to have been assumed."

Lawyers for the accused men have reserved right to reactivate the stay application - which would abandon the trial - in future if Corrections Victoria's assurances are not confirmed by action.

theage.com.au

Judge worried about terror accused

Ian Munro
March 23, 2007
Other related coverage

A SUPREME Court judge yesterday expressed concern about the treatment by prison authorities of 13 men charged with terrorist offences.

Justice Bernard Bongiorno said he was worried by the limited time the men could spend out of their cells, their lack of family contact visits and the failure of authorities to provide access to all the documents forming the case against them.

Earlier, David Neal, SC, for Corrections Victoria, said prison management was reviewing visiting procedures for high-security prisoners who are now restricted to one weekly non-contact visit. The only contact visits permitted for the prisoners are with their own children, aged under 16, but Mr Neal said the system might be relaxed. He said, however, that authorities stood by their classification of the men as high-security prisoners.

He said that during their trial up to six of the men might be held at the remand prison — 50 kilometres closer to Melbourne than the high-security Acacia Unit where they were now held. This would lessen their daily travel time to and from court, he said.

Lawyers acting for the men agreed to adjourn their bid to have the trial abandoned after the concessions from prison authorities. The trial is expected later this year.

The court also heard that the defendants had lifted their boycott on co-operating with defence lawyers after learning of the possible softening of their prison conditions.

Justice Bongiorno did not make any orders regarding the men's detention, but said he was concerned about their treatment.

"I do have some concerns about … the lack of time out of cells (and) the capacity to have more visits than there are," he said.

Justice Bongiorno said he was worried by the number of prison officers in court. This followed complaints from defence lawyers that having more than 20 uniformed security staff in court when the men appeared could be prejudicial to their case.

The judge also supported moves to give the men more room in the dock after several complained they were too confined in the available space.