NT Election

So what do you guys think? Will the resignation of Claire, the end of no-limit speeds on the highway and the out of the control violence sink the labor party chances??

Or will it take a different opposition to actually rest power away from the Labor Party.

What a joke in Katherine the CLPs First candidate resigns just days into the election Campaign and its second candidate a Policeman was effectivly to unable to work because he was suffering stress due to being caught unlawfully obtaining details from the Police Computer.

As for the Open speed limits its a shame the real reason for their cancelation wasnt published. This is what I heard on the grape Vine. That John Howard who was Prime Minister told the Territory Government that he was going to cut road funding if they didnt lower the open speed limit. It is believed that he wanted it to be 110 kms. Now you know! Also if you think that the Open Speed Limit will be returned think again the New Federal Government will not fund Territory roads either.

*waves gleefully from SA after 30 years of NTness.

Quote:
This is what I heard on the grape Vine. That John Howard who was Prime Minister told the Territory Government that he was going to cut road funding if they didnt lower the open speed limit. It is believed that he wanted it to be 110 kms. Now you know! Also if you think that the Open Speed Limit will be returned think again the New Federal Government will not fund Territory roads either.

I've said this before. If this was true, the ALP would have screamed it from the rooftops at the top of their lungs. It would have been front page news for weeks. It would be in all the brochures.

Give the ALP some damn credit. They listened to their safety-nazi mates, agreed with their arguments, and put the limit in place.

which side will help the first paintball field open it's doors soonest?

Quote from Aegis;349935:
which side will help the first paintball field open it's doors soonest?

+1

Quote from El Presidente;349933:
I've said this before. If this was true, the ALP would have screamed it from the rooftops at the top of their lungs. It would have been front page news for weeks. It would be in all the brochures.

Give the ALP some damn credit. They listened to their safety-nazi mates, agreed with their arguments, and put the limit in place.

Damn you so far wrong mate its laughable. Federal government initiative. ALP had no option. Hey but you belive what you will. Others like me know the truth and are willing to stake our balls on it

Quote from grandinferno;349932:
*waves gleefully from SA after 30 years of NTness.

lol gleeful from SA :D

lol whats the point they have both ****ed the NT royally in the ass turd sandwhich v/s a douche..

Quote from SpongeBobSquarePants;349954:
Damn you so far wrong mate its laughable. Federal government initiative. ALP had no option. Hey but you belive what you will. Others like me know the truth and are willing to stake our balls on it

You were privy to the conversations betwixt Howard and Martin, I take it?

Then I understand it not turning up in the NT News. Public servants aren't meant to leak, except to GU.

In any case, I am prepared to be wrong. Really, I am. If the CLP get the nod and then come out with a statement saying they've been boxed in by Canberra, I will donate "00 to the charity of SpongeBob's choice.

I hope that settles this rehashing of an old GU argument so people can get back to barracking for their own team :P :)

Quote from El Presidente;349979:
In any case, I am prepared to be wrong. Really, I am. If the CLP get the nod and then come out with a statement saying they've been boxed in by Canberra, I will donate "00 to the charity of SpongeBob's choice.

Your money is safe.

Not that Sponge is wrong, but that there's no way possible the CLP can claw their way from their current position anytime soon.

Quote from jabsy;349983:
Your money is safe.

Not that Sponge is wrong, but that there's no way possible the CLP can claw their way from their current position anytime soon.

The psephoes don't expect a CLP win and neither do I, but it's likely that the CLP will regain 6 seats which puts them in striking distance. If there's a swell of anti-ALP opinion that swings against then the CLP could collect the remaining seats to form a minority government or even to govern in their own right.

But the odds are against it. Centrebet are paying ".15 ALP, $4.65 CLP.

I expand my offer to pay "00 to a charity if hard evidence is produced of the Martin government introducing speed limits due to Canberran pressure. I would need a letter, a memo or some other document from one or the other government mentioning this state of affairs.

both sides are idiots.

its just a matter of which one makes the most or biggest mistakes. so far thats going to the CLP. i can see the CLP gaining some seats back, but i don't think they'll win overall.

Two terms is long enough for them to start scamming us all. Time to kick them out and let the other mob run a muck for a bit.

well *cough*

obviously hugely popular, one of the worst voter turnouts ever, i had no idea it was election day untill my cousin told me last night, boycotted the vote anyway. Most likely we will see a Labour goverment, with the only seat that can change is fanny bay, my friends old man Garry Lambert is only 57 votes behind the ALP man. and that seat will make it a hung Parliment if the CLP can turn it around.

Yeah i totally forgot it was today as i was working on my car all day, typical i remember 5 min after 6pm :S

It's a very exciting election count this year though. Very edge of the seat, and yes, I called it. ^_^ I win some money too. Might as well win where you can. ^_~

On a side note, the campaign this year has been bullshit to say the least, on both parts... I think they're all in shock a bit though. Libs didn't quite expect to do this well, and the labs didn't expect to be run so deep.

i voted to avoid any possible fine, however i'm not sure elmo was actually a candidate.

I couldn’t believe it when I heard that ALP only got government by one seat (I heard this via a 3rd party so forgive me if I am wrong).

I thought CL would do better than previously but not this well. It’s a wake up call for Labor to pull their finger out and also a wake up call to the CL to pull their finger out.

I really don’t care who wins but I struggle to comprehend some of the decisions that Labor has made. The main one that comes to mind is the 500k, 5 day binge party that they threw and also the parties they threw for the Greeks and the Italians (football wins?). Nothing against either I am ethnic myself but the money should have been spent better elsewhere.

On a side note, I am impressed by the free internet at the Airport *GRIN* all those updates that I had been putting off… well I did them whilst waiting for a flight *GRIN x 2*

2nd side note - Well done on the bet Kagetsu, the odds must've been pretty short? But a wins a win ;-)

Quote from Mungus;350787:
i voted to avoid any possible fine, however i'm not sure elmo was actually a candidate.

I haven't voted for a few elections, haven't received my fine YET.

Expect a protest in relation to the Seat of Sanderson and the distrobution of unauthorised election material and the now self admitted fact that the CLP candidate asked for it to be done.

I have it on good authority that he may be charged with Conspiracy and incitement both Criminal offences as well as the electoral act charges and if found guilty he could be stripped of the seat (and probably his former job as a Cop the Police Commissioner takes a dim view of inciting crime) and a bi- election held. The fool admitted to the offense on the ABC coverage on Saturday night.

Quote from thelion;350797:
Expect a protest in relation to the Seat of Sanderson and the distrobution of unauthorised election material and the now self admitted fact that the CLP candidate asked for it to be done.

I have it on good authority that he may be charged with Conspiracy and incitement both Criminal offences as well as the electoral act charges and if found guilty he could be stripped of the seat (and probably his former job as a Cop the Police Commissioner takes a dim view of inciting crime) and a bi- election held. The fool admitted to the offense on the ABC coverage on Saturday night.

some people just have no idea.....

Quote:
Expect a protest in relation to the Seat of Sanderson and the distrobution of unauthorised election material and the now self admitted fact that the CLP candidate asked for it to be done.

It'll go to the Court of Disputed Returns, but the actual magnitude of the offense in the Act is small potatoes -- people didn't put their name to the letters and that's it. The fine is $750 from memory.

Generally elections are overturned on fraud, not people misunderstanding the Act.

Actually there is another possibility El Presidente, Mr Stiles could be looking at the charges of

CRIMINAL CODE - SECT 43BI
Incitement
43BI. Incitement

(1) A person who urges the commission of an offence is guilty of the offence of incitement.

(2) For the person to be guilty, the person must intend that the offence incited be committed.

(3) Subsection (2) has effect subject to subsection (6).

(4) A person may be found guilty even if committing the offence incited is impossible.

(5) Any defences, procedures, limitations or qualifying provisions that apply to an offence apply also to the offence of incitement in relation to that offence.

(6) Any special liability provisions that apply to an offence apply also to the offence of incitement in relation to that offence.

(7) It is not an offence to incite the commission of an offence against section 43BF, this section or section 43BJ.

Penalty:

(a) if the offence incited is punishable by life imprisonment - imprisonment for 10 years; or

(b) if the offence incited is punishable by imprisonment for 14 years or more, but is not punishable by life imprisonment - imprisonment for 7 years; or

(c) if the offence incited is punishable by imprisonment for 10 years or more, but is not punishable by imprisonment for 14 years or more - imprisonment for 5 years; or

(d) if the offence is otherwise punishable by imprisonment - imprisonment for 3 years or for the maximum term of imprisonment for the offence incited, whichever is the lesser; or

(e) if the offence incited is not punishable by imprisonment - the number of penalty units equal to the maximum number of penalty units applicable to the offence incited.

and/or

CRIMINAL CODE - SECT 43BJ
Conspiracy
43BJ. Conspiracy

(1) A person who conspires with another person to commit an offence punishable by imprisonment for more than 12 months, or by a fine of 200 penalty units or more, is guilty of the offence of conspiracy to commit that offence and, unless otherwise provided, is punishable as if the offence to which the conspiracy relates had been committed.

(2) For the person to be guilty -

(a) the person must have entered into an agreement with one or more other persons; and

(b) the person and at least one other party to the agreement must have intended that an offence would be committed pursuant to the agreement; and

(c) the person or at least one other party to the agreement must have committed an overt act pursuant to the agreement.

(3) Subsection (2) has effect subject to subsection (8).

(4) A person may be found guilty of conspiracy to commit an offence even if -

(a) committing the offence is impossible; or

(b) the only other party to the agreement is a body corporate; or

(c) each other party to the agreement is at least one of the following:

(i) a person who is not criminally responsible;

(ii) a person for whose benefit or protection the offence exists; or

(d) subject to subsection (5)(a), all other parties to the agreement have been acquitted of the conspiracy.

(5) A person cannot be found guilty of conspiracy to commit an offence if -

(a) all other parties to the agreement have been acquitted of the conspiracy and a finding of guilt would be inconsistent with their acquittal; or

(b) he or she is a person for whose benefit or protection the offence exists.

(6) A person cannot be found guilty of conspiracy to commit an offence if, before the commission of an overt act pursuant to the agreement, the person -

(a) withdrew from the agreement; and

(b) took all reasonable steps to prevent the commission of the offence.

(7) A court may dismiss a charge of conspiracy if it thinks that the interests of justice require it to do so.

(8) Any defences, procedures, limitations or qualifying provisions that apply to an offence apply also to the offence of conspiracy to commit that offence.

(9) Any special liability provisions that apply to an offence apply also to the offence of conspiracy to commit that offence.

(10) Proceedings for an offence of conspiracy must not be commenced without the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

(11) However, a person may be arrested for, charged with, or remanded in custody or on bail in connection with, an offence of conspiracy before the necessary consent has been given.

I had a conversation last night with several lawyers who gave that possibility in relation to Mr Stiles when he made comments of complicity in relation to the woman coming to him to ask what she could do. His complicity was expanded in that the documents were printed with his knowledge and after he had read them and that they were printed using CLP resources.

There is El Presidente an axiom that one should not profit from an illegal act, as such there is a great possibility that The Supreme Court could actually declare that because the swing was significantly greater in the seat of Sanderson than the rest of the Northern Territory and that Mr Stiles himself has actually stated that the letters had a significant impact in that swing, that the elction of the seat of Sanderson is void due to illegal activities of one of the candidates and as such order a by-election.

Surely the law and order candidate Mr Stiles would demand that the legalities be followed and the toughest sentence be followed.

What happened, exactly?

A few years ago the then Member of Sanderson got a little bit drunk at a cricket match and when a female security guard took him to task he made lewd remarks to her. He publically appologised which she accepted. Three or four days before the election handwritten fliers were placed in that electorate and the electorate of Fong Lim alledgedly written by the Security Guard without CLP encouragement. It has come to light since that not only did Mr Stiles the then CLP candidate know about it, but from his own lips told her to write the letter and then arranged the production and distribution of the letter that letter failed to say who authorised it. Which is illegal under the Electoral act whilst this is not usually a big matter in this particular instance it provided a more than the rest of the Northern Territory swing against the sitting candidate. There is sufficient evidence from Candidate Stiles that he made arrangements with the female security guard for the production of said document that he provided the material support to both Publish and distibute the material and as such has with his own words breached the electoral act. Whilst Electoral act breaches are not considered a big crime conspiracy is, if he had admitted the oversight and that he had printed and distributed the material he would have got a slap on the wrist and the electorate would have known the dirty tricks campaign originated from Mr Stiles Campaign team. For him to lie about his involvement means that he knew well enough that he was doing something both dihonest and illegal. He also has told another person that it was perfectly alright to commit a crime, nice thing for a serving Police Officer to be doing expect the Police Commissioner not to be a happy chappy either so if he actually is Charged and convicted of any of the above matters he may not be allowed to still be a member of the Northern Territory Police for bringing the Police into disrepute.

now I know the NT news doesn't have the best journalistic standards but this is what the NT news article had quoted as peter saying.
Quote:

Mr Styles admitted he about the letter-writing. “I knew people out there who asked me what they could do to help me,” he said.
“I said if you want to help, express yourself.

Hardly looks like Incitement to me.

Quote from morge;350818:
now I know the NT news doesn't have the best journalistic standards but this is what the NT news article had quoted as peter saying.

Hardly looks like Incitement to me.

Actually I prefer the direct from the lips response he made on the Election coverage of the ABC that has the advantage of the candidate stating the matter in his own words, it is on the public record and able to be played to a Judge without ANY alledged distotions.

The Candidate said that they came to him and asked what they could do for his campaign. He told them what to do and it was an illegal act ipso facto "Incitement" he then helped them commit that offence ipso facto "Conspiracy" I sat with several lawyers of note in town when he said that and the comments were unbelievable with one saying more people are sent to jail because they arrogantly open thier mouth thinking they have not committed a crime Mr Stiles should know better he is a Policeman or was. I should also point out there are actually other charges under the N.T. Criminal code but I believe that those above are the charges that he will face if the matter gets to a court.

Morge in addition the letter droppers were photographed in some instances those self same people I believe were handing out how to vote cards for Mr Stiles and were Photographed doing so. That means that They to can be charged with disseminating unauthorised election material and Conspiracy and Whilst I may be wrong but a charge can be made for EACH pamphlet made as it is a seperate document so it may actually be literally several thousand charges made, with a fine for each one.

i'm enrolled as a postal voter in fannie bay. still havent recieved my postal vote. i think i may write into the nt news regarding voter disenfranchisement. i got an acceptance letter as a postal voter from the NTEC aswell

Quote from thelion;350821:
Morge in addition the letter droppers were photographed in some instances those self same people I believe were handing out how to vote cards for Mr Stiles and were Photographed doing so. That means that They to can be charged with disseminating unauthorised election material and Conspiracy and Whilst I may be wrong but a charge can be made for EACH pamphlet made as it is a seperate document so it may actually be literally several thousand charges made, with a fine for each one.

bitter much? Have money on the alp to win by more than one seat?

I tipped a 14 seat Parliament as well it is still a possibility unless I have missed some thing on Sunday as I havent listened to any news today as I slept in till late this afternoon. Last thing I heard last night was that the ALP had won 12 seats definite and the CLP 8 with one independent and 4 seats undecided with 1000 odd votes to count in each of those seats.

11 Seats CLP
1 Ind
12 Labor
Fannie bay still in doubt with a result expected by friday. If the CLP win Fannie Bay they're going to woo the independant to form government.
Got to love the politically aware members amongst our community:
Quote:
John Corn is concerned about "the rising road toll" :grin:

Ben

Quote from thelion;350805:
Actually there is another possibility El Presidente, Mr Stiles could be looking at the charges of

CRIMINAL CODE - SECT 43BI
Incitement
43BI. Incitement

(1) A person who urges the commission of an offence is guilty of the offence of incitement.

(2) For the person to be guilty, the person must intend that the offence incited be committed.
[ ... snip ... ]

CRIMINAL CODE - SECT 43BJ
Conspiracy
43BJ. Conspiracy

(1) A person who conspires with another person to commit an offence punishable by imprisonment for more than 12 months, or by a fine of 200 penalty units or more, is guilty of the offence of conspiracy to commit that offence and, unless otherwise provided, is punishable as if the offence to which the conspiracy relates had been committed.

(2) For the person to be guilty -

(a) the person must have entered into an agreement with one or more other persons; and

(b) the person and at least one other party to the agreement must have intended that an offence would be committed pursuant to the agreement; and
[ ... snip ...]

Law student, are you? Second year? That would explain talking about incitement and conspiracy, I seem to recall that's lectured on in the third week of semester 2.

I've bolded the parts that will probably put Stiles out of legal trouble. He hasn't said he incited an offence, only that he wanted people to write letters for him. If I asked you to write to someone on my behalf and you committed libel, would I have incited libel? If I ask you to buy me some milk and you also steal some chewing gum, did I incite gum theft?

Quote:
I had a conversation last night with several lawyers who gave that possibility in relation to Mr Stiles when he made comments of complicity in relation to the woman coming to him to ask what she could do. His complicity was expanded in that the documents were printed with his knowledge and after he had read them and that they were printed using CLP resources.

I don't recall him saying he had read them. He might be off incitement and still stuck with conspiracy in that case. Or, I don't know, is there a law against incompetent candidates? This is Peter Stiles we're talking about, not Niccolo Machiavelli.

Quote:
There is El Presidente an axiom that one should not profit from an illegal act, as such there is a great possibility that The Supreme Court could actually declare that because the swing was significantly greater in the seat of Sanderson than the rest of the Northern Territory and that Mr Stiles himself has actually stated that the letters had a significant impact in that swing, that the elction of the seat of Sanderson is void due to illegal activities of one of the candidates and as such order a by-election.

There's another El Presidente axiom that bullshit is tedious and you shouldn't pretend you're the mighty, impartial and vengeful hand of juuuusstiiiicceee!!!!11!!1!!

Here's how I reckon it will run:

If Fannie Bay falls to Labor, the ALP will probably keep its powder dry and leave Stiles alone. It's an iffy shot and would cost a lot of money. If Stiles won you wouldn't be able to accuse him of dirty tricks for the next 4 years.

If Fannie Bay falls to the CLP, then the ALP will race down to the court to challenge Stiles in case they can claw back a one seat majority.

In either case if Stiles is found to have knowingly incited the violation of the Act, he deserves whatever the Court of Disputed Returns dishes out and thorough kick up the backside as well. I imagine that the CoDR would order a by-election and that Kiely and Stiles would be replaced by new candidates.

Enjoy Crim Law.

Well iam :P

damn will they spell my name right ****ers

how did i know that would come back to haunt me urg i was at the bank depositing cash and some lady forced me to do it i swear...lol

Not a Law Student at all El Presidente I am quite a few years older than that. The incitement wasnt my idea but that of a learned friend, I actually stated conspiracy, the easiest of all crimes to prove. You may be right if Fannie Bay is won but dont discount a challenge anyway as the Government may foot the bill for the Court Case as it is technically a Criminal matter if he is charged with conspiracy and the matter is being investigated by the N.T. Police. That he is a Police Officer (he hasnt been declared the winner yet) he is still subject to the Provisions of the Police Administration Act and as such can also if convicted lose his job as a member of the Police Force. That will not escape the Commisioners attention either as he is not well liked in the Upper levels of the Police Force. As for being impartial probably not but I am probably officious which is part of the job description. I detest persons who should know better breaking the law.

Yeah? Well I detest people that refuse to use paragraphs.

and after sitting through 2 weeks jury duty recently - i want to ****ing kill anyone that says 'learned friend' ;P

I'm typing this in a jury selection room right now!

The letters had nothing to do with len losing the seat it had a lot to do with the fact that len hasn't done much for the community in his seat. Well apart from a few bbqs and the friiled neck lizard signs he got council to put up around anula school. Crime is still up in karama malak anula.

LOL pala, do what I should've done, do a big stage wink at the defendant if you're asked up =)

this shit beats work

hope your jury chairs are comfier than ours are :P

****ers designed the courtrooms for 5 foot midgets. The lumbar support bit in the chairs is practically under your arse and they have no recline function! The human back was not designed to sit up straight!

Sorry for the Paragraphs but had actually got into trouble for that already.

Don't however decide you will check out things on the Net Judges are getting p#@sed about that and it will not be long before a Judge decides to send someone to jail for contempt of Court for it.

lol. He won, you lost. hoping the legal system will cancel that fact out is just silly.

Len Kiely is useless as morge said and peter stiles is a awesome bloke and a hard worker. next to that every seat in the state had a swing against Labour, so he would have likely have lost anyway.

and when it comes down to it, len kiely was the ****ing idiot that did the deed in the first place, in the political arena thats fair game.

All good, it's a small case doubt it would have even made the newspaper

Quote from HeReTiC;350873:
lol. He won, you lost. hoping the legal system will cancel that fact out is just silly.

Len Kiely is useless as morge said and peter stiles is a awesome bloke and a hard worker. next to that every seat in the state had a swing against Labour, so he would have likely have lost anyway.

and when it comes down to it, len kiely was the ****ing idiot that did the deed in the first place, in the political arena thats fair game.

HeReTiC, you are correct in that in the political arena to take Len Kiely to task was fair game as long as the game was played fair and lawfully.

Peter Stiles knowingly Broke the law when he provided support for a document that was not Authorised to be disseminated. Peter Stiles has been through three Election campaigns and is a serving Police officer who has been taught how to read legislation. As such knows that the name and address must be on the document. That he at first denied all complicity with the document and then admitted his part after the polling booths closed showed that he knew he was doing wrong either at law or morally.

Peter Stiles campained on a law and order platform and yet it was he who has broken the law in his campaign. Isn't that a bit hypocritical? I hope that Peter Styles stands by his convictions (no pun intended) of hard sentencing in the event that he is charged and convicted of any electoral or criminal law matters.

HeReTiC whilst there was swing to the CLP in every seat there was a bigger more significant swing in Sanderson which Peter Stiles himself admitted was from the letters. That may actually be his downfall because an electoral irregularity must actually have been caused for a by election to be called by the Supreme Court and Peter Stiles the winning candidate and the perpetrator of the unlawful act has publically stated that the letters did actually do that.

Peter Stiles has done what all stupid criminals do made admissions as to what he did when there is still a pending Police investigation. Pride and arrogance may actually be his downfall.

Labor narrowly wins NT election17:38 AEST Mon Aug 11 2008agoBy Tara RavensVIEWS: 0| FLOCKS: 0| 0 comments so farLabor has won the Northern Territory seat of Fannie Bay and avoided a hung parliament.

Northern Territory Opposition Leader Terry Mills conceded defeat in the Darwin seat and congratulated Chief Minister Paul Henderson after the cliffhanger election.

The win means Labor will likely drop six seats from 19 to 13 while the CLP will go from four to a remarkable 11.

There is one independent Gerry Wood, returned by his electorate to the seat of Nelson, who would have held the balance of power in a hung government if the CLP had won Fannie Bay.

Labor is still trying to come to terms with the almost nine per cent swing against it.

The knife-edge result has also laid to rest speculation the CLP is no longer a viable political force and should merge with southern conservative parties such as The Nationals.

gerry wood is the only politician (and i use that term loosely) in the territory who isn't an outright wanker. fully deserved his win and more power to him.

Quote from thelion;350880:
Peter Stiles knowingly ....

Unless proven, he is presumed innocent. Ask your learned friends about the dangers of libel.

Administrators, edit or delete referred post and this post, or you may also become liable for allowing republication of libellous material.

I'm not saying this to win an internet pissing match. I am trying to protect you all from getting sued.

I doubt Labor will take this court now that they're won Fannie Bay. It's cheaper and more effective to hint that Stiles is dodgy without having to prove it in court.

If it becomes a criminal matter then he deserves his day in court, and to be evicted if found guilty.

I dont disagree with you El Presidente but as the matter is in the hands of the police it is now actually up to them as the independent umpire in such matters. If they do refer the matter to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions then all bets are off as to what will happen.

As for libel wouldnt worry me if he did decide to bring action against me. My friends would be covered anyway they were technically giving me legal advice I asked questions. As you are aware lawyers frequently both give and ask for advice by other lawyers who have expertise in other areas of law. I have even given advice to interstate Q.C.'s that have won their cases on the advice that I gave them.

Peter Stiles would actually be a fool if he wanted to take the matter to court, the rules of discovery for civil matters is different and the burden of proof is so much lower and that goes both ways, a matter is not libelous if it is true, his own words from ABC interviews would be used against him. To prove that Stiles knew on the balance of Probabilities that he was committing an offence would in reality be a cake walk. It would also mean that EVERY person involved would be pulled out of the woodwork something that the CLP would definitely not want. Remember refusing to answer questions in a Civil matter could allow the Judge inferences that may not be in the best interests of the CLP. The long term political damage would far outway the short term if what is thought to have happened actually did.