The Jurist 2014 Issue 4

The

Jurist Vol. 10 Issue 4

2|

Contents The United States of America & Online Privacy Why Not Wasai?

A Letter of Complaint Students Slipping Through the Cracks

Reviews Games

3 7 8 12 14 16 18 20 23 26 29 32 The Jurist

Editorial Sorry Seems to be the Hardest Word

Adventures Down the True Crime Rabbit Hole Why I Returned to Law

An Interview with Paul Power An Interview with George Lukic

|3

Editorial Sarah Gates Brittany Shelton Mara Morrigan Lauris Buckley

Thank You! The Jurist needs contributors.

We couldn’t do it without them. So thank you to everyone who contributed in 2014.

It’s over! This is the last issue for 2014 and we’re almost at the summer holidays!

This year has gone incredibly quickly for the Publications team. It’s so hard to believe that exams are just around the corner, when it feels like a week ago that the semester started. Each deadline has crept up on us like a kid on Halloween. There have been five editors across the year, with new editors staggered over the issues. So job well done to all of them/us: Preesan Pillay, Brittany Shelton, Sarah Gates, Mara Morrigan and Lauris Buckley (our newest recruit). We know it’s been a whole year of writing, editing and designing for The Jurist, so you’re probably a bit bored of seeing our names in print and, if you’re a contributor or friend, us harrassing you over Facebook. But we’ve put together a little questionnaire so you remember that we actually have personalities beyond the magazine. Please excuse the self indulgence.

The most important part of The Jurist, however, is that we’ve had tonnes of incredible contributors. Each and every one has contributed something invaluable to these pages. So a big, huge THANK YOU is well deserved to all.

Our wonderful contributors: Simon Collinson, Michael De Pierro, Angela Deas, Sarah Flynn, Danielle Gibb, Elizabeth Handsley, Joseph Hyde, Callum Brae, Thomas McCourt, Alma Mcllduff, Michaela Olsson, William Parry, Robbie Peschel, Geeta Sidhu, Andrew Sterling, Joanna Thompson, Chloe Waterhouse and Tilly Williams.

For this issue, thanks also to providers of photographs and artwork: Tamer Koseli (cover), FutUndBeidl (p8), Rita Yang (p12-13), European Parliament (p17), Zoriah (p23), Mika Hitunen (p20) and Jonathon Colman (p32).

The Jurist is operated and funded by the Flinders Law Students Association. Any opinions expressed are those of the author alone and are not representitive of FLSA or the editors. Images used within are licensed under Creative Commons or permission by the copyright holder has been attained.

The Jurist

4|

Vox Pops 1.

2.

3.

4.

Who are you?

What are you most afraid of?

Where do you see yourself in 10 years?

What's your ultimate SWOTVAC indulgence?

1. Sarah Gates

1. Lauris Buckley

2. A life-threatening combination of speed and heights.

Basically, I’m terribly frightened by skiing, go karts and driving in mountainous areas.

2. Ghost trains.

3. Published author, working in the publishing industry, happily accomplished at self defence, has learned how to cook.

4. Television binging. Basically, I’ll watch entire box sets.

Also applying for jobs, which I know is a weird habit.

3. Ideally as a high powered employment lawyer, but realistically I’ll be stuck in a hospitality job swimming in university debt.

4. Any form of bread.

5. Russell Brand, as long as he washed his hair.

5. Chris Hemsworth.

6. One of those chairs that hang from the ceiling—so impractical but damn they look fun.

6. One of those sink-into-the-material-and-you’ll-never-befree couches.

7. How to assemble Ikea furniture without using an allen key.

7. The lifecycle of snails, or something equally buggish. I was a huge fan of creepy-crawlies when I was little.

The Jurist

|5

The Editorial Team 5.

6.

7.

If you were to have a one-night stand with a celebrity, who would it be?

If you were a piece of furniture, what would you be?

Finish this sentence: If I were giving a speech at The Boring Convention, it would be about...

1. Mara Morrigan

1. Brittany Shelton

2. Outliving my son.

2. The fact that during the Gaza conflict, I watched a 10 minute segment on the news discussing whether dying your dog unnatural colours such as pink or blue is wrong.

Also, heights.

3. Some twilight rest home in the Caribbean.

4. Sleep!

5. Just one celeb? I’d shoot for an orgy (limited numbers though so no one misses out—we only have one night) with circa 1966 Bob Dylan, Tilda Swinton, and 1954 Laurence Harvey. A running commentary of this sport will be provided by the gently lilting voice of Celtic music expert, Dr Lillis Ó Laoire. Since it’s a one night stand and there is no time to truly understand any of these people on a deeper level, although their intelligence is sure to shine through, I am justified just this once in shallowly and callously picking ridiculously attractive people.

6. A languorous chaise longue.

3. Hopefully, not still in uni. Potentially working at the zoo feeding the animals or constantly travelling, once I win the lottery.

4. Watching a season a day of whatever TV series happens to be going, good or bad.

5. Leonardo DiCaprio.

6. A bean-bag.

7. Either Kristen Stuart or daytime TV, maybe a mix of the two.

7. ‘How to Succeed in Business.’

The Jurist

6|

Features “The legal system is often a mystery, and we, its priests, preside over rituals baffling to everyday citizens.�

- Henry Miller

The Jurist

|7

Sorry Seems To Be The Hardest Word

by Sarah Gates

E

lton John once said, “Sorry Seems To Be The Hardest Word.” It’s difficult to admit you’re wrong or that you’ve hurt someone. It takes a significant leap in faith to make yourself vulnerable and let go of pride. Apologies can make one feel inadequate. Many feel as if an apology is accepting responsibility for a conflict where both parties committed wrongs. In some cases, an apology draws attention to a wrong that may not have been discovered otherwise. In an Australian study, Dr Tyler Okimoto of the University Queensland Business School found that people have strong motivations and desires not to apologise. In two experiments, Okimoto found that participants who refused to say sorry reported psychological benefits, including a boost in selfesteem. ‘Offenders’ may also fear damaging a relationship, losing status or power, or embarrassment.

When it comes to the legal profession, many fear an admission of liability may be used against them in court. So are apologies doing more harm than good? Or do they serve a useful purpose?

In business and legal relations, there is research suggesting the ‘wronged’ person in a relationship is more likely to reconcile if the offender sincerely apologises—and that this is all the more true if the offender takes personal blame. This is especially important if it concerns a continuing relationship.

Roy Lewicki, the co-author of the study making these assertions, states that saying sorry “may be necessary to help repair a loss of trust in a business relationship.” Lewicki is a professor at Ohio State University’s Fisher College of

Business and the results of his study, with Edward Timlinson, were published in the Journal of Management.

Many people assume an apology is likely to amount to an admission of guilt which can be used against them in court.

However, Dr Jennifer Robbennolt of Law and Psychology at the University of Illinois states “studies suggest apologies can actually play a positive role in settling legal cases.” As Harvey Specter in Suits taught us, why go to court when you can win your battles before they’ve been fought?

In a survey of more than 550 people, Robbennolt found that apologies were likely to reduce financial demands and increase chances of settlement. Law suits are often motivated by a need to assign blame or responsibility, to receive respect from the other party, or to ensure history does not repeat itself. A sincere, thorough apology can address all of these concerns, providing the plaintiff with accountability for the wrongdoing. Apologies can also result in faster settlements, thus reducing legal costs and damages. Although, of course, the benefits of apologising are dependent on the quality of one’s apology; it must be sincere, detailed, and timely.

So perhaps it’s worth risking one’s pride to offer the other party a sense of closure?

The Jurist

8|

The United States of America & Online Privacy

by William Parry

The Jurist

|9

N

arcotics are a dangerous undercurrent in our society. In criminal investigations, it should be relatively simply for authorities to gain information on suspects' communications: issue a warrant and seize accordingly. However, Judge Francis' warrant issued in December last year, as directed by the United States Stored Communications Act, has prompted Microsoft to create a case—the Dublin Server Case—that may further unbalance the distribution of global power and mock the privacy of citizens the world over.

This warrant has lead to Apple, Verizon and Cisco Systems taking up legal arms for the sake of Microsoft, inserting their own memorandums of law supporting Microsoft's motions.

What's happening? Why the controversy?

US law authorities seek emails sent and received by a suspected Irish drug-trafficker. These e-mails reside in a Microsoft owned and managed server centre located in Dublin, Ireland. Microsoft promptly requested for the warrant to be voided.

Microsoft Vice President and Deputy General Council, David Howard, said “The US government doesn't have the power to search a home in another country, nor should it have the power to search the content of email stored overseas.”

The motion was denied, but execution of the warrant has been stayed so that Microsoft may file an appeal. In a US District Court Southern District of New York hearing last month, US solicitors filed their agreement with Microsoft.

Currently Microsoft will be in contempt of court if they continue to refuse to hand over the e-mails—a charge which Microsoft has every intention of overturning. Executive Director at Open Right Group, Jim Killock, argues that compulsory disclosures would “undermine customers' confidence in US business even further.”

What does this case mean legally?

As the United States is a common law country, cases set binding precedents for situations of a similar nature.

Currently, the US government legally claims access to any information that passes through the US. If Microsoft is indeed found in contempt of court at a federal level and forced to transfer any data requests contained in the warrant, it means that basic US policing will be permitted to access any information stored by a US-based service, regardless of the privacy law of the individual targeted. US companies such as Facebook, Amazon, Google, eBay and Yahoo would be obliged to disclose to the US government the private communications of any user, regardless of nationality or association with the US. This would include private or personal messages, or conversations sent using services such as Skype, Hotmail, Outlook, Gmail, iMessage and Yahoo.

Justice Preska, current District Judge on the case said, “It is executed like a subpoena in that it is served on the ISP in possession of the information and does not involve government agents entering the premises of the ISP to search its servers and seize the email account in question."

Problematically this means that a US tech company operating in a sovereign country, that has its own sovereign and unique laws, will be obliged to break that country's laws to satisfy a warrant. Which may lead to the US invading a person's privacy for enforcement of laws that that person would not be accountable for in their own nation.

Another likely issue is a privacy contract between customer and company that contains no exclusion clause for disclosure of personal information to authorities could cause unforseen liabilities.

Privacy researcher, Caspar Bowden, said that this is “starkly contemptuous of mutual legal assistance treaties

The Jurist

10|

between countries, giving a licence to ignore assurances of due process” merely to avoid onerous or time-consuming formalities. Mutual legal assistance treaties are the currently recognised route to obtain evidence internationally.

The sensationalist slippery slope is total and global surveillance by the US, accountable to no one, through powerful corporations founded in the US.

So what's the difference with the NSA’s spying?

NSA's surveillance using back-door code lines and covert systems such as PRISM means that US intelligence can already access data on the vast majority of devices/ servers that are connected to the conventional internet.

The use of incognito bypass-resend routers attached to even commercial nodes allows the harvesting of information using a process similar to pilfering electricity or damming a river. They then can apply filters using algorithms, similar to Google search, to discover information on terrorist threats or an operator’s ex's new lover.

Ever since rouge IT professional Edward Snowden released internal documents and testimony on the operations of NSA, it has become public knowledge and highly reported.

Lots of these gathering methods are illegal according to the Constitution and a multitude of precedents; therefore any intelligence evidence acquired by covert methods is impermissible in legal proceedings (short of a secret court under the Patriot Act or a military tribunal).

hassle. Efficient quantum-computing code crackers are only in theoretical phases. Many security measures, most commonly encryption, take money and geek-hours to break.

Use of warrants would allow US authorities to demand the manager of the storage security to unencrypt the data. The implications of this go far. This means that refusal could result in an arrest due to failure to co-operate with a valid warrant, not even the most safeguarded information would be safe.

In the first half of this year, Twitter recorded 1257 requests from US authorities and responded positively to almost three quarters of them.

The proceedings are not yet over. Brad Smith, General Counsel and Vice President at Microsoft, publicly stated “We’re convinced that the law and the US Constitution are on our side, and we are committed to pursuing this case as far and as long as needed.”

The US government will defend the warrant under the claim that the Stored Communications Act demands “a question of control” and not of location.

If there were a successful order of contempt against Microsoft following appeal, the US government would benefit greatly and consumer confidence in US tech titans would plummet.

It is possible that the US government already has information regarding the Irish drug trafficking in intelligence data storage—but to use the evidence to prosecute, a valid warrant is necessary.

Furthermore, the NSA and similar intelligence agencies are not always able to decipher every encryption without

The Jurist

|11

The Jurist

12|

Why Not Wasai?

by Sarah Flynn

Japanese food is brilliant. The secret lies in how Japanese cuisine leaves you feeling… light. Japanese food has the unique ability to satisfy insatiable hunger, yet never leave you with the feeling of greasy regret. It is the type of cuisine that no matter how much you eat, you will never feel the side splitting sorrow one often feels when gorging on other food indulgences—everyone knows those feels when you have had one pizza slice too many. Eating Japanese cuisine has also become so damn easy. Japanese restaurants have popped up in prime locations, with menus that have something for everyone whilst still maintaining a level of tradition. This is why you may have noticed an increase in the popularity of Japanese dining among your friends, colleagues, and Instagram users alike. If you are a creature of habit and stuck in the rut of frequenting the usual burger joint or interchangeable burrito bar, why not branch out to Wasai Japanese Kitchen instead?

Wasai sets the trend when it comes to high quality Japanese cuisine. Located centrally in the Adelaide CBD, Wasai’s friendly staff provide a magnitude of delicious Japanese options five days a week. The drinks list presents an array of enticing options, but is still small enough so you are able to choose the cheapest wine on the menu and simply call it coincidence.

Do not be fooled, just because Japanese food does not leave you feeling sickly, this is in no way indicative that you will go home hungry. On offer are all the typical delectable Sushi options, with a few fun extras thrown

in—always ask for the additional sushi menu. The sushi boats are made for sharing and are sizably comparable to Noah’s Arc. For those of you who cannot understand the perfection that is sushi, never fear, Wasai has a broad range of alternatives on offer. From noodle dishes to hotpots, you are spoilt for choice. If you decline to call yourself a fish fan, Wasai has your back, offering a variety of other meat dishes. If don’t eat meat full stop?

Then you best believe Wasai does great vegetarian, including fantastic vego sushi and tofu delights. What about if you have demolished your main but are feeling too lazy to leave your seat? Why bother when this place does dessert. The dessert options are quite simple, but are bound to hit the spot.

Wasai is good for large groups, small groups, or hot dates for two (or even cold dates; food soothes all wounds). However, booking is highly essential. This place is the bomb.com and nobody is keeping it a secret. If you decide to go there on a whim, you may end up stuck with a huge waiting time—and nobody likes getting hangry. Depending on how indulgent you are feeling, your bill can range from $25 to $50. Your wallet has (almost) nothing to lose and your stomach has everything to gain. So next time you decide to eat out, why not mix it up and give Wasai Japanese Kitchen a try?

Contact Wasai Tuesday through Saturday: (08) 8221 6606 9/15 Field Street, Adelaide SA 5000

The Jurist

|13

The Jurist

14|

Adventures Down the True Crime Rabbit Hole!

by Mara Morrigan I’ve always avoided the true crime genre, shying away from the grim and gruesome horror of humanity’s inhumanity.

Lately though, my interest has been piqued by DNA evidence (only relatively recently admissible in court due to a lack of acceptable and uniform expert opinion in its favour as a bona fide form of evidence). It has been cropping up in historical contexts. Some 20th century cases have now been overturned when conclusive DNA evidence has proven that the wrong person was convicted. In these instances, the DNA recovered was complete, carefully stored and now able to be fully examined and cross-matched. However, a few very old high-profile cases have come under modern scrutiny despite their evidentiary items not being stored at specific temperatures away from all possible contaminants in anticipation of later scientific advances. How much can be gleaned from such fragmentary evidence?

From these examples, it is clear only that these historical cases remain murky—and here’s why.

Ripping yarns This September Russell Edwards, who sells Jack the Ripper souvenirs and conducts tours of Whitechapel, has claimed to have solved the 126-year-old mystery of the notorious serial killer’s identity. He has used only an old and possibly bloodstained shawl of questionable provenance he picked up at auction. Of course, there are problems with both the shawl and the identification.

Edwards’ position rests upon the assertion that the shawl was pocketed by a Metropolitan police officer named Amos Simpson. Why would an officer of the law surreptitiously and inexplicably pilfer a blood soaked piece of fabric? The story handed to Edwards asserts that Shepard took it to give to his wife. Unsurprisingly, according to family legend, she didn’t want it and placed it in a box where it remained

for approximately 100 years despite the family being aware it was there.

Edwards is basing his forthcoming book, Naming Jack the Ripper, on an old shawl that has no proven provenance and has not been carefully stored, let alone hermetically sealed, since supposedly being found at the murder scene. If it was ever there at all. When the family lent the fabric to Scotland Yard’s Crime Museum, the museum chose never to display it after deeming it inauthentic. This artefact can offer no genomic DNA due to its age. The mitochondrial DNA was extracted by extremely novel means using techniques untested within the broader scientific community but developed by Dr Jari Louhelainen, the molecular biologist used by Edwards in his claims. Can this item really be seen to offer up conclusive DNA samples, especially after having been handled by multiple people including direct descendants of the victim at a Jack the Ripper conference?

According to these hypotheses, Catherine Eddowes (an impoverished woman of no fixed address) owned an ornate eastern European shawl dotted with embroidered Michaelmas daisies which, according to the apocryphal and unsubstantiated family story, was found beside her body despite not being listed among her belongings on the police ledger nine hours previously when she was taken into custody for being drunk and disorderly. Alternatively, Aaron Kosminski left it with her at some point prior to her death. To be fair, Eddowes was wearing a skirt with flounces decorated with Michaelmas daisies which a strip of or flounce from could perhaps be said to form the fabric examined and described as a shawl. This skirt may even have been obtained by her from a pawn shop and its Eastern European manufacture could conceivably be explained by the many Russian émigrés in the Whitechapel area selling their belongings go in order to pay for lodgings. If the fabric did come from the Kosminski household and happened to already have acquired one of the Kosminski brothers’

The Jurist

|15

semen, it still doesn’t necessarily equate to the ejaculator being the murderer.

This begs the question: was a seemingly harmless local selfabuser of foreign extraction likely to commit the murders and not be apprehended by police desperate to be seen to have solved this ongoing crime? If the fabric soaked up some of Kosminski’s ejaculatory fluids it does not necessarily follow that he is Jack the Ripper as opposed to a prior customer (especially if the shawl was actually a portion of Eddowe’s skirt) or even a kindly stranger making gifts of slightly soiled draperies to keep the chill from itinerant bones. The post-mortems of all suspected Ripper victims show that ‘connexion’ did not occur between victim and killer, so it seems unlikely that the killings engendered sexual excitation in the perpetrator. The ‘proof’ of his being Jack the Ripper hinges upon Dr Louhelainen obtaining mitochondrial DNA from seminal fluid left on the shawl and matching it to a single descendant of Kosminski’s sister. Unfortunately, no other descendants of this family or of other Ripper suspects were approached for comparison which is worrying since mitochondrial DNA, despite retaining stability over the years, is relatively unspecific compared to genomic DNA. Mitochondrial DNA is maternally inherited and multiple individuals can have the same type (it is only accurate to within 400,000 of the population). Unique identification is not possible from mitochondrial DNA analysis—although the sample points to an Ashkenazi Jewish heritage, it is a relatively common subtype and the area had a large immigrant population of similarly gened people escaping Tsarist pogroms. The police even had a few persons-ofinterest in this case from this ethnicity group. Kosminski lived for thirty more years after these events, seemingly without any hint of violence, and was only confined to a mental institution three years after the last Ripper killing, never too be released.

The truly fascinating aspect in all this, however, is the disappointment evinced by most people at the rather prosaic contention that a barber suffering from auditory hallucinations could be responsible for a crime that has fascinated the public for over a century. I’ll restate that: many felt deflated that a seemingly insane nobody could be responsible rather than, say, the whole thing being a giant cover-up for the actions of a somebody in a position of power. The true horror for the armchair detective may be to uncover potential banality at the heart of a conspiracy wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.

wife in favour of his receptionist in 1910. Adding fuel to this hypothesis, the pair fled to Canada when friends of Cora Crippen reported her missing. The police began demanding answers of the good doctor, now openly living with his lover who, in turn, was fraudulently withdrawing all the funds from his wife’s account. It seemed a straightforward case when partial human remains lethally laced with Hyoscine, a substance Crippen had purchased five grains of from a chemist 13 days before his wife’s disappearance, were uncovered beneath floorboards in the Crippens’ cellar.

A jury only took 27 minutes to return a verdict of guilty at his trial. The remains had been melted in quicklime to an extent that made identification of gender, let alone a specific person, highly difficult. Consequently, an abdominal scar said to resemble a surgical incision of Cora’s was as close to a positive ID as the prosecution could get. The defence contested that the scar was not a scar at all, alleging that it was a fold of skin since it contained hair follicles, an impossibility for scar tissue. Crippen maintained that he was innocent right up until he was executed.

Almost a hundred years later in 2007, a team of Michigan State University researchers, led by forensic pathologist David Foran, compared mitochondrial DNA from a single slide of human tissue used by pathologists in the original Crippen case to three of Cora’s maternal relations. They aimed to ascertain whether the torso in the cellar was really that of Cora Crippen. The slide was old, likely contaminated and compromised and these experts failed to factor in or address the inexact, rough and ungloved evidence gathering and examining that took place in 1910. Yet, Foran claims that he was able to isolate and amplify the mitochondrial DNA enough to determine that they differed at a minimum of five positions and therefore the remains were not Mrs Crippen’s. The researchers chose not to test the partially bleached hair in curlers found with the remains. These findings were published in 2011 in the Journal of Forensic Science which also discussed the Foran and his research team’s test to determine whether or not the remains were male or female. Based upon Y chromosome testing they found the portion of human being in Crippen’s coal cellar to be male. Although this could mean that Crippen, whose name remains synonymous with wife killing, might not have actually murdered his wife, the very existence of any body in his basement does imply quite strongly the possibility that he did murder somebody. Unless Cora was responsible and fled leaving Crippen and his lover to take the blame. Perhaps the body was that of the mystery man Hawley claimed Cora had absconded back to America with, one Bruce Miller. But, if so, who was responsible for his death?

Basement remains In another case study, the infamous Dr Hawley Crippen was said to have disposed of his inconvenient showgirl

The Jurist

16|

Why I Returned To Law

by Thomas McCourt

At the time of writing, it’s been around two months since I’ve been back at Law School. I’m not sure exactly what week it is, but I know I’ve got an assignment due in three days that I’m yet to start. Mid semester break is fast approaching, and I’ve no doubt that I’ll achieve less than half the work set aside for the two week non teaching period. I’ve already dropped a subject this semester and used up all the ink in my favourite highlighter in the process.

At times like these I question if I’d made the right decision to come back to my law degree. After a semester of Health Science, I’d achieved grades that I’d only ever dreamed of attaining in law topics. It wasn’t half as challenging as anything I’d done for law and employment opportunities upon graduation were endless.

It was the second semester of my second year. I was disheartened by my efforts to improve not being reflected in my grades of the previous semester. All the topics were becoming increasingly dry and my interest levels were slipping to the point where I’d be asleep within five minutes of any lecture. Constant reminders from staff and peers of bleak employment opportunities had left me wondering what the point was.

It was at this point I’d decided the sleepless nights, stress related nausea, mood swings and comfort eating my way through entire cakes that I’d baked in episodes of chronic procrastination weren’t worth it. I withdrew from all my topics and found work temping at a publication company for a few months.

Because I’d recently dropped a substantial amount of weight, I was inspired to become the next Michelle Bridges.

I enrolled into a nutrition major and started hash-tagging all my photos #fitspo.

Doing non-law topics, not once did I feel the overwhelming stress that is associated with my law degree. I was achieving excellent grades with half the work. University was enjoyable and manageable. Concerns that I’d suffered brain damage from one too many nights at Red Square began to subside.

In a tutorial for one of my health topics, there was quite a political undertone to everything that was being taught. This undertone was very relevant to the recent change in federal government and budget cuts that were to be introduced to the healthcare system. In high school I had political aspirations that had softened upon entering university,

The Jurist

|17

however the release of the 2014 federal budget measures reignited these passions.

Over the following months a continuous flow of equally shocking policy was announced and it just didn’t seem to stop. As much as I wanted to be the next face of Big W’s fitness-wear line, I was more passionate about politics.

I realised organic chemistry probably wasn’t particularly relevant to a political career, so begrudgingly I re-enrolled in my law degree.

I hoped a stint as a high achiever in another faculty would have prepared me better for a return to law, however it has only proved that all degrees are not created equally.

many people complain is lacking in the university experience.

I don’t believe that in any other degree you would be able to amuse yourself so much by reading the student forums for topics. There is something so comical about watching law students put their legal training to use in the way of arguing with a topic coordinator over deadlines and extensions.

Although my law degree is tedious almost all of the time, moments like the ones just mentioned make it somewhat bearable. I’m determined to finish my degree and have returned with greater clarity of where I’m headed.

In summary, I guess Joe Hockey is the reason I’ve returned to my law degree.

Two weeks back into law and I already feel behind and overwhelmed. Writing this article is an example of the extreme lengths I’ll go to in order to satisfy my need to procrastinate.

Despite all that, I do feel at home within the Law School. The camaraderie that law students enjoy is not present in many other degrees. Being able to put a name to most faces you see within your classes provides a sense of familiarity that

The Jurist

18|

A Letter of Complaint

by Anonymous

There are lecturers who are universally hated for their inability, or unwillingness, to convey knowledge. In each year, there seems to be a topic that has students: a) excessively stressed b) angry c) confused, or d) all of the above.

It was in first year, either in New In Law or Criminal Law that Tania Leiman explained to the group that teaching is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to an academic's load: that is to say, it is what we students see, but is actually a small part of their responsibilities. The major priority is taken up by research and producing published work. Tania's cupboard is no doubt lined with all her teaching awards; her priority is obviously supporting students, conveying legal knowledge that is interesting and accessible, and relating skills back to real world examples. That's not to say she spoon feeds students—on the contrary, her tutes are strict and demanding. So when I give the following complaints, please remember that these tutors and topics are the minority. On the whole, I would rate Flinders University quite high in terms of education quality—the terrible teachers are, thankfully, an anomaly. But perhaps, with university fees set to rise and a law degree threatening to get very expensive, it's time to reassess the skills of our teaching staff and the standard we accept.

Let me start first with the idea of elitism, in two different forms.

There are some topics that are so convoluted, complicated and confusing that students have to fight for a basic understanding of the simplest theories. Take the Blackshield and Williams textbooks for constitutional law. Not only is it so boring that I have literally fallen asleep reading it, but the sheer excess of noun proliferation and double negatives render many sentences nigh incomprehensible. It is 100% possible to spend 20 minutes trying to understand a single sentence if you refuse to skip it and move on, which is necessary in cases where that sentence seems to convey a key theory of principle—if only you knew what it was.

Where that ties back to teaching is that constitutional law is impossible to pass without this textbook. Quiz answers are taken word-for-word from this book. The 'plenary sessions' contribute next to no valuable insight into the law; half the time is spent on discussing the lecturer's surprise at quiz answers and patterns in results—observations that waste considerable time, just to add to the frustrating hours spent reading a brick with size 10 font. If law was still meant to be complicated and inaccessible to the common person, it succeeded in this topic.

This leads me to my second point: students learn in a variety of ways. Some through hearing concepts discussed, some through visual cues; some fast, some slow. A student is not smarter or more competent if they prefer to reap understanding from talking to people, reading graphs or diagrams, or any other technique. Some people learn by coloured tabs and cue cards. Others just read a badly written textbook until they get it. There are a handful of lecturers in the Flinders Law School that seem to feel like there is one way to learn. I am a firm believer that even if you struggle monumentally to study law, it probably makes you a better student, thinker and learner in the long run.

Perseverance is a crucial skill and way of thinking. You'll probably come out knowing more about yourself as a person and understanding how you best take in knowledge. And even if you choose to diversify, if law isn't your only priority, then there are diminishing legal jobs available; so students will increasingly be forced into alternate fields anyway. I once witnessed a lecturer say, 'If you struggle with readings, you should drop out of law and do a trade.' Which is an insult to every law student and tradie, and every person who has ever considered one of the occupations, or who has a moral compass. Fitting people in boxes is not only wrong, it's stupid. And it doesn't make for good teaching.

The second problem area is poor organisation and communication.

This year's admin assignment is the perfect example. For those that don't know, one of the lecturers announced (a week before the major assignment was due) that the

The Jurist

|19

assignment could be completed in groups. Everyone rushed to form groups and amalgamate their assignments. Some groups had a new, group document by the time the topic coordinator proclaimed that the previous announcement was false and void. By this time the damage was done and many, many students had unintentionally colluded. There was an uproar, the topic coordinator took the matter to the Dean of Flinders Law School, and the decision was made that no group work would be allowed, no extension given, no relief or guarantee for the students who now had work in their possession that was not written by them. It was a hard decision and looking from the outside, I get that. But the topic also had the following issues:

*The Jurist aims to give Flinders Law students a voice. The articles it contains do not represent the views or experience of the Flinders Law Student Association (FLSA) or the editors. All content is solely the opinion of the author.

— The topic guide was full of errors, including references to readings that were never properly cleared up after five weeks of discussion on FLO. — The Week 2 lecture simply didn't happen. The theatre was full, students were waiting. The lecturer had simply 'forgotten' and no subsequent lecture was arranged, the information was just crammed into the following weeks.

— The topic coordinator couldn't answer questions about the assignment, she referred all queries to the lecturer who made the shonky announcements.

— It took days or weeks to receive a reply from the topic coordinator, through FLO, email or voicemail. She claimed to a number of people that these messages were never received.

Now, as much as I intend to criticise the way some topics are run, I don't want it to reflect badly on the Law School. In my other degree, the information conveyed in tutorials and lectures is often over simplified and irrelevant to practicality beyond university. I chose Flinders because of the feedback I received from lecturers, current students, graduates and, most importantly, employers. It's a great place to study law, I have grown more through this experience than any other and have even got my head around a few topics. I've had lecturers who inspire me and who push me to do better. For those topics that should change, but haven’t (since the SET feedback doesn’t seem to sinking in) here is my unofficial letter of complaint.

The Jurist

20|

Students Slipping Through the Cracks

by Anonymous As law students, we know the importance of looking after our mental health. It seems we are constantly being reminded to: a) take good case notes, and b) reduce stress and recognise signs of depression Awareness of mental health has come a long way. The Tristan Jepson Foundation is a favourite charity of the Law School and recently, government established National Youth Mental Health Foundation, Headspace, set up shop on the Flinders main campus. ‘R U Ok Day,’ which caused a plaza full of promotional events and marketing this September, is dedicated to asking our friends, family and even strangers how they are feeling. But what happens if their response isn’t a simple “good thanks?” The current awareness and knowledge of mental health is great, however it has a long way to go.

It’s not surprising that one quarter of law students will suffer from a mental health problem that requires medical assistance—and the number that suffer but never seek help make the statistics quite morbid. The Law School and Flinders University have come to recognise that the hefty workload of a law degree can heavily burden someone who is having a rough time. Extensions for assignments are available if you’re suffering from stress and the counselling services on campus are a great place to visit if you want to talk to someone. There’s Mental Health Week and free breakfast days that help to relieve some of the day-to-day hurdles. But the system falls short.

You could be waiting an awfully long time to see a counsellor if you manage to pluck up the courage to go, as the services are blocked up by students seeking documentation for extension applications. And if you do manage to get an extension due to stress? A new deadline is given to you with no further questions asked. Shouldn’t there be a follow-up?

An obligation to see the counselling services again? There have been recent changes to the extension application process whereby it is no longer always necessary to have documentation from the counselling services to receive an

extension on non-medical grounds. Although this will free up counselling appointments for those who need it, some students could slip through the gap.

Hack, the Triple J current affairs segment, recently interviewed an ‘R U Ok Day’ spokesperson. Although listeners were told how beneficial a conversation with a person suffering from mental health problems can be, that was the extent of the advice. Asking someone how they are definitely gets the conversation started, but there are no tools teaching us how to help beyond that first question. It seems that even if you reach out and let people know that you’re not quite coping, no one, including friends, loved ones and even university professors, know what to do.

The problem doesn’t end there. What happens when someone you know and love has already been diagnosed with a mental health problem but you’re still worried?

Recently, a close family member of mine went through a severe bout of depression and anxiety. Despite a diagnosis from a doctor and adequate medication, the problem doesn’t go away overnight. But phone calls to several helplines left me with more questions than answers. I was told that if I was worried, I should ask my family member to go back to the doctors. That’s it. The support network surrounding people with depression and anxiety is critical, yet the support network needs its own help—someone to talk to about what’s normal and what isn’t, when to drag them out of the house and when to leave them be.

It would be wrong to criticise Australia’s stance on mental health considering the advances the community has made.

The tools are still being developed and initiatives such as ‘R U Ok Day’ are breaking down the barriers surrounding mental health. And as education initiatives continue to develop, it will become clearer that mental health is not just an issue for those suffering or for medical professionals: it’s a community problem.

The Jurist

|21

M

inter Ellison At Minter Ellison, we invest in our people. Your growth is our growth; your success is our success. We’ll support you to advance your career and help you to develop the legal and business skills needed to become a ‘trusted adviser’ to clients anywhere in the world. Our lawyers become innovative thinkers, strategists, and tacticians. As one of our lawyers, you’ll be part of an elite team – closing deals, resolving disputes and solving problems.

Clerkship Program The selection process for our clerks is designed to be informative and interactive. We want to ensure that this important decision making process is two-way, enabling us to find out more about you, and you to decide whether our firm is right for you.

Our vacation clerkships run for 8 weeks over summer, and offer you real life work experience. A comprehensive induction program and learning on the job will help you build a foundation of skills fundamental to your legal career.

You will work closely with partners and lawyers on active matters. Clerks are allocated two supervisors, usually from two different practice areas who help you to manage your workload, and a ‘buddy’ for extra insight and advice.

Our clerkship program serves as the main pipeline for our graduate program. It is a great way for us to get to know you better and for you to find out if Minter Ellison is the right place for you.

G

raduate Program Graduate positions are, in general, offered to selected current summer clerks at the conclusion of their clerkship in late January each year. A few additional graduate positions may be offered during the year as needed.

March, June and September, usually to students who were selected to be interviewed for a summer clerkship but were unsuccessful. Our summer clerks, graduates and our PLT students take part in our Graduate Program which provides tailored development and training in technical and commercial skills.

P

ractice teams Practice teams in the Adelaide office are:

• Commercial Litigation • HR & IR (including Workplace Health & Safety) • Insurance & Corporate Risk • Workers Compensation • Real Estate (including Property, and Environment & Planning) • Financial Services (including Insolvency) • Corporate (which includes Energy & Resources;

Major Projects, Construction & Infrastructure;

Regulatory & government etc) • Corporate Advisory (including Tax, Superannuation

& Estates)

H

ow to apply To apply please visit the careers section of our website at www.minterellison.com/careers. Only applications made through our online recruitment program will be considered.

Key application dates Applications open: Friday 4 July 2014 Applications close: Monday 28 July 2014 at 5.00pm Interviews commence: Tuesday 12 August 2014 Offers of clerkship: Tuesday 9 September 2014 from 9.00am Offers accepted/declined: Wednesday 10 September 2014 from 9.00am

Additionally we offer a number of PLT placements for

The Jurist

22|

Interviews “Justice isn’t about fixing the past; it’s about healing the past’s future.”

- Jackson Burnett

The Jurist

|23

An Interview with Paul Power CEO Refugee Council of Australia

There is a common misconception that Australia has a greater inf lux of refugees than most other countries, when Australia takes in less refugees than almost any other Western nation.

Where do you think this notion has come from and how do you think it inf luences the attitudes of the Australian public towards refugees?

Australia’s political leaders are often keen to talk up Australia’s proud record of being ranked second and first per capita for refugee resettlement, but are less willing to discuss Australia’s appalling policies towards refugees seeking protection through asylum processes.

This is reinforced by the myth that the only refugees Australia should accept are those who arrive with pre-arranged visas and fits into long-standing myths about orderly queues and the ‘illegal’ entry of asylum seekers who arrive by boat.

What is often lost in the toxic debate about refugees is that resettlement is available to less than one per cent of the refugees identified by UNHCR as being in need of resettlement and that despite all the furore about increases in the number of people seeking asylum, in 2013 Australia received just 0.45 per cent of asylum applications and accounted for 0.18 per cent of the global total of asylum seekers recognised as refugees.

In Australia we do not even detain our prisoners permanently, except in the direst of circumstances. However, we seem to have no issue doing so to innocent women and children who come to our country seeking asylum.

How do you think this contradiction ref lects Australia’s views?

Many fair-minded Australians would have felt very uncomfortable after digesting evidence from the Australian Human Rights Commission’s Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention. It is hard to believe the Australian Government could subject children to such hardships as part of an intentional policy to deter asylum seekers arriving by boat to seek refugee protection in Australia.

While most asylum seekers going through status resolution are living in the community in Australia rather than in detention, we still continue to see thousands of people, both adults and children, locked up for many months for no apparent reason.

This defies common sense as the government’s own figures show that detention is outrageously costly.

The National Commission of Audit has published a graph of figures from the Department of Finance which show that offshore detention cost more than $400,000 per person per year and detention in Australia cost $239,000 per person per year. Community detention cost less than $100,000 and community release on Bridging Visas less than $35,000.

The Jurist

24|

The use of mandatory detention as a deterrent to people arriving by boat to seek asylum is one of the most unsuccessful of all Australian Government policies—and yet politicians and bureaucrats hold on to this policy despite a 20-fold increase in boat arrivals since its introduction.

One of the great mysteries of Australian immigration policy is why so much money has been wasted detaining people who pose no threat to anyone when the evidence of the pointlessness of the policy is so overwhelming Ironically, Australian governments have developed and—at the time of writing—implemented alternatives to detention, like community detention and these alternatives have been examined by other governments looking to reduce the numbers of people being detained.

Australia has been criticised for lacking progressive change in regard to asylum seekers and refugees. Do you think that this will change in the near future?

Although the Australian Government may slow the flow of asylum seeker boats in the short-term, the current challenges will increase in new forms unless more attention is focused in the Asia-Pacific region on improving standards of refugee protection.

Australia’s unilateral actions in blocking asylum seekers from refugee protection in Australia will not improve the protection of refugees and asylum seekers living in unsatisfactory conditions in countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Bangladesh where vulnerable people live in constant fear of arrest and detention.

By blocking asylum seekers and deflecting its responsibilities to other countries, Australia is setting a poor example for those countries in the region that need encouragement and

support in building refugee protection frameworks that hold the key to providing safer pathways to protection in the region.

How do you feel about the new Liberal government’s “stop the boats” campaign? Do you think this leadership ideal represents the feelings of the majority of the Australian public?

The Government is trying to reduce a complex set of international issues, a matter of life and death for asylum seekers who ask Australia for refugee protection, to a mindless three-word slogan and a culture of secrecy.

Many Australians are extremely uneasy that its national government is cutting corners on human rights and playing with people’s lives to deliver on an election commitment to “stop the boats.”

What would you like to see change in the future? If you could make one change, what would it be?

Australia’s refugee and asylum policy must be guided by principles of refugee protection, not border protection.

Australia must meet its responsibilities as a Refugee Convention signatory by allowing asylum seekers to ask for refugee protection in Australia and adopt alternatives to detention while their refugee status is being determined.

The practice of offshore processing must end and the Australian Government must increase the focus on building regional cooperation on refugee protection. The challenges

The Jurist

|25

faced by the movement of asylum seekers in the region cannot be addressed by Australia alone and require a regional response.

For years, the Asia-Pacific region has desperately needed constructive leadership on asylum policy to counter Australia’s aggressive pursuit of deterrent measures to block people seeking protection.

The Gillard, Rudd and Abbott governments have maintained a singular focus on border protection, deterrence and repelling people seeking asylum in Australia. Governments in Australia have not just been content to repel asylum seekers from its own borders but has focused more and more attention on drawing other nations into its singular obsession with deterrence.

As a result, the Asia-Pacific region is a much more dangerous place for refugees and asylum seekers.

Australia must do more to meet the significant challenges of protecting a growing number of people displaced by new and escalating crises like Syria and protracted situations affecting parts of Africa, the Middle East and Asia by increasing the number of resettlement places.

In the same year the number of people displaced by persecution passed 50 million for the first time since World War II, the Australian Government cut the number of refugees resettled or protected by 6250 places per year to a capped program of 13,750 places.

Australia’s offshore refugee and humanitarian program now comprises about 5% of the total annual migration program so Australia certainly can do more to protect people displaced by conflict.

The Jurist

26|

An Interview with George Lukic

Pre-Admission Flinders Graduate, Thomson & Geer

The Jurist

|27

D

id you complete a clerkship with the firm for which you now work? How important would you say a clerkship is when it comes to finding graduate positions?

I completed a clerkship with my current firm before I started my graduate role with them, as did the other graduates I started with.

Completing a clerkship is always beneficial for law students hoping to gain graduate legal roles. However, the importance of a clerkship will generally vary depending on what area of law a student is interested in.

For students hoping to practice in commercial law— especially students hoping to work for large or mid-tier firms—obtaining a clerkship is usually critical to securing a graduate position with that firm. Most large or mid-tier firms will rarely advertise for external graduates; instead, they will simply recruit graduates from their pool of summer clerks each year. For those firms, the clerkship is a highly structured process that gives the firm a chance to evaluate how a student is likely to perform in a graduate role.

For students who aren't interested in commercial law, or are hoping to work for small firms or the government, clerkships can be less important. Most small firms don’t offer clerkships and those that do don't necessarily do so to evaluate potential graduates. With that in mind, these firms can still give students valuable experience that will help them find a graduate role in the future.

Did your clerkship provide you with valuable experience in a working environment? What advice would you give current Flinders law students when it comes to finding clerkships?

My clerkship was an immensely valuable experience. I had the opportunity to sit in on a number of client meetings and see how my Partner was able to translate his legal knowledge into useful advice upon which a client can make commercial decisions.

The best advice that I can give to law students is to start planning your application very early in your university studies;

ideally, a number of years before you are even eligible to start applying for clerkships. The current legal jobs market is not very promising for students hoping to practise as lawyers.

In 2013, the Law Society estimated that SA's three law schools produced a combined total of 600 graduates, who competed for only 130 to 150 jobs.

Given the above figures, students should do everything they can to distinguish themselves from other candidates before they even start applying for jobs. A good way to do this if you're in your first few years of university might be to participate in law school competitions or volunteer on FLSA. Alternatively, even non-legal work experience can set you apart from other candidates, showing you can balance work and university.

Is working as a practicing lawyer how you expected it to be? Did you ever have any doubts about your future in practice, both before and after beginning in your position?

Working in a law firm is definitely not what I expected it to be in practice.

During university, I thought that most of my day to day experience as a junior in a law firm would consist of legal research for the senior firm solicitors. However, I've quickly discovered that law involves much more responsibility than this. As a graduate, I have spoken to clients and expert witnesses, travelled interstate for a trial, and actively participated in a range of meetings involving high level legal disputes. The learning curve in my current role is steep enough to be exciting, but not so steep as to be overwhelming.

At the same time, I think anybody who works in a law firm experiences some doubts about their future from time to time, particularly after a few 14 or 15 hour days! I'm conscious of the fact that my friends who work in non-legal jobs have a much better work-life balance than me. However, I have had no doubts about my future. Law can be demanding at times, but it also gives you a uniquely challenging experience and an amazing variety of work that would be difficult to find anywhere else.

The Jurist

28|

Are you practicing in the area of law that you were interested in whilst you were studying? Would you encourage students to pick an area of law that they would like to practice in, or is it unrealistic for students to limit their opportunities in the current economy? How do electives factor into this decision?

I am lucky enough to work in our firm's litigation team, which is the area of law that I was most interested in while I was at university.

However, with this in mind, I think there are a few reasons why students should not rush to choose one area of law to the exclusion of all others. The first is the jobs market; given the paucity of legal graduate roles at the moment, students simply can't afford to be picky about their legal careers.

The second, more important, reason is that law school is generally a poor environment for figuring out what area of law interests you, simply because law school is so different from legal practice. You might love a particular area of law at university, only to find that everything you love about that area of law is missing from day to day practice. It's definitely beneficial to keep an open mind about new areas of law, because you might find that you love them once you give them a shot.

At the same time, while students shouldn't express a preference for one area of law over all others, there is nothing wrong with saying to a potential employer that you have a preference for a particular area of law, based on what you have studied at university so far. The important thing is to keep an open mind about what other areas of law might be open to you.

If you do have a preference for a particular area of law, electives are a great way to demonstrate your interest in that

area. For example, I studied Dispute Management, which was heavily focussed on alternative dispute resolution. I also wrote my Honours paper on alternative dispute resolution in the Federal Court, which was another way of demonstrating my interest in the area to potential employers.

In your experience, does a double degree help open doors in the legal sector? Would you recommend combined degrees for law students and if so, which do you believe to be most beneficial?

A double degree definitely helps open doors in the legal sector, for a number of reasons.

Double degrees give law students non-legal skills that they can apply in their current legal roles. For example, in my firm, graduates have been placed on certain matters due to their double degrees, such as an accounting graduate being placed on a matter involving an accounting dispute.

Historically, some firms used to only recruit law students that had double degrees, which shows the importance employers place on a double degree.

Even double degrees that are not obviously applicable to legal practice can still open doors for law students. For example, I completed a Bachelor of Arts, majoring in Politics and American Studies. While completing my American Studies major, I interned in Washington DC. Putting this internship on my CV helped me get my first clerkship in third year, which helped set me up for an eventual graduate role.

More practically, I also found my double degree helped ease me through university. Students with double degrees tend to study a mix of law and non-law topics each semester. Since law topics generally (but not always) involve more work than non-law topics, studying a double degree can give students a healthy break from constant law topics.

The Jurist

|29

Reviews Yes, there are more than one.

The Jurist

30|

Book Reviews

by Andrew Sterling

N

ever before has such a comprehensive book on public prosecutions been published. Christopher Corns' Public Prosecutions in Australia: Law, Policy and Procedure covers exactly that, across every Australian jurisdiction. As the first of its kind, this book will appeal to anyone who has a passion for criminal law. In particular, it should appeal to anyone who has watched every episode of ABC’s Crownies and Janet King, or who has an interest in how the decisions, responsibilities and functions of the various DPP offices truly work in Australia.

Public prosecutors hold immense power within Australia’s legal system and Corns gives the reader an insight into the vast discretion wielded by prosecutors. He also offers an overview of the processes relating to accountability, providing valuable critique and international comparisons with a view to greater consistency across jurisdictions.

Beginning with a comprehensive history of public prosecutions—right up to today’s DPP and ODPP agencies— the book covers police prosecution, dealing with witnesses and victims of crime, procedural information relating to the trial, sentencing and appeals, and the relationship between public prosecutors and the Executive. The procedural detail of this volume would be of particular interest to those undertaking PLT topics such as LLAW4213 Practical Legal Training: Criminal Practice and Advocacy.

Corns also offers an extensive overview of regulatory prosecutions, including WorkCover agencies, ASIC, environmental protection agencies, Centrelink, and more.

The arrangements between such agencies and the various DPP and Crown Solicitor’s Offices are particularly enlightening and would likely be extremely useful for students undertaking electives such as CRIM3203 Corporate Crime.

Throughout the book, Corns advocates for more extensive reviewability of DPP decisions and for merging the duties of police prosecutors into the DPP’s portfolio. While these ideas are somewhat controversial—and mostly without political support—the detailed research and referencing makes this book a valuable resource regardless of whether you agree with the author’s views.

The structure is simple, easy to navigate and carefully thought out. The table of contents, organised by detailed topic headings, provides a clear guide to the approaches of each State, Territory, and Commonwealth; this alleviates the issue of an index which leaves a little to be desired. A few errors have already been reported to the author. Despite this, Public Prosecutions in Australia is bound to be an invaluable resource for law students and criminal law practitioners alike. The second edition is very much anticipated.

The Jurist

|31

by Tilly Williams

Razorhurst Justine Larbalestier Allen & Unwin, 2014

East Sydney’s Darlinghurst, Surry Hills, Woolloomooloo and Paddington in the 1920s and 30s were a far cry from the bespoke, salubrious suburbs they have now become. Back then, the newspapers dubbed the area Razorhurst and vice ruled the streets with career criminals carrying razors when guns became outlawed and sly grog shops dotting the rundown neighbourhoods after a ban on drinking past 6pm came into effect. Due to a curious law, brothels were only illegal if run by men, so women began to preside over a good portion of the local sex dens and consequently much of the other illicit endeavours such as drinking and gambling.

Two women became synonymous with these practices in the area, frequently having violent brushes with both the police and each other: former prostitute, Tilly Devine, and teetotal alcohol and cocaine supplier, Kate Leigh.

Larbalestier acknowledges her indebtedness to Ruth Park’s classic Harp in the South trilogy, which featured an amalgamation of Tilly Devine and Kate Leigh in the character, Delie Stock. Here the two women are compressed into Gloriana Nelson who physically resembles Tilly more than Kate with her flashy jewels and tinted hair. Glory also shares Tilly’s love of throwing wild parties and a thuggish husband in the form of ‘Big Jim’—re-christened ‘Big Bill’ in Razorhurst. Much like Kate though she has a cleaning mania and surprisingly spotless premises for slumland dwellings.

is a street urchin who relies on kindly ghosts to help her find food and places to sleep while Dymphna, nicknamed the ‘Angel of Death’ for her ability to lose various lovers to gang violence, is the premier prostitute of the district who blocks out the intrusions of the myriad dead, including former paramours. She becomes Kelpie’s protector and guide, but could use some protection and guidance herself.

Dymphna too is a cross between two real women: the top earning prostitute and gangsters’ moll of the day with a private school education, Nellie Cameron, and the so-called ‘Angel of Death’ who managed to lose at least eight lovers to violent deaths, accomplished prostitute and thief Dulcie Markham. Both women had left affluent North Shore families for the instability of seedy Sydney streets and Larbalestier attempts to flesh out a possible reason for this. Sadly, like her addition of ghosts to the novel, Dymphna’s past is a very fanciful imagining compared to the reasons most often cited by teenage runaways, then and now.

Not every mystery is solved within the pages of Razorhurst and I appreciated that nod to reality, but the inclusion of ghosts who pass through these pages without purpose seemed an unnecessary addition to a tale set in an already thrilling time and place. Ultimately, Razorhurst is a diverting read, but not as strange and shocking as the reality upon which it is based.

The angle or hook to this fictionalised Razorhurst is Kelpie and Dymphna’s ability to see and hear the dead—Kelpie

The Jurist

32|

Games “As long as there are games to play it is not over.�

- Alex Ferguson

The Jurist

|33

Crossword

Across Down

4. November-March 8. Director of First Year 9. Fictional television show featuring lawyers 10. Cuisine focus of this issue

1. Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia 2. Current federal Greens leader 3. Highest grade available 5. Prime Minister featured in an article in the last issue 6. Negligence, nuisance, strict liability...

7. University-wide body of student representation

The Jurist

34|

Sudoku Easy

Puzzle 1 (Easy, difficulty rating 0.43)

5

7 4

2

6

8

9

1 5

9

5

4

2 1

1

3

6

8 7

1

3

9

6

4

7

2 6

3

1 9

8 6

8 5

Hard

Puzzle 1 (Hard, difficulty rating 0.72)

1

3 7

8

6

3

5

1

3

2

3

7 7

8

Very Hard 8

7 8

7

1

4

8

9

2

6 3

1 9

5

3

7 5

2

8

3

6

9 7

2

8

1

6 1

Generated by http://www.opensky.ca/~jdhildeb/software/sudokugen/ on Sun Sep 28 11:08:56 2014 GMT. Enjoy!

7

2

5

8

6

Generated by http://www.opensky.ca/~jdhildeb/software/sudokugen/ on Sun Sep 28 11:08:37 2014 GMT. Enjoy!

2 2

7

5

9

6

6

6

9

6

8

2

6

Puzzle 1 (Very hard, difficulty rating 0.83)

1

2

3

4

7 5

8 7

4

Generated by http://www.opensky.ca/~jdhildeb/software/sudokugen/ on Sun Sep 28 11:08:03 2014 GMT. Enjoy!

7

3

1

7

9

9

1

4

5 2

Medium

Puzzle 1 (Medium, difficulty rating 0.51)

3

6 5 8 8

1

4 6

Generated by http://www.opensky.ca/~jdhildeb/software/sudokugen/ on Sun Sep 28 11:09:14 2014 GMT. Enjoy!

The Jurist

|35

The Jurist

36|

The Jurist