Queensland introduced significant legislative changes to our criminal law in 2024, particularly focusing on youth justice and domestic violence offences. The Making Queensland Safer Act 2024, which received assent on 13 December 2024, brought about several key amendments:

1. Youth Justice Reforms:

• Removed the principle of detention as a last resort for children who commit specified offences.
• Introduced “Adult Crime, Adult Time” provisions, subjecting juvenile offenders to the same penalties as adults for serious crimes such as murder, manslaughter, grievous bodily harm, and home invasions.
• Enabled courts to consider an offender’s full criminal history, including juvenile records, when sentencing adults for up to five years after the most recent child entry.
• Prioritised victims’ rights over offenders’ rights during sentencing.
• Extended the trial of electronic monitoring devices as a condition of bail for eligible 15-year-olds.

2. Domestic Violence and Coercive Control:

• Introduced a new criminal offense of coercive control, set to take effect from 26 May 2025.
• Made it illegal for an adult to use abusive behaviours towards their current or former intimate partner, family member, or informal carer with the intention to control or coerce them.
• Set a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment for coercive control offenses.

3. Sexual Consent Laws:

• Implemented an affirmative model of consent for sexual activity, requiring mutual agreement and explicit communication of consent.
• Recognized “stealthing” (non-consensual removal or tampering of a condom during sexual activity) as a circumstance of non-consent and rape.

4. Youth Detention Centre:

• Established the new Wacol Youth Remand Centre as a place of detention under the Youth Justice Act 1992, commencing on 1 December 2024.
• Updated arrangements for determining the gender of persons conducting searches or providing health services in youth detention centres.
• Introduced x-ray imaging searches in youth detention centres to reduce the need for unclothed searches.

These legislative changes have been controversial, with critics arguing that they may exacerbate the overrepresentation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in the youth justice system and potentially conflict with international human rights standards. The Queensland Law Society has called for urgent youth justice reforms that focus on addressing the root causes of youth crime and providing culturally appropriate support services.

The government has defended these changes as necessary to restore community safety and respond to public concerns about youth crime. However, the long-term impacts of these reforms on recidivism rates, community safety, and the wellbeing of young offenders remain to be seen.

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

The Rise of AI-Related Crime

As artificial intelligence (AI) technology continues to evolve, so too does the scope of its misuse. While AI has the potential to bring numerous benefits, it has also given rise to new forms of crime, from privacy violations to harmful AI-generated content. These offenses affect individuals across Australia, including places such as Gold Coast, Rockhampton, Hobart, and Toowoomba.

If you’ve found yourself involved in or impacted by an AI-related incident—whether as a victim or someone accused of a crime—it’s essential to understand your legal rights and options. Here, we break down some of the most common AI-related offenses and how the law protects you.

Recent rise in use of applications

A site called “Clothoff” is using artificial intelligence to generate explicit images of real people, often without their consent. It is causing fake images to be posted to social media, harming those who are victims of this website and similar. Clothoff turns any photo of a person into an explicit image by stripping the clothing. Users can pay the service for different services and can even request pictures in different poses.

Common AI-Related Crimes: How They Impact You

Understanding common AI-related offenses is critical for both victims and those facing accusations. These crimes can range from privacy violations to defamation and harassment, with distinct legal implications. Here are some examples:

1. Non-Consensual Content

AI tools have made it easier to generate explicit images or videos, sometimes using people’s likenesses without their consent. If you are accused of creating or distributing such content, it’s important to understand the legal consequences, which may include charges of harassment or image-based abuse.

2. Defamation

AI is capable of producing content—like videos, images, and text—that can damage someone’s reputation. This might include false statements or manipulated images that appear to be real. Defending yourself against defamation charges requires a thorough analysis of the evidence and an understanding of the technology behind these AI creations.

3. Online Harassment and Cyberbullying

AI can be used to perpetrate harassment or cyberbullying by automating abusive messages, spreading harmful rumors, or generating offensive images.

4. Privacy Breaches

AI technologies can be used to access, scrape, and manipulate personal data, leading to privacy violations.

Steps to Take If You’re Facing AI-Related Charges

If you’re facing accusations related to AI misuse, acting quickly is critical. Here’s what you should do to protect your rights:

1. Document Evidence: Collect any relevant evidence, such as screenshots, communication logs, or files related to the alleged offense.
2. Report the Incident: If you’re the victim of an AI-related crime, such as image-based abuse or privacy violation, it’s essential to report the offense to the relevant authorities, such as the eSafety Commissioner or Queensland Police.
3. Consult with a Criminal Defence Lawyer: If you’re accused of AI-related criminal activity, seeking legal advice is vital. A defence attorney can evaluate your case, help protect your rights, and guide you through the legal process.

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

The accused, a man referred to as SN, has pleaded not guilty to charges of sexually abusing his two children over a seven year period ending in 2016.

One of the alleged victims, a woman named as LN, and diagnosed with “DID”, began giving evidence, switching between different identities – or “system members” as she prefers to call them – while on the stand.

Re-sworn as Teenage Girl

LN was sworn in as herself before transitioning into a 13 year old girl within 15 minutes of taking the stand. Her voice, tone, and demeanour shifted markedly, prompting Judge Ian Bourke to treat the new identity as a separate witness, requiring her to take a fresh oath.

“Her internal system has around 20 system members, or different identities, who are known as alters, some of whom will give the evidence in this trial” noted the Crown Prosecutor.

Expert Witnesses

DID, formerly known as multiple personality disorder, is central to this trial. Expert opinions presented during the trial diverged significantly:

Dr George Blair-West, a psychiatrist specializing in trauma and DID, testified that the disorder is not a mental illness, but a sophisticated psychological defense mechanism developed to cope with “betrayal trauma,” where caregivers are the perpetrators of abuse.

Professor Dianna Kenny, a psychologist, disagreed, describing DID as one of the most severe forms of mental illness.

The trial is ongoing.

Conclusion

Allowing “system members” to give evidence raises questions about credibility, reliability, and the treatment of such witnesses.

 The trial represents uncharted territory for Australia’s legal system, pushing boundaries on how courts handle complex psychological conditions. The case could set a precedent for future proceedings involving trauma related disorders and their role in trials.

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

Introduction

Domestic Violence (DV) is a critical issue in Queensland, with callouts expected to exceed 200,000 this year. In response, the Queensland Police Union has proposed significant reforms designed to enhance victim protection and alleviate the strain on police resources. These reforms, if implemented, could reshape how DV matters are managed in the state.

One of the key reforms proposed by the Police Union is the introduction of on-the-spot infringement-style protection orders, known as Police Family Violence Orders (PFVOs). This system aims to provide immediate protection for victims without requiring court involvement.

Key Features of PFVOs:

• Immediate Protection: Victims are safeguarded without the delay of court processes.
• Validity: Orders are valid for 12 months.
• No Admissions Requirement: Perpetrators are not required to admit to offences for the order to be issued.
• Challenge Process: Offenders have 28 days to contest the order before a magistrate.
• Criminal Offence for Breach: The order becomes a criminal matter only if breached.

This system mirrors a similar framework already in place in Tasmania and is expected to significantly reduce frontline police workloads by up to 80%, enabling officers to focus more on critical policing duties.

Using Body-Worn Cameras as Evidence

Another reform involves enabling body-worn camera footage to serve as primary evidence in DV cases:

• Reduces trauma for victims by eliminating the need to repeatedly recount their experiences.
• Provides judges with powerful, firsthand evidence of abuse.
• Streamlines police work, replacing detailed affidavits with recorded statements.

Union President Shane Prior highlighted that using this footage could save significant time and resources, while improving judicial outcomes.

Transforming Queensland’s DV Response

If implemented, these reforms could:

1. Provide immediate protection for victims.
2. Dramatically reduce police workloads.
3. Deliver stronger evidence to prosecute offenders effectively.

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

Jordan James Fineanganofo has been found not criminally responsible for the murder of paramedic Steven Tougher.

Steven Tougher, was repeatedly stabbed by Jordan James Fineanganofo, without warning, outside Campbelltown McDonald’s in April 2023.

The NSW Supreme Court held that the evidence produced by both the Crown and Defence, including opinions of psychiatrists, met the criteria for the special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible.

This verdict was reached under the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW), which governs cases involving mental health impairments in criminal proceedings.

Key Points of the Case

1. Fineanganofo stabbed Tougher multiple times outside a McDonald’s in Campbelltown in April 2023.
2. Both the prosecution and defence agreed that Fineanganofo met the criteria for a special verdict of “act proven but not criminally responsible”.
3. Psychiatric evidence indicated that Fineanganofo was experiencing psychosis, including auditory hallucinations, likely due to a relapse of schizophrenia.
4. The Supreme Court accepted that Fineanganofo did not know his actions were wrong at the time of the offence.

Legal Framework in NSW

Under the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW):

A person can be found not criminally responsible if, at the time of carrying out an act constituting an offense, they had a mental health impairment or cognitive impairment that had the effect that they:

1. Did not know the nature and quality of the act, or
2. Did not know that the act was wrong.

The court can order the defendant to be detained as a forensic patient, which is what occurred in the case of Jordan James Fineanganofo.

The Mental Health Review Tribunal will review the case periodically, typically every six months, to assess the Jordan James Fineanganofo’s condition and potential for release.

Any future release would be contingent on the tribunal being satisfied that Jordan James Fineanganofo no longer poses a risk to the community or themselves.

This verdict has sparked controversy, with the victim’s family expressing disappointment and frustration with the outcome. However, it aligns with the legal provisions designed to address cases where severe mental illness impacts an individual’s criminal responsibility.

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

A 29 year old man from North Brisbane has had his charge upgraded to murder following an alleged domestic and family violence (DFV) assault on 17 August 2024. The incident resulted in the death of a 61 year old woman, who was known to the accused.

Incident Details

The Queensland Police allege that the altercation took place inside a home in Upper Kedron, shortly before 5:45am on 17 August 2024. The woman sustained critical head injuries during the altercation and was rushed to the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital in a critical condition. Despite receiving urgent medical care, she succumbed to her injuries and passed away on 26 August 2024.

Initially, the man was charged with one count of grievous bodily harm under domestic violence provisions. However, following an extensive investigation by the Ferny Grove Criminal Investigation Branch and their DFV team, the charge was upgraded to one count of murder on 19 October 2024. The man was to appear for Mention in Brisbane Magistrates Court on 25 October 2024.

Raising Awareness on Domestic and Family Violence

This case sheds light on the critical issue of domestic and family violence. The Queensland Police Service (QPS) has used this opportunity to emphasise the importance of understanding what constitutes a healthy relationship and the signs of abuse. A healthy relationship, according to the QPS, is built on trust, support, and safety, without fear or intimidation from a partner or family member.

Legal Implications

This case highlights the serious legal consequences of domestic violence offences in Queensland. Under the Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld), murder carries amongst the highest penalties, and the decision to upgrade the charge indicates the severity of the injuries sustained and the outcome of the incident.

Murder charges, particularly when linked to domestic violence, involve complex legal arguments concerning intent, causation, and aggravating factors. In Queensland, a conviction for murder usually carries a life sentence, demonstrating the gravity of the case for the accused.

Our team specialise in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you are charged with a drug offence, we recommend you obtain legal advice immediately. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

In a recent matter heard in the Queensland Moreton Bay Magistrates Court, a man involved in a three vehicle crash in Strathpine was granted immediate parole after pleading guilty to nine serious offences.

The man was captured on camera driving through an intersection without stopping, leading to a collision with two vehicles waiting at a traffic light. He was heavily intoxicated with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.18% – more than three times the legal limit – and continued to drink from a wine bottle even after the crash.

Emergency services, including police officers and firefighters, arrived to assist. However, the man became aggressive, assaulting two police officers and obstructing a firefighter. The situation escalated further when the man spat on one of the officers during his arrest, which was captured on police body camera footage. Bystanders also filmed the incident, showing an officer punching the man constantly before using a Taser to subdue him.

Court Proceedings

The man pleaded guilty to nine charges, including:

1. assaulting two police officers;
2. obstructing a firefighter; and
3. driving under the influence of alcohol.

The court heard that the man had a history of criminal offences, including dangerous driving and drug trafficking with a prior conviction for assaulting a police officer in 2016.

Defence argued that his actions were influenced by the sudden death of a close friend, which had led him to drink excessively on the day of the incident. While the court recognised this personal hardship, the magistrate emphasised the seriousness of the offences, particularly the assault on Police.

As part of his sentence, the man was ordered to pay $750 to the officer he spat on as compensation for pain and suffering, and an additional $500 in penalties. He was sentenced to 15 months in jail but was granted immediate parole.

Police Conduct Under Investigation

The matter caused controversy when footage emerged showing the arresting officer punching the man and using a Taser. Although the use of force by police officers in high stress situations is sometimes necessary, the incident has sparked an internal investigation into whether the officer’s response was appropriate.

Our team specialise in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you are charged with a drug offence, we recommend you obtain legal advice immediately. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

After a December 2022 shooting in the rural suburb of Wieambilla, Queensland, U.S. prosecutors have revealed new evidence linking an American man to the fatal attack on two Australian police officers. The man, identified as Donald Day Jr., allegedly sent messages of encouragement to the family responsible for the ambush before they engaged in a gunfight with a tactical response team.

Queensland Wieambilla Shootings

On 12 December 2022, two Constables, a male and female, were tragically shot by two people after the officers arrived at a rural property in Wieambilla. A neighbour was also killed during the incident.

The investigation into the incident has extended across international borders, with new information surfacing regarding the involvement of the Arizona man prosecutors allege communicated with the shooters before and after the killings, offering his “comfort and assurance” in support of their actions.

Day is alleged to have sent further messages stating, “I tell you, family, that those bastards will regret that they ever f***ed with us… anything that is within my range to do for you, I will not hesitate.”

Legal Proceedings in the U.S.

These communications form part of the federal case being built against Day, who was arrested in December 2023. He has been charged with five federal offences, including:

1. interstate threats;
2. threatening an FBI agent; and
3. illegal possession of firearms.

Day has pleaded not guilty to the charges. The court has ordered both prosecutors and defence to provide jury selection questions, with a trial date pending.

Day’s connection to the Wieambilla shootings stems from his alleged promotion of a “Christian end-of-days ideology” known as premillennialism. Prosecutors claim that he repeatedly communicated this ideology to the family between May 2021 and December 2022.

International Investigations

The matter highlights the complex nature of international criminal investigations, particularly when crimes span across borders. With U.S. authorities continuing to build their case, and an upcoming inquest in Queensland, both Australian and U.S. legal systems will play pivotal roles in determining the full extent of the actions and influences that led to the fatal shootings in Wieambilla.

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

A Queensland man has been charged in connection with an alleged assault and abduction that occurred in Melbourne over 30 years ago. The arrest follows a re-opened investigation by Victorian Police into the incident from 1988.

Alleged Crime and Arrest

The 57 year old from Queensland was arrested following new evidence that led to the reopening of the case. Following his arrest, the man was transported to Melbourne, where he was formally charged with:

• Two counts of aggravated rape;
• Two counts of rape;
• Abduction by force;
• Kidnapping; and
• False imprisonment.

Police allege that the victim, who was 19 years old at the time, was walking along Carlisle Street in St Kilda following an evening out when she was forcibly taken. The accused is alleged to have driven the young woman to Elwood Beach, where she endured a series of violent assaults.

Despite an initial investigation in 1988, no charges were laid at that time. However, the case was reopened in 2021 when new information came to light. A Detective of the Victorian Sexual Crime Squad stated that police were committed to seeking justice for this “horrific” crime and that the arrest provided some closure for the victim.

The detective noted: “To be a 19 year old woman, happily walking home after a fun night out, who suddenly had her world changed instantly in this way, is unimaginable. Shocking crimes like this leave a permanent imprint … today we hope we have delivered some closure and relief,”

Upcoming Court Appearance

The accused, who would have been in his twenties at the time of the alleged offence, has been remanded in custody. He is set to appear in the Melbourne Magistrates Court in January 2025.

Commitment to Historic Cases

Police’s persistence on this case demonstrates that Police do not forget allegations of serious sexual assault, even after many years. For victims of historic offences, cases like this provide hope that justice can eventually prevail.

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

With the Queensland Liberal National Party’s recent electoral victory and its “tough on youth crime” platform, youth justice laws in the state are set for significant changes. The “adult crime, adult time” approach proposes that youth offenders receive adult sentences for serious crimes.

Some likely implications this will have on youth sentencing (those under 18) include:

Higher Penalties for Specific Offenses

Legislative changes are aimed at harsher penalties on crimes frequently associated with youth offenders, such as:

1. car theft,
2. property damage; and
3. violent offenses.

Changes could include minimum sentencing guidelines specific to these crimes when committed by minors.

Lowering the Threshold

This could involve reducing the age or circumstances under which youth offenders can be tried as children, particularly for violent or serious crimes. The aim would be to mandate that repeat or serious offenders face adult sentencing frameworks, possibly by redefining age-related exemptions in the Youth Justice Act 1992.

Increased Detention Powers

Proposed amendments might expand police and judicial authority to detain youth offenders pre-trial or post-sentence for extended periods, potentially including mandatory minimum sentencing for specific offenses. Such changes would align youth sentencing more closely with adult practices, despite concerns about developmental appropriateness and recidivism.

Use of Adult Watch Houses and Detention Facilities

Changes could further permit or codify the detainment of minors in adult watch houses when juvenile facilities are unavailable. Recent legislation, like the Youth Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2021, already allows limited use of adult watch houses for children. New laws could broaden this, sparking debate about its impact on youth welfare and international compliance.

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.