QLD How to Take Child Safety to Court?

Australia's #1 for Law
Join 150,000 Australians every month. Ask a question, respond to a question and better understand the law today!
FREE - Join Now

DocSniper

Well-Known Member
1 January 2015
58
11
224
Last message said there were 200 plaintiffs available. That would normally be adequate to get a class action underway providing most proved credible at interview. Personally I'd be ecstatic to see the Child Safety drones cop a bit of the same treatment they have been inflicting on their victims for years.
Yes, it is very possible to obtain 200 plus victims, the question is then, to where would I send these people to voice they want a class action ???, to this webpage or ????
and believe me, if I get to that court room, that infliction will happen....
 

praxidice

Well-Known Member
30 May 2014
62
8
224
Yes, it is very possible to obtain 200 plus victims, the question is then, to where would I send these people to voice they want a class action ???, to this webpage or ????
and believe me, if I get to that court room, that infliction will happen....

If you send them here and one of the resident lawyers doesn't sit up and take notice, I know some that will. Remember that each and every victim or their carer will need to be interviewed and assessed for credibility; lots of them may not make the grade. Then affidavits will need to be prepared etc etc. Its quite an involved process because you are effectively fighting at least two levels of government (the legislature and the executive) and probably elements of the third (the judiciary). In theory, all are ostensibly independent of the others but there are numerous versions of that fairy story. Basically this dog has multiple tails and its a matter of which tail wags the dog.

The respondents have many years of experience and unlimited resources so its imperative that preparation be meticulous. Re an earlier comment to the effect that the whole problem stops at ex premier Bligh, I think you'll find that its far more entrenched. I'm aware of issues that predate the blighters by many years and there is no indication that either of the two governments since then have made more than token adjustments to known problem departments.
 

DocSniper

Well-Known Member
1 January 2015
58
11
224
Well if any residing lawyer is looking, They should know, that guilty people do not beg to be in a court room, They should fathom that a human being can not be in two places at the same time committing a crime/s. Any lawyer that is reading all this, that might have any Interest could of contacted me for further details, but none so far.

I know I can win, I just dont have that right means to achieve in solo mode.
 

praxidice

Well-Known Member
30 May 2014
62
8
224
Well if any residing lawyer is looking, They should know, that guilty people do not beg to be in a court room, They should fathom that a human being can not be in two places at the same time committing a crime/s. Any lawyer that is reading all this, that might have any Interest could of contacted me for further details, but none so far.

I know I can win, I just dont have that right means to achieve in solo mode.

The ball is in your court. Put your group of two hundred victims / carers / whatever together and things will start moving. That said, its not sufficient to merely claim you have the numbers, you need to have them readily available and ideally accessible for interview before any lawyer will take you seriously. Lawyers are too busy doing stuff they know will make them money that to be bothered following up lost causes. I've used a particular individual I've found effective in matters involving the bureaucracy, he's OK with class actions and doesn't necessarily view money as a God, but there is no way known he'll consider getting involved in a matter like this without ensuring beforehand that the two hundred you say you have are more than names in a phone book. That has been tried far too many times in the past for anyone to get caught again. I'm far from the greatest fan of lawyers and / or the legal profession but that said, I'm not prepared to alienate one of the extremely rare ones who is legitimate and is prepared to stick his nose into what is in reality a human rights issue with no relevant legislation by suggesting he take on something that potentially ends up with only one or two usable plaintiffs and tens of thousands of dollars in expenses .

Taking on Child Safety isn't like a class action against multi-zillion dollar international phamaceutical company, in particular it isn't likely to result in a significant payout regardless of how much damage has been done; the best you can hope for is a change of policies and hopefully a few bureaucrats shuffled from one ivory tower to another. Its not as if any lawyer would get excited about his 47.5% cut of a maybe $10,000 maybe nothing settlement. Like it or not (I don't, but then I don't make the rules), the commercial reality is there are costs involved and someone needs to pay them. Two hundred people by a thousand dollars each will buy quite a bit of legal practitioner time.

A lot of legal practitioner time equates to a lot of court appearance and given that children are sacred cows in our society, media attention is a given. I suspect that the media could well end up achieving much more than court processes although you'd need to court stuff to air the blood and guts that attracts media attention.
 

DocSniper

Well-Known Member
1 January 2015
58
11
224
The ball is in your court. Put your group of two hundred victims / carers / whatever together and things will start moving. That said, its not sufficient to merely claim you have the numbers, you need to have them readily available and ideally accessible for interview before any lawyer will take you seriously. Lawyers are too busy doing stuff they know will make them money that to be bothered following up lost causes. I've used a particular individual I've found effective in matters involving the bureaucracy, he's OK with class actions and doesn't necessarily view money as a God, but there is no way known he'll consider getting involved in a matter like this without ensuring beforehand that the two hundred you say you have are more than names in a phone book. That has been tried far too many times in the past for anyone to get caught again. I'm far from the greatest fan of lawyers and / or the legal profession but that said, I'm not prepared to alienate one of the extremely rare ones who is legitimate and is prepared to stick his nose into what is in reality a human rights issue with no relevant legislation by suggesting he take on something that potentially ends up with only one or two usable plaintiffs and tens of thousands of dollars in expenses .

Taking on Child Safety isn't like a class action against multi-zillion dollar international phamaceutical company, in particular it isn't likely to result in a significant payout regardless of how much damage has been done; the best you can hope for is a change of policies and hopefully a few bureaucrats shuffled from one ivory tower to another. Its not as if any lawyer would get excited about his 47.5% cut of a maybe $10,000 maybe nothing settlement. Like it or not (I don't, but then I don't make the rules), the commercial reality is there are costs involved and someone needs to pay them. Two hundred people by a thousand dollars each will buy quite a bit of legal practitioner time.

A lot of legal practitioner time equates to a lot of court appearance and given that children are sacred cows in our society, media attention is a given. I suspect that the media could well end up achieving much more than court processes although you'd need to court stuff to air the blood and guts that attracts media attention.

Well, I can only try, I have posted and emailed others and only they can make the effort to voice their issues as I have done.
There is no possible chance that a single voice will ever be heard from any victims.
A compensation is by far the end result.
 

praxidice

Well-Known Member
30 May 2014
62
8
224
Well, I can only try, I have posted and emailed others and only they can make the effort to voice their issues as I have done.
There is no possible chance that a single voice will ever be heard from any victims.
A compensation is by far the end result.

You can forget compensation, matters involving pharmaceutical companies may well result in substantial compensation but it's extremely unlikely with a government department or quango. The reason you need to start with a tribe of two hundred is partly because many won't pass muster and partly because you need a bunch to fund a class action.
 

DocSniper

Well-Known Member
1 January 2015
58
11
224
again, If I ever make it to that court room, I will open up a can worms that the state government have tried so hard to conceal.
and that ole saying " there are many ways to skin a cat ".
And I also know from past events of child safety to where they have paid compensation, I like to add Prison time to that as well......
 

praxidice

Well-Known Member
30 May 2014
62
8
224
again, If I ever make it to that court room, I will open up a can worms that the state government have tried so hard to conceal.
and that ole saying " there is many ways to skin a cat ".
And I also know from past events of child safety to where they have paid compensation, I like to add Prison time to that as well......

If indeed any compensation was paid, it would be accompanied by extreme non-disclosure conditions sufficient to deter the recipient from spilling the beans. I can't imagine the gubmunt encouraging other potential claimants including those from other problem departments
 

DocSniper

Well-Known Member
1 January 2015
58
11
224
Well, the current Royal Commission now looking at the other side of the coin, meaning: for those found in the system to be guilty will be held accountable.
Compensation, will be something like the Forde Inquire, get bugga all. and yes, if child safety feel they have a no win, they can make an out of court settlement or the whole nine yards in the Federal court.
 

praxidice

Well-Known Member
30 May 2014
62
8
224
Well, the current Royal Commission now looking at the other side of the coin, meaning: for those found in the system to be guilty will be held accountable.
Compensation, will be something like the Forde Inquire, get bugga all. and yes, if child safety feel they have a no win, they can make an out of court settlement or the whole nine yards in the Federal court.
Where did you get the idea about the federal court? Child Safety is QLD legislation.