ipl-logo

Dietrich V Queen Summary

991 Words4 Pages

Australia believes that your rights are protected if you’re on the wrong and right side of the law. However, it wasn’t in the Dietrich v. The Queen (1992) 177 CLR 292 case. Dietrich was a criminal who had a past of committing many crimes. He had many outstanding warrants in almost all the states in Australia. He was arrested in the 18th of December 1982 in Thailand while trying to conceal heroine which was stored in a condom which he had swallowed. He was arrested and taken to Australia for trial for drug trafficking under the Customs Act 1901 (Cth). In Australia when you’ve been arrested and have a set trial date you have the exact rights of every person in that court room. However, Dietrich didn’t have his rights protected through the Australian …show more content…

If he didn’t, he could have been found guilty and served a much greater prison sentence for all four of the charges brought against him. However, this was averted because he was supplied legal representation that changed the outcome of the case. Upon Dietrich’s release in 2009, he changed his name to Hugo Rich. He later affected the life of one family for the rest of their lives. He had murdered a security guard in cold blood. This resulted in Olaf Dietrich receiving the life sentence. This decisions biggest affect was the way the Australian government deals with providing legal aid to any individual who may not have access to legal aid, to people may not be affluent enough or to those who have committed such serious crimes to which legal aid isn’t supplied. The decision also affects the way legal aid works itself and how it works in the Australian legal system. However, the main affect this decision has on today’s society is the way justice must be carried out in the court of law and the way a person’s rights should be protected even if they’re guilty or

Open Document