VIC Can a "Court of Law" - commit a criminal act ? aka - Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custode?

[Tangent Runner]

The facts....

1 - Magistrates court - issues an order claiming respondent present in court and consented...
2 - Respondent was NOT present, did not consent, still does not consent....
3 - It is suspected a duty may lawyer falsely represented to the court, regards respondent present / consent...
(suspected only, as respondent was not present....)
4 - duty lawyer was fully aware that respondent was not consenting, and not present in court...
(certain of this fact... + have witnesses...)
5 - Court order is an anonymous / unsigned document that contains false statements regarding fact 1...
as well as further false statement that respondent was given a copy of the order....
6 - Multiple applications by respondent to have hearing to revoke / vary the order are denied by the
same court that issued the order.....

So ipso facto - 2 indictable offences spring to mind....
by the Registrar / Magistrate who "issued" the order....
- Make False Document & Use False Document....

So my Q's are pretty simple....(sort of...)

Would a court order, made with disregard for law / legislation as above
- be a lawful or unlawful order ...?

Can a legitimate court of law commit indictable offences in the course of it's duty,
and remain a legitimate court of law ?

Can a prosecutor - upon becoming aware the IVO is a "false document" then
later USE the same false document....as basis for prosecution...?
Would not the prosecutor also then commit the indictable offence of "use false document"?

How does a pleb - "guard the guardians" - and ensure there is accountability ?

Really interested in responses that include legislation or case law refs...

Anyone ?

 

[sammy01]

why were you not at court?

 

[Rod]

Lawful

Not relevant to your situation. Court committed no offense, problem is with the duty lawyer for misleading the court.

Document is not false. Until a court says otherwise, the orders stand as is. And how does a prosecutor know the duty lawyer made a mistake - because you say so?

IVO's not normally granted by consent unless the magistrate talks to the respondent. Unclear how this can happen, unless you are are trying to use pseudo legal argument that some try to use and fail.