R V Brent Dreamer Case Study

NAME & CASE DETAILS: R v Brent Dreamer was a case heard by the District Court, in which Brent Dreamer had been accused and charged with unlawful stalking. The offence was outlined in section 19AA of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act, 1935. The case was held at a preliminary hearing in the Mount Gambier Magistrates Court, where the defendant elected a trial by jury. The judge that heard the case in the District Court was Judge Boomer. The prosecutor accused Dreamer of unlawful stalking because of the instances described in his hearing, such as constant phone calls and visiting when his presence was unwanted. The act of stalking is committed when: the person follows the other person or waits outside their house of loiters around their work place …show more content…
Judges, much like magistrates, preside over court cases. They are seen as the umpires of court cases, ensuring that the rules are followed and that a fair trial is carried out. Judges sit in intermediate and superior courts (District and Supreme Courts). The role of the judge is to adjudicate in cases: the judge makes decisions about points of law and gives instructions to the jury to make sure that they understand the proceedings and evidence presented. Another role in the case was the judge’s associate, this role is a confidential secretary to the judge and is a clerk of the court in which the judge is presiding. The prosecution witnesses, both Ms Molly Simpson and Ms Jessica Clancy gave evidence to support the case in court. A witness must stay outside the courtroom until his or her name is called. When they are called they must take the witness stand and swear an oath or make an affirmation to tell the …show more content…
I found Brent Dreamer to be guilty, in more ways than one. The accused had allegedly stalked and loitered in two main places where the witness was constantly seen at, her workplace and home, and tried to contact her through phone calls and repeatedly showing up at both of the locations. Instead of giving Ms Molly Simpson and Ms Jessica Clancy a lengthy and thought out trial, the decision was abrupt and rejected their accusations, and possibly placed them in a risky situation where past instances of Dreamers stalking could occur again. The just nature of the court system is limited in this case, due to the mechanisms of the court in achieving justice, including the judge and jury members that did not give the prosecutor’s witnesses a considerably fair trial because of bias behaviour and the gender majority of the jury, therefore, the verdict that had been given was not beyond reasonable