Tag: criminal law

Earlier this month, Chris Nyst returned to the winner’s circle in the literary world with his latest novel, the intriguing Aussie outback-noir page-turner, Millen.
Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk announced an independent Commission of Inquiry into Forensic DNA Testing in Queensland. The Commission’s final report, which was handed down on 13 December 2022 sent shockwaves throughout the legal community.

“…theoretically at least, Ben Roberts-Smith could be prosecuted for War Crimes under Article 8 of the Rome Statute. But the criminal standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt is a much higher bar to be leapt than mere proof on the balance of probabilities, and the ICC already has its hands more than full.” The recent […]

“…none of the amendments included in the Bill is more contentious than the proposed removal of the prohibition against identifying accused persons charged with rape and other prescribed sexual offences prior to a committal hearing.” Just weeks ago the Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2023 was introduced to Queensland Parliament by Attorney General and Minister for […]

I am very proud to announce that Nyst Legal Solicitor Jordan Roles was this week announced by Griffith University as the winner of last year’s George Tanner Prize for achieving the highest grade in the Griffith University Innocence Project course.
In his massively successful, triple-platinum 2018 album "Astroworld," American rapper Travis Scott  got the party started with the high-charged rap anthem, ‘NO BYSTANDERS.’ It was an up-tempo call-to-arms, full of rage and rebellion. As it turns out, it may also have been a little prophetic.
As the proud father, and principal of Nyst Legal, I am extremely chuffed to be able to announce that this week, for the second year in succession, my youngest son, and Nyst Legal Senior Associate, Jonathan Nyst, has been shortlisted as one of the finalists in the Criminal Law division of the national Lawyers Weekly 30 Under 30 Awards.
The familiar legal adage "Hard cases make bad law" dates back at least as far as the early 1800s. It points to the danger of reacting to an extreme case by making a general, harsh and inflexible law to cover all cases. Wisdom dictates, the adage suggests, that laws are better drafted to target the average - and therefore more common – cases, rather than the extreme ones.
Confidential communications between lawyers and their clients are sacrosanct. They are subject to legal professional privilege, which means they cannot be disclosed by anyone – including the lawyer – to anyone else - including the government, the courts, the police, or anyone at all - without the client’s express authorisation. That principle has been around for about 500 years, and remains a fundamental tenant of our legal system. But it has, at times, been sorely tested.
School’s out! So hold onto your hats, folks, it's on again. As thousands of school-leavers descend upon Surfers Paradise for the annual ritual of revelry that has become known as Schoolies Week, thousands more parents hold their collective breath in dread and anticipation. The institutional shackles have been broken and cast aside, leaving only the unbridled celebratory passion of youth.
About ten years before the birth of Christ the great Roman poet Publius Ovidius Naso, in his collection of epistolary poems known as The Heroides, coined the Latin phrase Exitus acta probat, which translates roughly to the often-quoted mantra ‘The end justifies the means’. It is a sentiment celebrated by the Italian Renaissance writer Niccolo Machiavelli in the 1500’s and enthusiastically embraced by a long list of authoritarian dictators throughout history. Thankfully, it has no place in the criminal justice system of any modern western democracy.
This week the Queensland opposition launched a robust attack on a centuries-old criminal law defence. The 'mistake of fact’ defence was encoded into Queensland law in 1899 when our Criminal Code was first enacted, adopting a common-law notion dating back at least as far as pre-Norman England, that criminal liability requires some sort of actual subjective culpability, whether based on moral guilt or negligence. Section 24 of our Code provides that a person who does something under an honest and reasonable, but mistaken, belief as to a particular fact, they are not criminally responsible to any greater extent than if that belief was correct.