Political prisoner Stephen Wells will remain in prison until at least mid-May, after several blunders caused another adjournment, and yet again he has not been granted bail.
Stephen is currently imprisoned at the Adelaide Remand Centre for the crime of being a White Australian celebrating Australia Day on Australia Day “loitering”. He refused to sign bail conditions which would have restricted his free expression and political activism. As a result, he has been in prison since Australia Day.
The XYZ has obtained information that at a pretrial hearing last week, the prosecution was given more time to prepare its case in order to gather testimony. Given Wells was arrested nearly four months ago, this appears a bit of a stretch. Moreover, Wells has not received any summary of the prosecution case against him because it was sent to the wrong prison. Given that we know the Regime reads every word published by nationalists, this also appears a bit of a stretch.
This was enough to schedule another pretrial hearing for May 22. A pedant may insist this is fair, as Wells needs all the information to give him a fair trial. However, what Wells really needs is a fair process.
Depending on the responsibility of one’s job, mistakes have different consequences. If a delivery driver sends salt instead of sugar to the wrong address, a bakery’s buns will taste funny for a few days. Sending a prosecution brief to the wrong prison means a man who has not been convicted of any crime spends another month in prison.
Thus a “mistake” has resulted in a gross breach of Stephen Wells’ fundamental human rights. It is the sort of stuff up which should result in severe reprimand, and even a mistrial. Instead it has prolonged his incarceration with no consequence to those at fault. Similar “mistakes” occur with suspicious frequency when it comes to legal proceedings involving nationalists.
Incidents such as this must be investigated, as it casts a dark pall over Australia’s entire legal system.
If we break down the technical process of what lawyers do, one has to wonder if there is not a more efficient way. Humans on one side wield a block of information against humans on the other side wielding a competing block of information, and a human or group of humans decode the competing blocks of information to decide an outcome. What we’re basically talking about is an algorithm, which means the entire legal system could be replaced with a simple AI.
If the cost of AI-driven legal proceedings was tied via legislation to the cost of a takeaway coffee, the quality of outcomes may or may not alter, however it would be far more efficient and affordable for ordinary people.
Under such a system, even if found guilty unfairly, Stephen Wells would have served his sentence months ago. Justice delayed is justice denied.
If you would like to support Stephen’s legal defence and his family, you can donate at the following GiveSendGo page.
This article originally appeared on the XYZ and is republished by The Noticer with permission.
