This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/oct/05/ruling-to-prevent-deaf-woman-becoming-juror-described-as-a-smack-in-the-face
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Ruling to prevent deaf woman becoming juror described as 'a smack in the face' | |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| A Queensland woman who wanted to become the country’s first deaf juror says a high court ruling against her is “a smack in the face” for deaf Australians. | A Queensland woman who wanted to become the country’s first deaf juror says a high court ruling against her is “a smack in the face” for deaf Australians. |
| Gaye Lyons, who is profoundly deaf, said her case was about the principle of justice and equality for “every citizen of Australia”. | Gaye Lyons, who is profoundly deaf, said her case was about the principle of justice and equality for “every citizen of Australia”. |
| “Deaf people should not be treated any differently,” Lyons said. “The high court does not see that.” | “Deaf people should not be treated any differently,” Lyons said. “The high court does not see that.” |
| The deputy registrar of an Ipswich court told Lyons in 2012 she must be excused from jury duty because there was no provision in the state’s Jury Act to swear in an Auslan interpreter or for that person to be allowed in the jury room. | The deputy registrar of an Ipswich court told Lyons in 2012 she must be excused from jury duty because there was no provision in the state’s Jury Act to swear in an Auslan interpreter or for that person to be allowed in the jury room. |
| Lyons took the case to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal, the supreme court of Queensland and the Queensland court of appeal, where the decision was upheld each time. | Lyons took the case to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal, the supreme court of Queensland and the Queensland court of appeal, where the decision was upheld each time. |
| The high court on Wednesday dismissed her appeal. | The high court on Wednesday dismissed her appeal. |
| The chief executive of Deaf Australia, Kyle Miers, said the court had failed to recognise the UN convention on the rights of people with disabilities. | The chief executive of Deaf Australia, Kyle Miers, said the court had failed to recognise the UN convention on the rights of people with disabilities. |
| “’It is time for all states and territories, including the commonwealth government, to take immediate action to amend their anti-discrimination acts and to remove discrimination in all areas and, more importantly, recognising the right for deaf people to use Auslan,” he said. | “’It is time for all states and territories, including the commonwealth government, to take immediate action to amend their anti-discrimination acts and to remove discrimination in all areas and, more importantly, recognising the right for deaf people to use Auslan,” he said. |
| The judges agreed that Queensland law did not permit an interpreter to be present during jury deliberations in the absence of specific legislative provisions. | The judges agreed that Queensland law did not permit an interpreter to be present during jury deliberations in the absence of specific legislative provisions. |
| In arguing Lyons’ case, solicitor Kylie Nomchong SC rejected claims about possible errors from interpreters and said there was just as much chance that a hearing juror would be bored, distracted or suffer a lapse in concentration. | In arguing Lyons’ case, solicitor Kylie Nomchong SC rejected claims about possible errors from interpreters and said there was just as much chance that a hearing juror would be bored, distracted or suffer a lapse in concentration. |
| Lawyers for the state said there was no way to test the accuracy of interpretations and the Jury Act was simply being administered as it was intended. | Lawyers for the state said there was no way to test the accuracy of interpretations and the Jury Act was simply being administered as it was intended. |
| The high court ruled that the presence of a person other than a juror in the jury room during deliberations was “an incurable irregularity”, regardless of whether or not they participated. | The high court ruled that the presence of a person other than a juror in the jury room during deliberations was “an incurable irregularity”, regardless of whether or not they participated. |
| The Queensland attorney general, Yvette D’Ath, said the confidentiality of jury deliberations and the right to a fair trial were “among the most fundamental tenets of our justice system.” | The Queensland attorney general, Yvette D’Ath, said the confidentiality of jury deliberations and the right to a fair trial were “among the most fundamental tenets of our justice system.” |