*Please note that the links to the content in this Part will direct you to Westlaw AU.<\/p>\n
To purchase an article, please email: LTA.Service@thomsonreuters.com<\/a> or contact us on 1300 304 195 (Australian customers) or +61 2 8587 7980 (international customers) during business hours (Mon-Fri, 8am-6pm AST).<\/p>\n The latest issue of the Criminal Law Journal <\/em>(Volume 45 Part 5) contains the following material:<\/p>\n EDITORIAL<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: Mirko Bagaric<\/em><\/p>\n Click here to access on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n Commonwealth Criminal Law and Interference with Automated Vehicles<\/strong><\/em><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Mark Brady, Andry Rakotonirainy and Kieran Tranter<\/p>\n The computer-controlled nature of contemporary road vehicles has reached a point where the in-vehicle computer control system manages a significant proportion of motor vehicle dynamic operation. In highly automated vehicles the automated driving system (ADS), undertakes the dynamic driving functions and overarching responsibility for the vehicle\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s journey. Central to Australia\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s future road transport system is the reliable operation of ADSs. ADS are networked, transmitting, and receiving data. This is a weakness that could be exploited to cause harm to individuals or the transport system. This article examines whether the Commonwealth criminal law is adequate for protecting against, or deterring from, unauthorised interference with ADSs. Three scenarios of interference are investigated. Scenario 1 is the intentional unauthorised interference with an ADS to cause harm. Scenario 2 involves unknowingly uploading of software containing harmful malware to an ADS. Scenario 3 is a third party installing unauthorised spyware on an ADS. This article argues that overall Commonwealth criminal law, specifically the \u00e2\u20ac\u0153cybercrime\u00e2\u20ac\u009d offences relating to unauthorised and malicious interference with computer systems, appear able to apply to various forms of interference with ADSs.<\/p>\n Click here to access this article on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n Prosecution and Defence Strategies in Non-fatal Strangulation Cases: Are They Influenced By Victim Brain Injury and PTSD?<\/em><\/strong><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Sarah Kendall<\/p>\n Over the last two decades, offences for non-fatal strangulation (NFS) have been introduced in Australia and the United States (US). NFS can result in anoxic-hypoxic brain injury (AHBI) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), both of which impact on victims\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 memory and other capacities. This article engages in empirical analysis of Australian and US cases to examine prosecution and defence strategies in NFS cases, and whether those strategies are influenced by knowledge of victim AHBI and PTSD. Three themes emerge from this analysis. First, many NFS victims show signs and symptoms of AHBI and\/or PTSD. Second, prosecutors adduce a variety of evidence at trial \u00e2\u20ac\u201c but none on AHBI or PTSD. Third, defence counsel use signs and symptoms of AHBI and PTSD, and myths and misconceptions about NFS, to create doubt. The article recommends that the prosecution of NFS includes an explanation of AHBI, PTSD and their effects on victims.<\/p>\n Click here to access this article on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n \u00e2\u20ac\u0153You Don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t Need to Know\u00e2\u20ac\u009d: The Australian Experience of Criminal Intelligence as Evidence<\/em><\/strong><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Dr Brendan Walker-Munro<\/p>\n Criminal intelligence, the synthesis of information and trained analysis to inform decision-making, has formed the cornerstone of policing and national security investigations for the last century. However, since 9\/11 the traditional lines between \u00e2\u20ac\u0153spies and cops\u00e2\u20ac\u009d have become blurred, and Federal and State laws have become more permissive of the use of criminal intelligence as evidence in proceedings, often in circumstances where the parties are not allowed to view the evidence, test its strength or even know it exists. This article intends to engage with this paradigm, not only to expose its weaknesses but also to identify positivist mechanisms where such material \u00e2\u20ac\u201c usually probative as to the facts in issue \u00e2\u20ac\u201c might be used in ways that do not offend constitutional or common law principles.<\/p>\n Click here to access this article on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n CASE AND COMMENT<\/a><\/p>\n Click here to access on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n DIGEST OF CRIMINAL LAW CASES<\/a><\/p>\n Click here to access on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n For the PDF version of the table of contents, click here: Westlaw AU – Crim LJ Vol 45 No 5 Contents<\/a> or here: New Westlaw Australia – Crim LJ Vol 45 No 5 Contents<\/a>.<\/p>\n Click here to access this Part on Westlaw AU<\/a><\/p>\n Click here to access this Part on New Westlaw AU<\/a><\/p>\n\n
Articles<\/h3>\n
\n