Deakin University School of Law

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by nosborne48, May 16, 2005.

  1. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member


    Apparently Deakin U. has an online LL.B. program that qualifies the student for Victoria law licensure.

    Deakin also has "conversion" courses online for foreign lawyers wishing to qualify in Australia.

    Victoria has a mandatory clerkship of (I think) one year.

    They wear wigs and gowns down under, too.
  2. jayncali73

    jayncali73 New Member


    Always wondered what the Supreme Court would look like in wigs. haha! :D
  3. agilham

    agilham New Member

    Ewwww. Hot. Hot. Hot!!!!

    Not my idea of a fun time.

  4. DesElms

    DesElms New Member

    I knew a guy who used to wear wigs and gowns down under...

    ...but I think maybe I'm talking about something else.


    The father of a childhood friend of mine used to complain (back when I was a kid) that the U.S. was going to hell; and that if so-and-so won the election, then he was moving to Australia, etc., etc.

    Having now reached and exceeded the age that he was back when he used to say such things; and having seen politics and the state of society evolve to a place unimaginable by him at the time, I think maybe I'm starting to understand how he felt.

    Hmmm. [contemplative chin rubbing] Deakin, eh? Law-licensure-qualifying LLB, eh? Conversion courses, eh? I'd look okay in a wig and gown... wouldn't I? Hmmm.

    [just kidding... er... well... sort of]
  5. Yan

    Yan New Member

  6. PJFrench

    PJFrench member

    Re: DETC

    Not for accreditation - only for funding for US students.
  7. PJFrench

    PJFrench member

    Barristers gown up, solicitors don't. Solicitors can appear in a case in a lower court and they don't wear gowns then - just a business suit.

    Clerkship can be met by a concentrated course for I think 6 months at present at the Lewis Cowan Institute before application for a practising certificate. It of course costs, but clerkship pays - something, although i had a client who had to pay for his daughters clerkship.

    Clerkship has been an issue recently with several complaining they were mail persons and office correspondence filers - lousy way to treat a graduate, and that is NOT clerkship. I currently have a contract training barristers staff and the treatment of 'clerks' is not right. I have daughter [9th child of 9 and last an Uni!] doing law and I'll pay for the Institute course in preference.
  8. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    According to the Deakin web site, the state of Victoria does not have an officially bifurcated profession. As in Canada, a law license is a law license. Every lawyer is both a barrister and a solicitor.

    However, apparently the lawyers in Victoria divide themselves up into barristers and solicitors.

    This has never been the case in the U.S. My law license doesn't even SAY "barrister and solicitor"; it says "attorney and counselor".

    I saw a friend's Nevada license. It said simply "license".
  9. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

    Re: Re: Deakin University School of Law

    Can you explain the difference between a "barrister" & a "solicitor"? I had thought that both were Brit-speak for "lawyer"?
  10. oxpecker

    oxpecker New Member

    A barrister is a courtroom lawyer. A solicitor does everything else (including getting a barrister to present a case in the higher courts).

    Members of the public hire a solicitor.

    There are many more solicitors than barristers.

    At least, this was the situation in South Africa when I lived there.
  11. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    In general, solicitors make more money than barristers do.

    Barristers are (or were) supposed to be of a higher social standing than solicitors. They are (or were) deemed to be "gentlemen" whereas solicitors were (and are) expected to be "men of affairs", that is, businessmen.

    Most Judges are appointed from the ranks of barristers.

    I understand that, in England, a barrister may not sue for his fees. Whether that is still true, I do not know.

    A barrister has something called the "right of audience", that is, a Judge MUST listen to him in Court. Solicitors may appear in lower level courts but at the Crown Court or High Court only a barrister may present a case on behalf of a client.

    Solicitors DO have their own monopolies, however. Only a solicitor may pass on title to real estate or draft a Will for a member of the public. For the most part, only a solicitor may "approach", that is, retain, a barrister.

    IIRC, these monopolies are the only forms of law practice that require any licensure in England. Anyone may give, and charge for, legal advice or the drafting of most legal documents.

    It is possible now in England to qualify in both professions.
  12. Charles

    Charles New Member

    Make torture legal, say two academics [Head of Deakin U. Law School]
  13. DesElms

    DesElms New Member

    Ouch. (no pun intended)
  14. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    I don't think that that sort of torture is likely to yield much in the way of useful info.

    On a related note, though, I'm damned if I can see that the Iraqi prisoner abuses amount to anything remotely approaching torture, certainly nothing warranting lengthy prison terms. I mean, a prisoner is very unlikely to suffer lasting harm through being sexually embarrased or outraged.
    If we make them uncomfortable, SO WHAT?

    We're not maiming them, blinding them, cutting out their tongues, smashing their fingers, raping them with mop handles or even placing them in pitch dark cells for months at a time.

    "Desecretion" of a Koran is something that I'd be perfectly willing to do myself to further the fight against those who do no more than burn my country's flag, let alone drive airplanes into our public buildings.

    I REALLY think we need to get some PERSPECTIVE here. These people are our MORTAL ENEMIES. Hello?
  15. Charles

    Charles New Member

    I'm surprised you would say that. Do you see the war on terrorism as a war with Islam?

    The only known Koran desecration at Gitmo was perpetrated by a Muslim prisoner.

    Condoleezza Rice

    I agree with the Secretary of State regarding respecting other faiths.

    The whole "prisoner abuse" thing is filled with great case-study material for a military ethics class. What is torture? Is torture ever acceptable? If so in what circumstances? and so on . . . .

    Not that all non-Muslims are always tolerant, it sure does seem that we can count on a large percentage of Muslims becoming violent when offended. Do you recall any Budhist rioting when the Taleban destroyed the ancient statues in Afganistan? Which is why, even if it were true (which it was not!), Newsweek was very irresponsible for publishing the story that said United States Soldiers desecrated the Koran in Gitmo.

    As a private citizen, I guess there's nothing to stop you from desecrating as many Korans as you like. However, you better stand by for heavy rolls. On the other hand, if an "artist" did the same thing with a Bible, Crucifix, or a statue of Our Lady, Newsweek, the BBC and the rest of the mainstream media with be falling all over themselves defending the "artist's" First Amendment freedoms.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 18, 2005
  16. adamsmith

    adamsmith member

    Deakin University is a great university with a great law faculty.

    Also look at Charles Darwin University in the Northern Territory of Australia- another distance learning LL.B.

    And not forgetting the University of New England, NSW...
  17. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Of course we are in a war with Islam. No amount of political correctness can alter the fact that we were the subject of a vicious attack mounted against us PRECISELY because Western institutions and values are correctly perceived as a mortal threat to entrenched Muslim power interests. We are in a war with the Muslim world because THEY made it so.

    This is not to say that individual Muslims are themselves necessarily hostile to the U.S. however, a Muslim is reconciled to the U.S. precisely insofar as he fails to follow the precepts of his formal religion.

    It's a bit like Judaism...the more "religious", meaning fundamentalist an Israeli or American Jew is, the more his belief system collides with modern Western democracy. Literalist, fundamentalist Judaism is incompatable with self government by a sovereign people. This is Israel's basic internal conflict, a conflict that is the sourse of much suffering and death.

    Ultimately it is a culture war, very much like the culture war we have here in the U.S. except that, so far, we aren't shooting at each other. It boils down to authority; either the people are themselves the sole and ultimate source of legitimate political power or they are not; the Bible, or Torah, or the Loran, or whatever religious superstition is. Real compromise is impossible.
  18. Opalese

    Opalese New Member


    I wouldn't normally get myself involved in such a discussion, but I am a little shocked by the tone of things here.
    I think it should be made quite clear that there are genuinely good people of all faiths everywhere in the world, and that you should not exclude Muslims. Believe it or not, there are God-fearing Muslims who practise their faith, adhere to its values, and are able to accomodate others with tolerance and love.
    I strive to be one of those.
    I find it very disturbing that some people in the forum would be willing to desecrate my Holy Book without knowing very much about it. It is, as far as I am concerned, the word of God, His perfected message on earth, unaltered, till Kingdom Come. You do not have to agree with me, but you can respect others as you wish to be respected.
    As a Muslim, I would like to take a moment to say something to people of other faiths: there is often a big difference between Islam and Muslims. The religion itself does not propagate violence at all. Nor does it promote disrespect towards other faiths. Many Muslims have done a lot of hellish deeds. I personally was present at a bombing in a residential area (where I live) in which lots of innocent people were hurt and killed, so I know the horror first hand, and am not just rattling off something I watched on CNN. But haven't people of all religious denominations done many a hellish deed? Think about it. Let's not be biased simply because the media often is!
    I admit that Muslims have in so many ways deteriorated terribly over the centuries. There are many reasons for this ( and many forms of deterioration), but I will not get into that here. It's enough to say they so often present themselves in the most shocking of ways. They know how to make themselves hated (with a little help from the media). I know and acknowledge that. BUT NOT ALL OF THEM ARE LIKE THAT!

    It is so superficial and childish to sum people up, and we're supposed to be educated people here!

    Again I say: there is so often a difference between Islam and Muslims. Islam is a great faith. Muslims often (more than often) disgrace their own great and noble faith. If Islam could weep over how it's been interpreted and abused by its own followers, the tears would flood the entire Muslim World.
    There is a war of ideologies going on. I am not so naive and idealistic as not to see it. But I still have hope that reaching out and communicating with others, however bitter we may all be, can help. And it can heal. I have tremendous respect for people of all faiths, and my late father, a devout Muslim, used to always say 'piety is beautiful' and he meant it for any soul who can see the beauty of the faith he/she has been blessed with. For belief most certainly is a blessing.
    I am not here to change anyone's mind about anything, but I do hope that people can stop and think about the possibility of communication. Forget the politicians. Every day folk like me and you can talk. As long as we maintain respect, you'll be surprised how much good can be generated.

    Thanks for your time,


    M.Litt Creative Writing, Central Queensland University (Oct 2005)
  19. bing

    bing New Member

    Re: Re: DETC

    Do you think this is the case? The reason I ask is because there are Caribbean medical schools such as AUC, St. Georges, and I believe Ross(and vet school), that get federally backed student loans and those schools hold no U.S. accrediation that I am aware of. They certainly are not DETC or RA.

    Also, students attending Polish medical schools such as Karol Marcinkowwsky University in Poznan can receive Stafford loans. I\'m sure Karol M. is not RA or DETC.

  20. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Please do not assume that I condemn individual Muslims. Of course not. The trouble is, in war, you don't LOOK at whether an individual soldier or citizen of the enemy state is HIMSELF your enemy; you are fighting a CORPORATE entity and that means fighting those individuals who are identified with the corporate enemy regardless of their personal views.

    And this is but the most recent flare up in the West's war with the Muslim world. I promise you that the Americans killed in 9/11 were not each individually committed to killing Muslims or destroying Islam. They are, nevertheless, dead because they were identified with the Muslim world's enemy.

    There ARE no innocent civilians in a war zone.

Share This Page