Social Justice - Advancing Australia's Fairness.

First up, I'd like to direct your collective eyes up this page to the top. Notice my shiny new title image?

"Wow Chris, since when were you talented?"

Answer: I'm not. Full credit goes to Adam who writes far more entertaining posts on his blog. I suggest skipping mine completely and just reading his instead.

***

Now to those readers that I have left I bring you today's post, with a nice little introduction. I know that current affairs commentary isn't something that I generally blog here. There are plenty of people out there doing that.

Actually, come to think of it, there are plenty of people writing the kind of stuff that I normally write...so it kind of nullifies that argument.

Regardless, today I am going to discuss a topic that I have been following since it began, and have previously written about. (Not on my blog - it was an editorial piece for my writer's workshop class - copies are available to anyone interested, just leave a comment).

So...here goes. Nick D'Arcy - once more you are in my sights.

***

Its not quite a year after the infamous event that lost D'Arcy his international swimming career, and his chance at Olympic gold. For those who may have forgotten Im going to do a cut and paste from my previous writing to summarise what occurred - as best as media sources will allow.

You’ve heard the story about Nick D’Arcy, no doubt. He had a few to drink. His drinking buddy, Simon Cowley, told him to “tone down his bragging” - as the Herald Sun reported - and so Mr D’Arcy elbowed him in the face. Cowley suffered fractures in his jaw, eye sockets, hard palate, cheekbone and nose, requiring extensive surgery to insert five titanium plates into his face. Pretty hefty blow. D’Arcy’s punishment? The Australian Olympic Committee has said that he will not be attending this year’s Beijing Olympics.

So, it was an unprovoked attack, or at least thats how it was presented - though recently it has come to light that he was "slapped" by Cowley. And apparently D'Arcy punched him. Whether this slap occured or not and whether it was a punch is irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned. I'm ready to get on my high horse and condemn the situation.

What we have here is a violent outbreak that has physically and mentally damaged a fellow human being, and indeed a fellow swimmer. And I do not think that is something we should tolerate in our society no matter how drunk the person happens to be. Drunkeness is not an excuse for damaging incidents. You make a decision to drink - you deal with the consequences.

Now what has bought this topic back to my attention? Well, our wonderful Nick has had his sentence passed. He attained a suspended sentence, meaning he's been found guilty but escapes a jail term so long as he is on his very bestest behaviour. So no more punching for Nick or he goes to prison.

I think he was very lucky to escape a jail sentence. But I'll stick with the court's decision. They know a hell of a lot more about in than I ever will. We can't trust the media to not put a spin on things.

But there has something that has really made me angry about the whole situation.

In news today Swimming Australia annouced that D'Arcy would not be competing in the World Championships in Rome - despite qualifying at the Australian Championships.

And people think that Swimming Australia is in the wrong here.

A comment published on the Herald Sun article reporting this development - there were a number arguing the same sort of thing - this was the best expressed, however:

The decision to ban Nick D'arcy from the swimming team is deeply concerning. It suggests that decisions in law and sentence in law is not sufficient. All Australians should be concerned that a person charged and convicted in a court of law can be required to face additonal consequences beyond the structure and limits offered by the legal system. Those who support ongoing punishment would lead us all away from the objectivity of the legal system.

"Jan Anderson"

I disagree entirely with the sentiments expressed by Ms Anderson here. Law plays a vital role in ensuring justice is withheld in the community - but it is not, and never will be, the only role in justice. Many comments expressed similar sentiments "his done the time", "he's paid his debt" and "shouldn't be punished further". At first I found these arguments compelling. He's been sentenced, and punished by the courts, leave him be. But lets pull back for a second.

I work in a knife shop. If I commit a crime - regardless of its severity - my employer has every right to sack me, no matter how good I am at my job. If I have a criminal record, I will be punished beyond the law by society. It's a black mark against my name, and its something that I would sure as hell have to live with.

It's called social justice.

It isnt a matter of whether Nick D'Arcy is a fantasic and talented swimmer, and that he has already be punished by law. He has commited a crime and in doing so he has tarnished his name, he has recieved a black mark. Swimming Australia is well within their rights to say "We don't want him."

And I'm well within my rights as a citizen of the country he seeks to represent to say: "I don't want him - he is not what I want representing my nation."

That is something he will have to learn to live with.