AOTW:
To mix things up further, Sunfish wanted rigid rules a few posts back and now he wants more flexibility
Again, missing the point.
I want plain English common sense rules such that any reasonable person can determine what is required to comply. I do not want a system where we are told what does NOT comply, leaving us to crystal ball prognosticate what MIGHT satisfy CASA, even then CASA won't "approve" it just "accepts".
I want a clear set of policy guidelines on how such rules are to be enforced - including the degree of any discretion available to an investigator.
I want the final arbiter to be the judicial system where rules of evidence apply.
I do not want some Two bit, corrupt,, biased, Kangaroo court (show cause bullshyte) run by CASA which is both rule writer, rule interpreter and rule enforcer to have anything to do with punishment.
I want to be afforded procedural fairness, natural justice and the principle of equity and proportionality to be applied and always in the interests of the accused. Including the right to cross examine accusers and witnesses.
To put that another way; exactly how long do you think the general public would put up with the situation if the road traffic police were allowed to behave like CASA does writing rules, interpreting those rules to their own advantage and enforcing them capriciously like CASA does?