Anastasia Qvist is an outstanding lawyer. My criminal law situation (family violence order) was difficult, complex and Ana's diligence saved me as I was going through the most difficult period of my life. Ana is down to earth, commonsense and she even kept our costs to a minimum. She is a skilled litigator and knows the ins and outs of the ACT Magistrates Court. She dealt skillfully with the DPP and is an excellent negotiator. You will get a fair representation and she genuinely cares about her clients. She has my complete recommendation. The lady goes to bat for her clients.
I would strongly recommend Anastasia to anyone who is seeking legal representation. As a first-time offender who was charged with a Level 2 Drink Driving offence, she walked me through every step of the matter and was very upfront and clear on all aspects of my case. She was always accessible when I needed advice. Her approach and advice were excellent. Under her representation, I received the best possible outcome and managed to avoid a criminal conviction. She was a pleasure to deal with throughout the whole matter.
Anastasia Qvist was very professional and helpful in every step of my matter. I got a very good outcome and I can’t thank you enough for your hard work and the Armstrong Legal team in Canberra. I would highly recommend her!!!
Throughout Angela has been the consummate professional. She maintained a calm, yet strong demeanour remained informative and completely open in her communication and took complete ownership of the situation. We felt confident we finally had an advocate to steer us out of the nightmare we were in, and she did so with great respect and sincerity. I cannot speak more highly of Angela. She has literally rescued our family from what looked very much like a hopeless future.
Words can’t describe how grateful I am to Trudie Cameron being my solicitor and to Andrew Tiedt presenting my case in the court. They both have been very supportive and amazingly professional and effective. I’ve got an absolutely fantastic outcome I couldn’t even dream about.
Soon after meeting Andrew I knew he was the solicitor I wanted to handle my matter. He immediately sprang into action which brought me stability and hope during a tumultuous time in my life. Andrew was never afraid to give me straight answers to my tough questions which is a true mark of integrity. He is clearly at ease in the court environment and I believe his calm and measured demeanour went a long way to helping me secure the best result from my day in court. I would certainly recommend you approach Andrew if you need assistance.
"Andrew Tiedt was very professional and considerate to personal circumstances and gave sound advice that resulted in the best outcome possible. Highly recommended."
What Is A Conjugal Visit?
A conjugal visit is a designated period in which a prison inmate is allowed to be in private with a visitor. The visit allows extended, intimate contact, including sexual relations, between a prisoner and a visitor. In this way it is different to a supervised, regular prison visit, such as a contact visit, where hugging is permitted, and a non-contact “box” visit, where a screen separates the prisoner and visitor. The key aims of conjugal visits include preserving an inmate’s family ties, promoting the inmate’s reintegration into society on release, curbing recidivism and lessening prison violence. Victoria is the only state or territory in Australia which allows conjugal visits to prisoners.
Section 38 of the Corrections Act 1986 states:
“(1) The Secretary may in accordance with the regulations by instrument approve contact visiting programmes under which a prisoner’s family and friends may visit and have physical contact with the prisoner.
(2) The Secretary may in accordance with the regulations by instrument approve residential visiting programmes under which a prisoner’s family may stay with the prisoner in the prison.”
In this section, “family” is defined as a “near relative” or any other person who has a long standing close personal relationship with the prisoner. “Near relative” is a partner, parent or grandparent (or a partner’s), child or grandchild (or a partner’s), or a sibling (or a partner’s).
Conjugal visits are run by Corrections Victoria, a unit of the Department of Justice and Community Safety, at five prisons: Beechworth, Fulham, Loddon, Marngoneet and Tarrengower. The visits are in two categories: one focuses on a prisoner’s intimate partner relationships and the other on their relationships with children.
To be eligible for a conjugal visit, an inmate must be a medium and minimum-security prisoner serving a sentence of at least 18 months. Visitors must be on an approved visitors list, which the prisoner compiles and which can have up to 10 names at any one time. The conjugal visits are conducted in a motel-type setting. Beechworth prison provides family visits at a dedicated property near the prison.
Should conjugal visits be allowed?
The debate over whether conjugal visits should be allowed depends on the lens through which the visits are viewed. The goals of imprisonment are generally recognised as retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation and protection of society – how do conjugal visits fit within this paradigm? Do inmates forgo their right to spend intimate time with loved ones on account of being in prison?
Proponents say that in prisons across the globe, conjugal visits achieve their key aims. Such visits are permitted in countries including Brazil, Canada, Russia and Germany. In several states in the United States, conjugal visits were instigated to lessen the strain on families caused by the long absence of a jailed parent. Prison authorities allow sexual relations which they say has an added benefit of preventing homosexuality in prisons and affairs by wives.
Supporters say conjugal visits are necessary for a humane prison system, and refer to the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, which state:
“61. The treatment of prisoners should emphasize not their exclusion from the community, but their continuing part in it…
- Special attention shall be paid to the maintenance and improvement of such relations between a prisoner and his family as are desirable in the best interests of both.
- From the beginning of a prisoner’s sentence consideration shall be given to his future after release and he shall be encouraged and assisted to maintain or establish such relations with persons or agencies outside the institution as may promote the best interests of his family and his own social rehabilitation.”
They say prisons will remain unpleasant, and imprisonment will still confer a social stigma, even if conjugal visits are allowed.
Opponents say deprivation from contact should an accepted component of punishment for prisoners. They also point to the expense and administrative burden of allowing conjugal visits, such as the additional screening required of visitors and assessing the validity of marriages. Further, the fairness of allowing conjugal visits for some prisoners and not others has been questioned.
Safety concerns have also been raised. In Germany in 2010, an inmate murdered his girlfriend and attempted suicide during a visit. In the Australian Capital Territory, conjugal visits were established in 2011 but were scrapped after only 10 visits due to fears of compromised security.
Opponents also say it is important for public confidence that politicians do not appear soft on crime.
For advice on any legal matter, please contact Armstrong Legal.
WHERE TO NEXT?
If you suspect that you may be under investigation, or if you have been charged with an offence, it is vital to get competent legal advice as early as possible. Our lawyers are highly specialised in criminal law and will be able to guide you through the process while dealing with the various authorities related to your matter.
WHY CHOOSE ARMSTRONG LEGAL?
201 Elizabeth Street
Sydney NSW 2000
575 Bourke Street
Melbourne VIC 3000
231 North Quay
Brisbane QLD 4000
1 Farrell Place
Canberra ACT 2601
111 St Georges Terrace
Perth WA 6000