[ulf-77723]

Most interesting for Australia and generally society is the fact that a judge has to associate the behavior of collecting different materials from the periodic table with mental health issues in order to not ridicule the current laws.

[mianos]

They have the wrong person with mental health issues. Everyone involved in this whole story, aside from some guy with a hobby collecting elements, are absolutely insane. (I live nearby so I have been following the story closely).

[that_lurker]

And because of that he most likely will have really hard time getting a job after this

[_fat_santa]

Would he though?

This kid (assuming they go to college, etc) could quite possibly get a job in a lab or some other scientific establishment. At a place like that everyone would know about his case AND know how insane it was.

[theginger]

Possibly although given the story about it could go the opposite way.

[grumpy-de-sre]

Pretty sure he won't be getting a license to drive a train anytime soon. Especially not with a recorded conviction.

[tw1984]

according to australian laws, he has a pretty good chance to be sentenced without a conviction recorded.

[grumpy-de-sre]

"Judge Flannery did not record a conviction against Lidden and ordered that he be subject to an 18-month bond and recognisance release order."

Thank god, after a couple years he should have a real chance of getting his life back in order.

[Cordiali]

I get the impression that background checks are basically standard practice in America. That's not generally true in Australia, only in certain industries and roles.

[A4ET8a8uTh0_v2]

It seems it kinda depends since there are background checks and background checks. In private sector, it ranges all the way from credit check to actual invasive paid background check conducted by a third party, whose accuracy may very wildly ( I don't want to go into too much detail, but buddy had some troubled history in one state, but the background check conducted in another state did not raise those issues at all despite the fact that those same issues would have been treated differently, where he is now ). And then ( mostly ) public sector, where the range goes a little further to include checks for IC, which, apparently ( I am not aware of anyone who had one ), include actual interviews with people in your life.

[skissane]

> And then ( mostly ) public sector, where the range goes a little further to include checks for IC, which, apparently ( I am not aware of anyone who had one ), include actual interviews with people in your life.

Background investigators from the Australian military once came to our house. My father's partner, her friend's son was in the Navy and upgrading his security clearance, and he'd put her down as a character reference. They asked her all kinds of questions – "illegal drugs? prostitutes? gambling addict? secretly gay? cheating on his wife? beating his wife?" – and to all of them she basically said "not that I know of, but as his mother's friend I don't expect I'd be hearing about it if he was". And apparently they were happy with her answers.

[skissane]

> That's not generally true in Australia, only in certain industries and roles.

In software and IT, it is standard practice (in my personal experience) for private sector employers in Australia to ask for a national police check (criminal record).

Financial firms (such as banks) demand it, because they don't want to hire people with a criminal record for fraud or theft, they worry they'll use their insider access to commit fraud or theft again. And they often put standard terms in their vendor contracts to demand any vendor employees working on the contract also have a pre-hire criminal record check. Which means if you have finance industry customers (or hope to get them in the future), the simplest approach is just to do it for all your employees. If you are some small business doing tech support for other small businesses, you might not bother.

But, since this is not fraud or theft, they officially speaking don't care – whether they would in practice, likely depends on the individual company (hiring manager and HR). Plus someone else mentioned there was no conviction recorded, which means he won't get a criminal record for this – well, it will probably remain in the database forever, but it will be flagged as hidden, so an ordinary police check won't include it. (I thought maybe that he might temporarily have a record until his bond expires, but reading more about it, sounds like that isn't actually true.)

[theshackleford]

> In software and IT, it is standard practice (in my personal experience) for private sector employers in Australia to ask for a national police check (criminal record).

My personal experience has been quite different. I’ve done one in twenty years (hosting and telecommunications) and only because this time, I’m working closely with government.

[skissane]

Possibly depends on how big a firm it is and what kinds of customers it has - the bigger the firm, and the more sensitive the customers (big banks, government, military), the greater the odds of at least a pre-hire criminal record check

Also standard for any job working with vulnerable people (originally just minors, increasingly the elderly and disabled as well)-sometimes those checks are only for specified types of crimes, but the “types of crimes” included are broader than you think-e.g. assault is included (even if non-sexual and against another adult)

[rubatuga]

Don't we all have mental health issues?

[kitesay]

Yea