⚖️ Practical Lawful Ascension Online Course

A study in procedural fairness, statutory authority, and the criminal burden of proof

Featuring the case of Kelly v Osborne [2023] WASC 353

🏛️ Course Overview

This online course offers a documented, step-by-step exploration of procedural fairness, statutory authority, and the burden of proof in Western Australia’s courts.
Centred on the real case of Kelly v Osborne, it illustrates how prosecutions under the Road Traffic Acts are criminal matters requiring the prosecution to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt — not merely on a civil balance of probabilities.

This is a critical insight for anyone navigating the system:

It is not simply about whether you committed the acts alleged.
It is whether the prosecution can lawfully prove their case to the strict criminal standard required.

📜 Case Foundation: Kelly v Osborne

In 2022, Dawn Michelle Kelly faced four criminal charges under the Road Traffic Acts.
Despite providing a medical certificate and requesting to appear by video link, the Magistrates Court refused to adjourn or allow alternatives. Dawn was convicted in her absence under s.55 of the Criminal Procedure Act, fined, and disqualified.

On appeal, the Supreme Court of WA held that:

• The refusal to adjourn was unreasonable, failing to respect procedural fairness.
• Convictions were overturned, showing that even after a lower court ruling, due process must be enforced.

⚖️ Key Insight: The Criminal Standard of Proof

• Traffic offences prosecuted by police under the Road Traffic Acts are criminal matters.
• This means the prosecution must prove each element of the offence beyond reasonable doubt, not simply “more likely than not” (as in civil cases).
• This principle holds even if you believe you “did” the act — the prosecution must still establish the facts, compliance with statutory requirements, and their own authority properly.

This is a cornerstone of your lawful position:

• Challenging delegated powers under the Road Traffic Administration Act (ss.8–11).
• Demanding compliance with evidentiary standards for certificates under s.110.
• Asserting your right to procedural fairness, disclosure, and the ability to test evidence by cross-examination.

📝 What This Course Covers

• The statutory and common law framework governing criminal traffic matters.
• The importance of procedural fairness, medical adjournments, and alternative appearances.
• How and why the “beyond reasonable doubt” standard protects the accused.
• Detailed study of s.55 CPA (conviction in absence) and how it was improperly used in Dawn’s case.
• Practical examples from notices, objections and appeals showing how to contest deficiencies.

📂 Materials Included

• Official transcripts from Magistrates Court & Supreme Court proceedings.
• Judicial commentary on burden of proof, procedural fairness, and the rights of self-represented defendants.
• PDF handouts mapping the procedural path from initial charge to successful appeal.
• Sample statutory requests and rebuttals of presumptions.

💡 Course Aim

This program does not offer individual legal advice, but provides a structured educational resource for those wishing to understand:

• The obligations of the prosecution to prove criminal cases to the strictest standard.
• How statutory authority and procedural safeguards operate under WA law.
• How self-represented people can lawfully raise these issues and keep the prosecution to its burden.

🚀 How to Get Started

Enrol now for immediate, self-paced access to all course materials and work through them on your own schedule.
Gain a clearer understanding of your rights, the law’s requirements, and how to approach criminal allegations with informed, lawful strategy.

👉 [Access the Course]