The killings were legal till the 60's and then overlooked till the 80's. Last year a guy was acquitted by the court even after murdering 4 aboriginal children due to double jeopardy laws. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/sep/13/bowra...
That's an astonishing statement. Could you elaborate? The Aboriginal population has been treated heinously since European settlement but that's a, literally, incredible claim.
Also Aboriginals do not have the concept of land ownership and hence wouldn't understand the concept of trespassing, especially the kids.
Here is a list of known massacres: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_of_Indigenou...
I spent some time in Queensland and the lawyers told me point blank that courts would hardly rule in favor of "Non Europeans" even for criminal/personal injury cases and that's why a huge percentage of civil/injury liabilities are settled out of court.
I genuinely don’t see why you’d make something like that up when the truth is awful enough. But I’m sure you have your reasons.
They were counted in the population as "humans" only 5 years after this referendum. Besides the law was such that you could kill Intruders on your land and this invariably meant murdering the aboriginals
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_zoo
[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States
This is really heartbreaking. The most heartbreaking photo I have ever seen was a father looking at the chopped up hands of his 4 year old son. The Belgium army had his son's hand cut off as punishment for failing to fulfill the daily work quota.