Students Seen Crying in the Law Library After Missing First Law Ball Ticketing Round

6:58

A nervous atmosphere fills the room.

Baw Btudent (18) is a first year starting at UQ law, confident that she’ll snatch tickets for the law ball. 

“It’s probably going to be fine,” she claimed, 

“I’ve ticketed for BTS before.”

She shudders at the memory of it. Her fingers aching from typing so aggressively, the 67 tabs open, the angry swearing at classmates to “shut the fuck up or I won’t get to see Jimin IRL.”

Did she mention that this was in the middle of her year 12 chemistry class? Maybe that’s why she flunked her external.

She briefly calculates the demand-ratio between that concert and the law ball. Probably around 75,000-200 respectively. Unluckily for Baw, she’s a law student and can’t do basic maths.

6:59.

‘It’s going to be okay,’ she tells herself. She could manage to secure BTS tickets in two minutes. Surely no one in law is that desperate to go to a ball. Surely, they’re all doing their weekly 500 pages of cases (that she gave up doing after the first week of the semester).

Surely, the tickets will take at least ten minutes to sell out. She assumes that that’s what the fourth year meant at market day when she told her “Tickets usually sell out in minutes” with a dire tone.

7:00. Its time.

Her eyes focus on all 69 tabs like a pro. Her fingers move faster than the speed of light. No one can beat her. She’s a ticketing pr---

7:00:15.

Silence.

A shudder trickles down her spine.

The words “fully reserved” stare back at her.

“There’s no way.” She mumbles to herself.

“There’s no way that I, Baw Btudent, failed at ticketing.”

She crumbles to the ground, distraught. She now not only has to pay an extra 10 bucks (given that she even gets tickets at all), but also can’t brag to all her peers that stanning BTS has given her many valuable life skills.

The worst part is, she can’t even go on a totally-legal website and negotiate until the ticket is 10 dollars. Or maybe she can.

$10 more to come tomorrow

Posse of Normally-Dressed Spectators Causes Chaos at Clowncil Question Time

The City Clowncil sitting week started off with a bang (or, rather, with a silent ‘pop!’ flag unfurling from a pistol).

As Question Time progressed - bringing reports on new unicycle lanes, juggling programs for the unemployed, and the Brisbane Metro - an unwelcome presence in the visitors’ gallery drew murmurs from the Clowncil benches.

A group of spectators, hair undyed, faces unpainted, dressed to the nines in business casual, seated silently with their notepads drawn.

“I see the party police have decided to join us!” crowed Lord Mayor Boingo McChuckles, as a chorus of honking noses built to a crescendo.

“Why don’t you go put on your regular-sized shoes and skedaddle!”

Security eventually shooed the spectators out of the chamber (by way of water-squirting flower).

Confronted about the incident as the Clowncillors piled into their one tiny car at the end of the day, Cr Pogo Bogo commented: “I’m all for public acclowntability, and my temper’s usually as long as this handkerchief [said as she pulled one from her sleeve].”

“But you know what they say… the show must go on.”

Cr Pierrot le Mime declined to comment, but offered a heartstring-pulling performance depicting his existential feelings of imprisonment in a box of his own making.

Spokespeople for the observers, the disappointingly named Lucy Nicholls and Tom Carmody, remain undeterred in their quest for transparency.

“The people of Brisbane want answers. We are done saying, ‘Not my circus, not my monkeys.’”

More to come.

GPS Debaters Suddenly Social Justice Warriors When Paired Against Girls’ School

Following a dominant GPS season, where the irrelevancy of issues like human rights went uncontested, the Churchie 10.7s have made a philosophical about-turn after being drawn against a girls’ school in round one of QDU.

“We did some exercises in basic human empathy,” explained their coach, “now I just have to hope they don’t absolutely cook this short prep with the most cursed takes imaginable.”

Sometimes, it turns out, not trying is better than getting it wrong.

“If I were a single mother, who was also queer and a person of colour and suffered from a disability and was a refugee; I would support the affirmative team” first speaker and future school captain Alex Alexson waxed lyrically, in a totally unbelievable attempt to gain the sympathy of the room.

“You’d have to be a bigot to disagree,” third affirmative speaker and local bigot Sam Sommerton alleged, turning round to look at the girls on the opposing bench.

In the post-debate press conference, the girls on the negative team were more than a little confused.

“The topic was about whether sports teams should be held responsible for the behaviour of their fans,” second negative speaker Holly Smith, “I truly have no clue what they was yapping about.”

“Their third speaker tried to say they understood the burden of sexism because they had mothers and sister,” added the third negative speaker Lucy Speakgood, “did they not realise that we are literally women ourselves?”

The boys now eagerly awaits the adjudication, which pundits expect will result in a loss by about 50 thousand points.

More to come.

Former High School Debater Isn’t Cramming – They’re Just Practicing “Short Prep”

With a Foundations of Law assignment due at 3pm, most of the first-year law cohort was stressing out, refining their meticulously crafted essays and desperately editing their footnotes to be comma-perfect. But for former high school debating legend Albert Rimmington, this day couldn’t have been more chill.

“I’ve been preparing for this my whole life,” Albert claimed, “it’s basically just a short preparation debate, but a law essay instead of a topic about whether we should ban school uniforms.”

Albert’s classmates were intrigued at how he would manage to write a 2000-word assignment in only an hour, but Albert’s insistence that his faultless silent brainstorming technique would maximise efficiency assuaged their fears.

When asked what sources he would use to justify his position, Albert said “I’ll just BS it to be honest. That’s what worked when we won the 11.4 premiership. It’s not like examples and sources really matter much when the adjudicator doesn’t know if it’s real or not.”

“I’m not an ‘adjudicator’, I’m a career expert in constitutional law.” lamented seminar leader Stohn Muart-Jill.

Albert defended his take by suggesting “what if the negative team just asserts another fake statistic back?”

“That isn’t how this works,” responded Stohn, “hopefully Albert will learn when he gets his mark back”.

Four (if not even lower) to come.

President-Elect Chloe O’Sullivan attempts to win “broke” vote with promise of UQLS Office Tea & Coffee station.

The overwhelming majority of law school students left perplexed as to why anyone would need to buy coffee when their trust fund covers it.

 With the recent news that Chloe O’Sullivan is reportedly running for UQLS president, we here at the obiter have put on our deerstalker caps and busted out our calabash pipes to dig deep on her presidential campaign.

O’Sullivan has suggested quite a few changes to UQLS operation, changes that have left students nervously wondering if the society is more than just an excuse for GPS alumni to have a designated table in the law library via the UQLS office. The campaign has seen significant attention particularly with its promise to overturn previous party rulings on the segregation of mooters by allowing them to talk about their “extracurricular” in the office. Additionally, The Obiter questions the proposal to cut minor events, praying that the UQLS annual sperm race will not be on the chopping block.

Via the utilisation of the Obiter’s immense intelligence network, access to O’Sullivan’s “Sony Shots” Instagram account uncovered a wealth of highly concerning information: ties to the Woods Deputy President campaign and even more shocking… potential collusion with presidential candidate Melodi Kizil. Could it be that the presidential race is secretly subject to the manipulation of a sinister third party? And does this have anything to do with the network of tunnels hidden beneath the great court?

While the Obiter admits that this would be “totally dope” and still endorses the spread of wild conspiracy theories, in the name of journalistic integrity we must admit that the truth of the matter is that despite opposing political aspirations the candidates are seemingly “just friends”. Bummer.

Harry Rae's How to Vote Guide

(with some amendments by the Editor-in-Chief).

Hi everyone, Harry here with some tips if you don’t know who to vote for. I know there are important rules about avoiding ticketing, so I’ve asked Sienna to make some small adjustments if necessary to ensure impartiality, but I’m sure you’ll barely notice at all.

In the first contested election for president in many years, the three candidates are all running very strong campaigns with varying degrees of good ideas and absolute lunacy. Don’t forget to number every box, as preference flows could be critical in saving the law society from total destruction. My recommendation is:

1.         [Redacted]

2.         [Redacted]

3.         [Redacted]

The Deputy-Presidential race is stereotypically huge yet again, with two very strong candidates promising basically the exact same things about being around and talking to people. But if you need to split the difference and decide who deserves your vote, you can’t go wrong with [redacted]. Truthfully, it was an easy decision for me, and it should be for you too.

There are about three thousand candidates for first year officer, and I don’t really know them, so my opinion isn’t the most informed. But that also means yours might not be too, so you might want some advice. From my basic research of their proposals and credentials, my top 3 candidates would have to be [redacted], [redacted] and [redacted]. Again, number every box, mostly because there’s one candidate I really don’t like and want to avoid them winning, and that of course is [redacted], so put them last.

Lastly, here are some quickfire suggestions for a couple of other races:

Careers VP: [redacted]

Education Officer: [redacted] and [redacted]

Treasurer: well, that’s not good. I’ll give some thoughts on the candidates running from the floor during my speech. But I hope [redacted] runs. Or [redacted]. Or [redacted]. Just please not [redacted].

Law Students Prove They Know Fuck All About Managing Finances Tbh

With a Treasurer position vacant as we approach another AGM, the fate of the UQLS’ financial future seems uncertain. But we know one thing for sure: Regan Brown is handing over the torch whether we like it or not.

Not a single advanced nomination for the position of Treasurer should come as no surprise given the circumstances. There are a couple of different types of law student when it comes to managing money:

1. The student who wastes their money on coffees as Merlo (or Espresso Engine if they so happen to work a casual job at a Barristers Chambers one day a week) because it’s all a ‘bit of fun’; or

2. The students studying a Law/Finance degree with seventeen side hustle businesses but no capacity to take on the management of a not-for-profit volunteer organisation; and

3. The students who work and study full time and can’t really see themselves playing Monopoly for an entire academic year.

That leaves a couple of legends who have graced our Leadership Committee in their capacity as Treasurer in the last couple of years (Tim ‘Wolf of Eagle St’ Rainbird and Regan ‘Richard Branson’ Brown). But alas - whose next?

It takes a callous leader to stand up and challenge the expenses list of every portfolio down to the Byron Bay Chocolate Co. gift for the Senior Moot Judging Panel. But someone has to do it. In the words of Tim Rainbird, ‘if you aren’t out for blood, what are you even doing it for?’. Goosebumps.

This all has us on the edge of our seats for the UQLS AGM on 30 October 2025 at 9am. The Obiter cannot wait to cover every moment - including some bombshell Treasurer candidates running from the floor. Gasp!

Melodi’s In It to Irwin-It!

UQLS Presidential-Elect and Social Media Connoisseur, Melodi Kizil, receives covetable celebrity endorsement.

More exciting updates from the UQLS presidential campaign trail! This morning, The Obiter received exclusive word that Melodi Kizil’s election campaign has caught the attention and admiration of a familiar face across the pond.

In a stroke of Wicked genius, Kizil subtly demonstrated that she’s both tapped into the zeitgeist, and a bona-fide member of Group 7. We are of course referring to her first campaign TikTok, which referenced last week’s Wicked Night on Dancing With The Stars, this season of the US reality competition show having taken the internet by storm. Honestly it’s no surprise she’s on the pulse, likely thanks to spending 25 hours a day parked on the LS Office couch trawling Pinterest, Canva and TikTok as Designs Officer this year.

Now it seems her shout out has captured the attention of one Robert Irwin. The 21-year-old Aussie national treasure is currently competing on the show and has been a clear front-runner from the beginning, evidence that even Americans would rather cheer for literally anyone but one of their own right now.

Speaking of presidents, Irwin had this to say of Kizil: “Crikey! Melodi’s running an absolutely ripper campaign! Inclusivity, responsiveness and authenticity are fair-dinkum policies. I love them almost as much as I love posing half-naked and showing off my snake (Editors note: we assume he was referring to his recent campaign for Bonds, otherwise clearly it hasn’t taken long for Hollywood to corrupt Australia’s sweetheart…)

In sum, on behalf of literally the entire world, we are incredibly jealous. Also Mel if you’re reading this, please can you get us an autograph.

Rae-cking Havoc! An Opinion Piece

Is Harry Rae’s populist agenda a breath of fresh air, or the greatest threat to UQ Law since the Valedictory arsonist?

In the wake of AGM Advanced Nominations closing, one presidential hopefully is wasting absolutely no time forging (or dare we say aggressively bulldozing) the campaign trail.

Harry Rae, notorious social media Luddite, has seemingly changed his tune, in the space of 48hrs earning a spot among Facebook’s Top 10 most prolific creators. According to a credible insider, Rae has indeed made so many posts in his Facebook event page that his account was temporarily banned for suspicious activity.

Perhaps even more bizarre than his newfound affection for influencing are his policies. Adopting a populist persona rivalled only by the likes of Trump, Bojo, and that rabbit from the Secret Lives of Pets, a sample of Rae’s proposals include:

• Scaling down the marks of Laws/HASS students (Paul Ramsay is rolling in his grave)

• Banning all talk of mooting in the LS office and replacing it with conversation about high school debating (as if UQ Law students weren’t insufferable enough)

• Replacing Suri with a women’s cricket comp (fair cop there)

• Vaping in the advocacy rooms (maybe this bloke actually has a good point)

• Giving the Jessup mooting team a day off (nvm, this is straight up sacrilege)

Most perplexing of all is that for all of his fanfare and showmanship, Rae insists vehemently that he ‘really doesn’t want to win’ the election. It’s more than safe to say that this week’s antics have had the UQ Law community collectively scratching their heads, and pondering the question: ‘respectfully mate, what is going on?’

Is this spectacle a bewildering act of defiance against the generous hand that’s fed him in his role as Education officer? A Louvre-heist-esque coup in broad daylight, orchestrated by the SMP Faculty? Or is it all just an elaborate comedic performance art piece, precursory to a genuine campaign to be 2026’s Obiter Editor-in-Chief?

One thing’s for certain; we’re most definitely in for one of the UQLS’s most interesting presidential races in modern history.

Watch this space.

In a surprise to absolutely no one: VP (Sport) Unopposed for Sixth Year Straight

Is Max Spork a member of the shadowy "Sportfolio" cabal? Analysis inside.

For the sixth year in a row, a privileged straight white male has been returned unopposed as VP Sport of the UQLS. Allegedly established by VP Funnell '21, the mysterious group known as "Sportfolio" has been pulling the strings of UQLS Elections for over half a decade. Their goal? Total control over the sporting life of the Law School. This devious cabal meets prior to the UQLS elections in what they euphemistically term the "Kit Room," buried somewhere in the tunnels beneath the great court (see cover image). There, they imbibe of the juice of the Milton Mango and plot.

When you look closely at the history of the VPs, the conspiracy becomes clear. Henry Spork (VP '24, His Excellency Spork I) paved the way for Maximilian Spork's accension by arranging for Beirne to succeed him. Beirne is now running for Deputy President. Does this group's lust for power know no bounds? Further, both VPs Watson ('23) and Spork I ('24) are recipients of the W.A. Garske Prize for Best Male Windsurfer, named in honour of the VP Sport ('22), who represented Australia at the Annual Wolfgangsee Windsurfing Championships at Strobl. It would not surprise this correspondent to see this nepotistic awarding continued for VP-Sport-Elect Spork II.

Our VP-Sport-Elect has been preparing for this moment for years. He has played a variety of sports for the UQLS: touch, netball, rugby, soccer, rowing, Gaelic football, and sepak takraw. His successful captaincy of the UQ Law Rugby Team is well known. He was Vice-Captain of the UQ Law Barbarians, who represented the Law School internationally at the Henley Royal Regatta. He leaves us with no choice but to recognise his unsurpassed credentials for the role. Perhaps this was his, and the “Sportfolio's” goal all along.