23/12/2017 at 10:02 am #73896
The word Force might be too frightening for the thugs and criminals.The word Force might be too frightening for the thugs and criminals.”
My comment above was very much tongue-in-cheek.23/12/2017 at 1:26 pm #73900
Yes Salina, it reads that way.
But a ‘staid’ response can also be kind of ‘tongue in cheek’. ^_^27/12/2017 at 10:15 am #73927
In my opinion, I feel that anyone that has come to live in Australia should be made fully aware that any criminal acts that they perform here will mean instant shipment back to their place of origin, and where teenagers are concerned the parents also, because they are responsible for their childs upbringing, therefore should also shoulder the blame. If this was made law, then maybe they might take a different view.27/12/2017 at 11:28 am #73929
Just today, a thug bashed a police woman, teeth knocked out, jaw broken I think , she is undergoing prolonged surgery. The thug pleads drug use to blame, his sentence-” 200 days community service”, they must be joking surely. Time the judges started giving out decent sentences, the police will start to wonder why they bother trying to catch these thugs.28/12/2017 at 7:12 am #73946
bettyh Vic; let’s not punish him more than the courts did, he got 200 HOURS of unpaid community service. His mitigating circumstance was that he has a mental health condition although he only ever once been to a mental health clinic. In Victoria we have mandatory six month imprisonment for assaulting an emergency service workers but as usual in Victoria the courts are too gutless to do their job.28/12/2017 at 12:59 pm #73955
This is how I see it.
Someone was charged with an offence.
The matter was ‘argued’ in a court of law.
The presiding judge considered the evidence presented, and used principles of law to decide on a just result.
It is unlikely we were there, so we don’t have full knowledge of what the court heard. How can we give a valid opinion on the result?
We live in a democracy, and must trust the courts to get it right.
Some cases can be contentious, and catch the public’s eye.
Then there can be a ‘swell’ of public opinion against a decision of the court.
This can cause either the prosecution or defence to rethink, and perhaps lodge an appeal.
All this can and does happen.
I am in agreeance with Johnvic when he says: ‘let’s not punish him more than the courts did’.
I say, let the courts have the final say.
Remember, almost all decisions can be appealed when necessary, and the evidence looked at with a fresh pair of eyes.
We should be thankful we have such a system in place.29/12/2017 at 7:41 am #73956
William I think you completely misunderstood my last post. Bettyh wrote “200 days community service”, I corrected her by giving the reported sentence of 200 HOURS, not days. As far as I’m concerned the mandatory sentence of 6 months imprisonment should have been applied; that is what the law is for. In my opinion the Victorian government is far too soft on crime and the courts likewise. Victorian police are not permitted to chase vehicles so people can easily avoid RBT sites and so get away with driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol. People driving stolen cars, or driving cars fitted with stolen or false number plates or those wanted on warrants of arrest can simply drive off. Our courts seem to feel sorry for any person before them who can offer up the smallest of mitigation and give community service or bail. Meanwhile the victims of violent crime get overlooked and made to look insignificant by the leniency of the courts on those who assaulted them. Our emergency service workers need our protection, our government and courts are failing to do that. In my opinion the Government and courts are failing all the good people of Victoria.
No I wasn’t in court, but I do know this scumbag was a drug addict and that was his feeble excuse for doing what he did. Meanwhile we have a front line police woman who was doing her job and has been bashed, lost a tooth and will suffer the consequences for life. If you think his community service order is in any way fair punishment, then I will disagree with you all day long. You talk big of democracy, but what of democracy when our courts go continuously go against the will of the people?29/12/2017 at 3:36 pm #73965
Johnvic, I appear to have misunderstood the thrust of your post.
Thank you for pointing that out to me.
But we do live in a democracy. We have laws.
The courts apply those laws. They cannot make up their own as they go along.
Any decision they reach must be in compliance with the law as it stands.
At election time we select the people who make the laws, so we are responsible for the laws.
If our lawmakers are not keeping pace with our needs, and laws need changing, we are the ones who should do something positive about it.
When our representatives are not doing it right, we should tell them so, vehemently.
We could do this directly in a firmly worded but socially polite letter.
Or write in public forums about about our displeasure.
If a large majority did this, a representative who ignored them would be likely to lose office, if the people followed through, and exercised the power they have.
Also, at election time, we could choose a candidate who might better address our concerns?
Perhaps we need a ‘people’s union’ to speak to lawmakers on our behalf?
But if people are apathetic, and shy away from their responsibility, the will of the people won’t be addressed.
The future is in the hands of the people.
It really is: this is not a fairy story.
Being realistic, all police officers know their work won’t be like walking around in great grandma’s drawing room at afternoon tea time, with polite conversation, and dainty sandwiches and cakes.
They accept the rigours of the job without too much quibble. They are to be admired and commended for what they do.
But they know what can happen during the exercising of their duties. So do we.
I want to be clear on something here. I don’t in any way condone drug use, or using that as an excuse for extreme behaviour.
In an ideal world, offenders would be separated from the rest of society until they had demonstrated ‘normality’.
But it would cost money to operate an ideal system. Lots of it. I don’t think we can afford it.
So there is compromise.
I say again, the courts are just administering, in a practical way, the laws as they stand.
Were you there making the decision yourself, constrained by the same legal framework, you would reach the same conclusion, or one very like it.
It seems to have become acceptable to ‘rubbish’ the law and those who do their best to enforce it.
I acknowledge that no system is perfect, and there are lots of times when I think the law is being unfairly applied or causing undue stress on people. But, with all it’s faults, it is better than no law at all.
Overall, I am satisfied that those who sit in charge of our courts, are, by and large, honorable men and women.
We are safe in their hands. But we must give them good laws to use so they can be effective.
Look at some other countries where fairness and justice have just vanished from sight. I think the people in those places would be absolutely delighted to have a system like ours.
There are so many of them trying to get here, we should learn something from that. We should open our eyes to reality.
Be forever vigilant of course. Keep law makers and the courts up to the mark. Don’t accept second rate performance.
I see journalists as being VITAL if we are to find out about problems and improprieties, and be kept adequately informed.
Please don’t knock the justice system, but rail against any shortcomings you can see by all means.
This is democracy in action.
Be glad you are part of it.
Be glad our ancestors designed and built it.
Be thankful, every day, that you live here.
Soon I must return my soapbox, as I cannot afford to keep up the payments.
I must take a back seat, and let others do all the commenting. ^_^
I hope they do.30/12/2017 at 8:20 am #73974
William, I’m bit bewildered by your response above. Yes our judges and magistrates are appointed by our government to apply the laws, however they are given leeway via mitigating circumstances to impose fines, community service or host of other punishments for convictions. They are not robots controlled by a defined programme applying a certain punishment for a certain crime. It’s not like entering data into a computer and getting a known calculated response, they are human and vulnerable to human flaws and emotions. They may have a mindset anywhere from “imprisonment at last resort” or “I wish we still had the death penalty”; and that mindset can change day to day. The fact is many people here in Victoria are sick of violent criminals getting bail and re-offending, they’re sick of violent offenders getting community service and community correction orders. Many are sick of gangs of youths and young men running amok seemingly unafraid of any consequences. Our young are treated with kid gloves in Juvenile Justice Courts where they are often given token punishments time and time again for violent crimes. How does this serve the greater community; in my opinion, it doesn’t. You say we can’t afford to jail all those who have given up their right to live in the community, I disagree. The right to live peaceful and without fear is a right we all have and it’s up to our government to protect us, if they can’t or won’t then get out of office. The police, like all other workers in this country have the right to go to work, do their job and go home after their shift without injury. You suggest “But they know what can happen during the exercising of their duties. So do we.” are you saying if you’re a powder monkey you aught to expect to be blown up at some stage, should a pilot expect to crash land a few times, should a professional driver expect to die on the road one day. I think not. In my opinion any person who assaults an emergency worker doing his/her job automatically looses their right to freedom for a specified minimum time. Being drunk or under the influence of drugs is NOT an excuse or form of mitigation, if it was we wouldn’t needs jails at all would we?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.