Reasonably happy with Tassie's justice system

[Miss Chicken]

In November last year one of my sons was assaulted on his way home. He was a street away from home and luckily two people in that street saw the assault. One of them, a woman, phoned the police while her next door neighbour chased the attacker away from my son.

Today we got a letter from the Department of Public Prosecutions telling us that the man concerned has been convicted and sentenced. With the letter came two pages of the comments of the sentencing judge.

The comments start

You have been sentenced on your plea of guilty to one count of robbery committed in November last year. The complainant had had several drinks in a hotel and was walking home. you and some friends had been drinking at the same hotel. Apparently you had spoken to him briefly. In any event, you left about the same time but in a vehicle. Without any preplanning you came across the complainant a short time later and it was decided to stop and ask him for a cigarette. You got out and demanded a cigarette from him, but asked for the whole packet of tobacco when he rolled one for you. When he refused and began to walk away, you struck him in the back of the head, causing him to fall to the footpath. You then kicked him several times in the head and body, during which he was trying to protect himself, You then took his wallet, apparently at the urging of one of the other occupants of the vehicle "so that you knew were he lived". You were arrested shortly after and the wallet was found on the backseat of the car. You gave a false name, but you have been dealt with in the magistrates court for that."

The judge then stated that, though the assault did seem to be alcohol related, there is no suggested of any ongoing substance abuse issues. He commented on the guy's good work record, about previous convictions (mainly traffic offenses) but also one stealing offense that he was still on a good behaviour bond for. He had never convicted of a crime of violence.

Then the judge said

Needless to say this is a most serious matter and calls for a sentence having a deterrent effect. People are entitled to go about their business without being set upon and beaten. It is fortunate that the victim was not serious injured.

The judge then sentence the guy to 10 months imprisonment but suspended three months of the sentence on condition that the guy be on good behaviour for a period of two years from the date of his release.

The letter also said my son will be informed about a week before of the guy's release.

My son and I are reasonably pleased with the sentence. Wat is your opinion of it?

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Yes, that seems quite fair and efficient. Good job, Tasmania. And the Judge seems more interested in doing his job than making hissing remarks, which is always a good sign.

 

[iguana_tonante]

I would have preferred seeing him condemned to do social work instead of imprisonment. The perp is a dick but he doesn't seem a gun-toting criminal: I'm not sure jail would do good to him to restrain his bad tendencies. But all in all, it's a reasonable sentence.

 

[RJDiogenes]

^^ I agree. Something constructive would have been better.

I'm a little saddened by the poor grammar in this official document, though. You'd think a Judge would have a better grasp of the language, or at least have a secretary who did.

I got a kick out of this, though:

People are entitled to go about their business without being set upon and beaten.

Now there's a landmark precedent.

 

[T'Girl]

Did the other occupants of the vehicle, especially the one who urged the attacker to take your sons wallet, get charged as accessories?

 

[gturner]

To me that just doesn't sound like Tassie justice.

Tassie justice should be burying someone up to their neck and letting one of them little buggers eat their face off.

 

[Trilliam]

I would have preferred seeing him condemned to do social work instead of imprisonment. The perp is a dick but he doesn't seem a gun-toting criminal: I'm not sure jail would do good to him to restrain his bad tendencies. But all in all, it's a reasonable sentence.

No, a custodial sentence seems the way to go. The letter reads like this bloke is not a first time offender if he's already known to the court. He's also breached his good behaviour bond.

 

[Miss Chicken]

Did the other occupants of the vehicle, especially the one who urged the attacker to take your sons wallet, get charged as accessories?

As far as we know only the attacker was charged. It might be difficult to charge the others because the court accepted that the assault wasn't preplanned.

No, a custodial sentence seems the way to go. The letter reads like this bloke is not a first time offender if he's already known to the court. He's also breached his good behaviour bond.

I agree. He was given a chance to behave when he was given the good behaviour bond. If he can't abide by the terms of his bond he has to take the consequences.

 

[iguana_tonante]

^ True. I'm just not a fan of prisons. I feel they only make small-time offenders worse criminals than they already are. On the other hand, there is always need for manpower to scrap shit from hospitals' bathrooms.

 

[Miss Chicken]

Cleaning shit from hospital floors would be out .

To work in a hospital in Australia, either as a paid worker or volunteer, one has to have a police check. I think anyone convicted of a crime of violence would be excluded from being allowed to work in a hospital.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Well, I assume Australia needs license plates.