What we're talking about

Peter Byrne on Asylum seekers before homeless Julia Gillard / Kevin Rudd / Wayne Swan / Bob Brown and The Unionists who shall remain faceless, are at this time in ... more
vince on Odd behaviour? What's odd about this is Rebecca Wilson thinking Australians have an absolute RIGHT to know more about the man with whom our ... more
Phil of Springwood on Rudd wasn't killed... he topped himself And now that real Labour man, Mark Latham, has cometo the forefront for the cause and called on Kevin Rudd to come clean and ... more
Richard on Dinner with WikiLeaks Mr Wikileaks has some serious mental issues.Because he believes all information should be made public, there should be a ... more
greg on Commissioner Bob Atkinson smithy, i saw an ad for the qnu last night on the telly and i was astounded that a union, with members who can not even get ... more
taxpayer on Asylum seekers before homeless The asylum seekers should be sent back to fight for their own country. Instead our Government sends our troops over there to ... more
Shorty - Police aircraft on Odd behaviour? Neil Roberts thinks that we are all as stupid as he is when it comes to his thinking on aircraft in policing..Maybe when ... more
Brian....Alderley on Guess who? A set of specks and Dame Edna, step aside...!!! more
Ryan Williamson on Dinner with WikiLeaks i've read and seen a few interviews now with Julian, and must say I think he is doing a great job in getting this ... more
Jennifer Nash on Commissioner Bob Atkinson There is no genuine public consultation on anything and we really do need citizen initiated referenda on demand. The people ... more
bigfella on Toll woes Jo Jud, you make an excellent observation. While the shortfalls of the Labor Government in Queensland are increasingly ... more
Brett on Achieving family not wanted Look, this BS about turning the boats around is just Abbott talk. What really happens is this:You intercept the boat, ... more
bigbrownbear on Original unedited interview with PM MMMM Train line for redcliffe AH got a question for ya Bligh SHOW ME THE MONEY more
micko on Barnaby Joyce This is the greatest way to get people to and business to move to these areas. more
Wobblyone on Guess who? Betcha Bob Brown would find it a safe seat... lol, lol, lol. more
Wobblyone on Rudd wasn't killed... he topped himself Heh, heh, heh, heh, Oh Boy...I don't think KRUDDY is quite finished yet Phil. I think he might sink a shiv in right up to ... more
Phil of Springwood on Rudd wasn't killed... he topped himself Houston, We Have a Problem!!Prime Minister Gillard says "The Reality of the Matter Is" thats a similar quote that Beattie ... more
Anthony Gettings on Guess who? Whats he doing on the weekend more
Shorty - Tingalpa - Brunswick Heads on Commissioner Bob Atkinson Just a suggestion Bob Atkinson.. If we need helicopters & fixed wing aircraft - Anna Blight might have some of her (OUR) $3 ... more
shaunna on Guess who? I think its Ian Maurice more

Pricing Crime and Punishment

Posted by: Michael Smith | 24 February, 2010 - 3:23 PM

Do the crime, do the time. Notice that doesn’t say do the crimes?

If you make one blue in Queensland and you’ll expect to pay dearly.

Particularly in traffic offences. Or in failing properly to pay your state taxes. Or for taking an undersized fish.

Generally speaking, one blue will be dealt with severely.

But the more serious your criminal-conduct, the less that edict holds true.

Let's take the case of the bikeway rapist.

He'll serve just over 12 years for 18 offences against 11 women.

From the time he committed the first act, he had a history but he's been treated as a first-offender with no criminal history.

This was a hideous course of conduct in which he brought terror to our city.

Yesterday the Chief Justice Paul de Jersey and 2 of his fellow "justices" cut 9 years from the gaol time the animal that did it will have to serve. Luke James COLLESS will be out in just over 12 years.

In an unusual move, the Chief Justice has today commented publicly about this matter. He said that the courts rely on public confidence in the courts' judgements. He said that people should read his judgement about COLLESS and make their own minds up

Read the judgement yourself.

I think our system is crook. What if COLLESS had attacked 12 women. Or 20? Or how about just 8, or 6. There’s nothing in this judgement that takes into account the scope of this bloke's reign of terror.

Each of the rapes carried a potential term of life imprisonment. But there seems to be no recognition in this sentence of the impact on the women who were victims. Was the horror of the offence any less just because you were victim number 9, 10 or 11. Why do we not have consecutive sentences?

And there's another much more sinister element to this judgement. Our system is now directly equating the punishment for raping a woman with money. We have put a price, or a money value on the crime.

Justice de Jersey said that COLLESS had saved the state time and money by pleading guilty. A grateful state will now reward COLLESS with less gaol time, less punishment, because of the money he'd "saved" us.

How disgraceful that our legislators have written that into the law.

The judgement says:

"there were substantial mitigating circumstances: the applicant's cooperation with the authorities from an early stage, including his confession to the crimes, saving an even more substantial police investigation; his genuine remorse; the early intimation of his intention to plead guilty, and his doing so, saving the resources of the State"

Maybe I wouldn't feel so bad about that money-before-punishment thing if it earned him some minor remission at the end of his sentence. But 9 years from a 25 year sentence? It is staring us in the face that our state has now put a dollar value on the rape of a woman - and the value is very, very low.

We should be saying it does not matter how much it costs, either way you are going to be punished for what you have done - not for how much you are going to cost us to investigate you.

If we must give him some incentive to confess, surely there are other options that are more commensurate with the relatively small value of the money he has "saved" us. Maybe privileges in gaol like a TV. But reducing the punishment in a direct relationship to the dollar value he’s saved us is a disgraceful precedent.

Over to you for comment.

Blog comments

I wrote to you once before through Russell White in relation to drivers on the road.
As well as mentioning that, I commented on my disgust at the judiciary. Being a JP at the Mag & Famiily courts, talking to ordinary queenslanders, I can say that 80% or more, have no control over this governments ordering of light sentencing to CRIMINALS, because of economic reasons. Well, its the Queenslanders money. Victoms of crime are Queenslanders. How dare this arogant Government decide on crimal's welfare, and snub their noses on victims, and law abiding citizens. This is a CRIMINAL government in our state.
Russ

Russ Boman Tuesday 9 March, 2010 - 4:03 PM
Well I will give you all a potted version. We need to keep a seperation between our court system, note I don't call it a Justice System, and our ellected leaders. Regardless of your support for those people or not, they were ellected, and if you don't like them vote them out.
Although, you are all bangiong on about mandatory prison terms for this and that. I give to you people the United States, the worlds largest prision population....reflect on that. If these laws that are overseen by ellected DA's and AG's, not an independant Legal system, are such a detterent, then why is their prison popluation growing? should the detterent of a life as in term of natural life scentence, for non Murder related crimes, not be keeping their system free of new criminals.
Just take a breath let the bats loose from your brains, and have a bit of a research into this.
Then tell me our system is broken.

Trent Friday 5 March, 2010 - 12:08 PM
Never a truer word spoken ,Wobblyone - regarding PC. But, point that out to the peddlers of PC, and you can expect anything from outright (very un-PC) abuse, to typical sanctamonious denial.

Liberator Thursday 4 March, 2010 - 1:25 PM
If you want to stop crime, the current sentences are inadequate, but more importantly, i refer everyone to Section 155 of the Penalties and Sentences Act. It states "Imprisonment to be served concurrently unless
otherwise ordered
Unless otherwise provided by this Act, or the court imposing
imprisonment otherwise orders, ifÃ¢Â€Â”
(a) an offender is serving, or has been sentenced to serve,
imprisonment for an offence; and
(b) is sentenced to serve imprisonment for another offence;
the imprisonment for the other offence is to be served
concurrently with the first offence."

Up shot is, whether you commit 1 break and enter or 50 break and entres, your only going to go inside for 6 months. If all sentences were cumulative, it would be 50 x 6 months. Then, we would see reduction in crime instead of the same old faces repeatedly coming through the watchhouse...

Groffo Wednesday 3 March, 2010 - 5:49 PM
What a load of rubbish.

What do you define Mainstream Media?!

4BC is maistream media, surely!

Shez Wednesday 3 March, 2010 - 5:19 PM
I don't want to know. I'm sure it is something totally absurd Shez... and for your edification, let me again define your Political Correctness, on which you rely so heavily.
"Political correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional minority, and the mainstream media,
that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end"
I hope that helps Shez

Wobblyone Wednesday 3 March, 2010 - 4:53 PM