HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2)
2008-02-26 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

CRIMINAL LAW (SENTENCING) (VICTIMS OF CRIME) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 22 November 2008. Page 1587.)

The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY (15:29): I support the bill, which seeks to put into effect significant promises made by the government to victims of crime and their families and associates in the lead up to the last election. No person present in this place today is ignorant of the impact of crime on its victims. Many of us have experienced crime. We may have experienced a property crime, such as a car theft or home burglary, or a personal crime, such as an assault, bag snatching or other robbery. Let us take a relatively common crime such as assault: perhaps the victim is subject to a random attack, possibly fuelled by alcohol or drugs; or maybe the victim intervenes in a dispute and is assaulted themselves. In other circumstances the victim may know the assailant, perhaps very well.

As we know, personal responses to a criminal assault can vary widely. Let us leave aside for a moment the physical aspects, such as medical treatment, pain, possible rehabilitation or surgery, though these of course may continue for some time or even indefinitely.

Victim A may feel that the event has had a minor impact but may find that the trauma emerges later when least expected. Victim B may find that the impact of the event, while very real, dissipates over time with the help of family, friends and support services. Victim C may experience good and bad days, days when he or she feels the fear and shock are receding, and days when the full force of the attack is felt almost as if it is happening again. Sometimes the trigger for a bad day cannot be identified.

Each victim may also have to deal with a range of reactions such as nightmares or other sleep disturbances, a racing heartbeat, headaches, anxiety attacks, the sensation of fear, and so on. The victim may have trouble concentrating, making choices and solving problems. They may find these reactions (many more of which are set out in the literature) debilitating in terms of work or other community involvement. Some victims may need to go into hiding, while others simply feel like hiding much of the time.

The impact of being a victim on men, women, children and the elderly has many similar features but each experience is different—unique to the person—and the expression of that impact is often vital to their recovery. We know, too, that the families, partners, children, extended family and friends experience crime through its impact on their loved ones. They share, to varying degrees, the feelings of hurt and loss. Sometimes they share shock, grief or shame. In some instances, the feeling might be one of absolute despair. They may all experience those emotions to varying degrees for the rest of their lives. One simple example of that is the anniversary of the event.

Crime impacts on our community both directly and indirectly, and its costs are many and manifest. The government's most recent analysis of recorded offences in our state is the Office of Crime Statistics and Research report entitled Crime and Justice in South Australia 2006. Offences recorded are those which are reported to police or which come to the attention of police. The report shows that, in 2006, 263,369 offences were recorded (a 3.4 per cent decline from the previous year) and 21,794 victimisations directed against a person were recorded. In considering these statistics, let us not forget that victims must deal not only with the immediacy of the criminal event and its personal aftermath but frequently they become involved in the criminal justice system.

Having reported the event to police, the victim makes a statement, participates in the investigation and engages with the prosecution. Later, the victim attends court and gives evidence. They may need to recount personal and traumatic details. Doubts may be cast on their evidence and he or she is subject to cross-examination. Distress will not deter the court for long. The victim may be subjected to harassment by supporters of the defendant and the matter may attract media attention. The experiences and ensuing civil responsibilities (often thrust on the victim seemingly randomly and without warning) are recognised by the bill before us today.

The bill amends the Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988 to allow a victim impact submission to be furnished at sentencing hearings in indictable and prescribed summary offences. These are defined as offences where the victim has died or become permanently physically or mentally incapable of independent function. As the Premier indicated prior to the last election, this means that victims who no longer have a voice will still be heard in court. The bill also allows the prosecutor or the Commissioner for Victims' Rights to describe in court the effects of the offence on people living or working in its location—for instance, a neighbourhood impact statement—or on a particular section or sections of the community, or the community as a whole, in the form of a social impact statement. It is envisaged that both types of statement may be furnished in the same matter.

The proposed amendments to the act will also allow vulnerable witnesses—for example, children and victims of domestic violence—to read their victim impact statements and have it presented as an audiovisual recording where those facilities exist. The defendant, whether an individual person or company official, should be present in court but, if circumstances do not allow this, he or she is to be shown a recording of the statement. Finally, the bill makes provision for additional remedies to do with the enforcement of restitution orders.

As with the amendments I have already discussed, these expanded avenues towards the return of property or its monetary value both serve in the interests of victims and augment the government's ongoing reforms in the area of victims' rights. The government has listened to victims and has acted to protect their interests. I commend the bill.

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Police, Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning) (15:35): I thank honourable members for their contributions to this bill. The Hon. Mr Wade asked how much money is currently allocated to enable victims to appear personally at criminal sentencing hearings. It is impractical to determine exactly how much money is spent each year to enable victims to appear personally at criminal sentencing hearings. Victims who are already present as witnesses would be paid witness fees but, without reviewing each case, I could not say how much has been paid. Similarly, discretionary payments are reported in general but not the specific purpose for each payment. The records kept by the Commissioner for Victims' Rights shows that the Attorney-General approved several discretionary payments to help cover the costs of victims attending the sentencing stage of their case.

The Attorney-General has, for example, paid about $500 for airfares for two victims of sexual assault, to travel from their Victorian homes and return, to make their impact statements; about $370 for the sister of a murder victim to travel from Queensland and return to attend the court to make an impact statement and listen to the sentencing submissions; almost $2000 for the parents of a manslaughter victim to travel from Queensland and return, to listen to sentencing submissions, including the submission of their impact statements; several hundred dollars for the wife of a person killed, to travel from a regional town in New South Wales and reside in Adelaide for a few days, to give her impact statement and listen to the sentencing submissions; about $960 for the parents of a person killed in Port Lincoln, to attend the district court to make their impact statements and listen to the sentencing submissions—this sum covered the fuel for their motor vehicle to travel from a regional township to Port Augusta and return, as well as accommodation for four people; and about $2500 for the mother whose son was killed in a crash, to reside in Adelaide to make her impact statement and listen to the sentencing submissions. She had sold her family home to move interstate and needed somewhere to live for a couple of weeks.

Michael O'Connor, the Commissioner for Victims' Rights, applies to the Attorney-General for discretionary payments in such cases. There is no intention of changing this practice, so the honourable member can be assured that victims who need financial assistance will get it, if they ask and if it is appropriate, given the scope of the Attorney-General's discretion to pay. The examples I have given indicate the costs that can be involved but do not show the inconvenience and other personal costs that victims endure, which is among the reasons why the Attorney-General and the government are proposing, in this bill, to allow victims to make their impact statements in other ways, such as video recording. We want victims to be able to choose how they present their impact statements.

Also, during the debate, the Hon. Ann Bressington, speaking in support of the bill—or indicating that she supported any legislation strengthening and supporting the rights of victims—mentioned the alleged theft of a video camera from her Parliament House office, and the theft of items from the home of a staff member. Ms Bressington indicated that, in her view, police had not investigated these incidents appropriately. This issue was also raised during a discussion on the Leon Byner talkback radio program.

The Commissioner of Police advises me that the theft of the video camera was reported to SAPOL at 2.50pm on 11 January 2008, and a police incident report was submitted. The camera was reported to have been stolen between 1 October 2007 and 31 October 2007. The theft was reported after the camera was identified at City Cash Pawnbrokers, located at the Adelaide Railway Station Arcade by Ms Bressington's staff member. The staffer had gone to the pawnbroker after apparently locating pawnbroker receipts at her home address. Until this time she had apparently not realised that the property was missing.

The staff member attended at the pawnshop and identified her property, along with Ms Bressington's video camera. The police recovered the video camera from City Cash Pawnbrokers at 3pm the same day, 11 January 2008. Police also recovered some of the items belonging to the staff member and they have been returned to her. There are still some items outstanding and the police have made extensive inquiries to locate the suspect, and a warrant of apprehension has been issued for this person. I think it is important to put on the record that, in fact, it had not been too hot for the police to attend to their duties—as had been suggested.

With those comments, in answering the points raised during the debate, I again thank honourable members for their support of the bill.

Bill read a second time.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT