HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2011-02-23 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

SENTENCING

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (15:32): I rise to express some concerns about some inadequate sentencing that has been imposed by our court system in recent times with respect to drug dealers dealing in very significant quantities of very serious substances indeed. Just one week ago is just one example of many that I could quote. On 16 February, a judge of the District Court sentenced a man for drug offences, and I will read in part from the transcript of the sentencing remarks of the case. I have, of course, read it all, but given the short time I have to make this contribution, there is not time to read all the remarks.

The facts of the case were that on 23 July 2010 some premises were searched by the police and 68 ecstasy capsules were found at a particular residence. In addition, a document colloquially known as a 'tick list' was found, together with a sum of $320. A tick list, I am sure most members would be aware, is usually a piece of paper (either the back of an envelope or something similar) on which a drug dealer writes down the names of people who owe money to them for the drugs they have supplied. Two hydroponic cannabis plants were also found at the address.

The defendant was arrested but released on bail under curfew conditions. Those conditions included requirements that the defendant remain at his home during certain hours and attend at the door when requested by police. These requirements were ignored by the defendant. On three occasions, the defendant did not remain at their address or failed to attend the door when requested. On one occasion when police attended, they were required to break down the door in order to gain access because the defendant simply refused to open it, a clear contravention of the order.

When police attempted to place handcuffs on him, he struggled substantially with police and had to be restrained to the ground, making the job of the police attending that much more dangerous and obviously placing them and their colleagues in danger. In consequence, the defendant pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in a controlled drug. The maximum penalty for that offending is a fine of $50,000 or imprisonment for 10 years.

The defendant also pleaded guilty to cultivating a number of cannabis plants, the maximum penalty being $1,000 or six months imprisonment. The offence of possessing prescribed equipment carries a maximum penalty of $10,000 or imprisonment for three years. The three counts of breach of bail carried a maximum fine in each case of $10,000 or imprisonment for two years, and the one count of resisting police carries a maximum penalty of $2,500 or imprisonment for six months. I might just mention as an aside that I think that that is a woefully inadequate penalty and one which I will be looking at.

Potentially, the defendant was looking at several years in prison. Nevertheless, the defendant, after all these offences and potentially a very substantial sentence—resisting police in a very violent manner, many ecstasy capsules as I outlined, hydroponic cannabis, breach of bail and on and on it goes—the penalty that this defendant incurred was a single $500 fine and a suspended sentence of imprisonment for 20 months with a non-parole period of 10 months which this person obviously ignored anyway.

As a result, this defendant remains on the street and is potentially still a risk to the community. What is needed is mandatory minimum sentences for drug dealers and also a tougher regime for dealing with street-level dealers, many of whom are currently not penalised at all for possession of street quantities of drugs and escape virtually any form of conviction or certainly any substantial penalty merely by agreeing to participate in a drug diversion program.

With the remaining moments I have, I should outline that this is just one of many cases that I could have highlighted today. I chose this one because it is very recent. The facts are that we pass laws in this place that simply are not being applied by the courts in any substantive way, and I think it is a disgrace. I also believe that we are not doing our best as a society to protect particularly children or youths from the influence of drugs, and I think this penalty, amongst many others, bears witness to that.

I might also say, if I may, that it might come as something of a surprise to members in this place that, if somebody is caught with marijuana in their possession in South Australia, the penalty is a $300 expiation fee. If you are caught with heroin in your possession, if it is under two grams, there is no penalty. There is no fine whatsoever if you agree to attend a drug diversion program at which you merely have to turn up and then can simply leave and you have fulfilled the requirements, despite the fact that you have been found with nearly two grams of heroin. It is just not good enough.

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