Lauren Novak: So far there has been 99 strangulation cases go through the courts but only one conviction

All but one strangulation case under SA’s new domestic violence laws has been dropped, writes Lauren Novak. That means abusers are still getting away with it.

• First man convicted under new strangulation laws
• How to get the most of your Advertiser digital subscription

Sometimes the smallest things set them off.

For one guy it was the discovery of a shopping receipt — and the apparently enraging thought that his girlfriend had dared to go out without him — that sparked a barrage of beatings.

In another case it was a woman who misplaced her partner’s mobile phone who apparently deserved to be shoved against a wall and choked by him.

That incident led to the first conviction in this state for a new offence of strangulation in a relationship context.

Last week, 43-year-old Kristan Russell Bradley was sentenced to a minimum 16 months in jail under laws that took effect in January.

I initially found this deflating given the new law sets a maximum jail term of seven years for this brutal act.

And especially given it was not the first time Bradley had committed it. But under previous laws he had been handed sentences of between two and seven months for similar acts and they were suspended.

So, in comparison, 16 months can be seen as a move in the right direction.

But what bothers me more is that Bradley — who pleaded guilty — is the onlyone to face any penalty under the new law.

SA Police seized on the new power to lay charges against 291 alleged stranglers in six months, but subsequent court data reveals a different story.

So far 99 of them have been through the courts but Bradley is the only one to be convicted — and he pleaded guilty.

In every other case the strangulation charge was either dismissed (perhaps because of lack of evidence), withdrawn (often because a victim withdraws co-operation) or changed to a charge for a different crime.

It is a sad reality that abuse victims withdraw from legal proceedings. Some hope the assault is a one-off or that their partner will change, while others are threatened with further harm if they persist.

This is frustrating from the outside, but understandable.

What perplexes me is why the remaining cases are falling over. Unfortunately data is not available to show exactly how many charges are dropped entirely and how many are converted to an alternative charge.

We also don’t know what other charges are being pursued instead — or the outcomes. The most likely options would be downgrading to assault, which carries a lower penalty, or upgrading to attempted murder, which is much harder to prosecute.

My fear is that the first option is more likely. If that’s the case it puts us back where we started because it was usually the outcome before this new offence existed.

Obviously not every charge (of any crime) results in a conviction in our legal system. Some alleged offenders are innocent. In other cases there is just not enough evidence.

But I have heard too many stories of women who have survived strangulation by a partner to believe that the current conviction rate accurately reflects what’s going on in South Australia.

One hope is separate laws that recently allowed police to start using footage captured by their body-worn cameras could provide more concrete evidence in future cases — especially where victims may withdraw. Even if the act itself is not filmed, they could record injuries on scene.

There is also some hope to be taken from Queensland, where strangulation laws, with a seven-year maximum penalty, were introduced in mid-2016. In the following two years 287 stranglers were sentenced. About three-quarters were given jail time, on an average sentence of 1.9 years. In SA there are at least 161 cases still going through the courts on initial strangulation charges.

In these police and the Director of Public Prosecutions have, at some point, believed there is enough evidence to proceed with that charge. I acknowledge there are high thresholds for proof in our legal system, but it would be devastating if about 99 per cent of those cases were also downgraded, bargained away, dismissed or withdrawn.

There were such high hopes the creation of this new offence would mean we started recognising — and penalising — this heinous act for what it is.

Surely there is justification for a conviction rate well beyond 1 per cent.