OPINION: Spare us the pity party - crime has no excuse

Courtrooms are daily filled with tales of hardship. But not from victims – from the perpetrators of dreadful crimes, writes Keith Woods.

A statistic highlighted by Gaven MP and Shadow Attorney-General Meaghan Scanlon last week bears repeating.

It’s a single number, but it speaks volumes about what is happening daily in our courts system.

The number is 91.6 per cent. That number, ladies and gentlemen, represents the percentage of convicted rapists who had people testify to their “good character” in court.

The statistic appeared in a report about the sentencing of sexual assault and rape by the Queensland Sentencing Advisory Council released in February.

To quote the report:

“The Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) (’PSA’) requires a court to consider the character of the person being sentenced in determining sentence. A person’s ‘character’ is one of the factors to which a court must have primary regard if the offence involved the use (or threatened use) of violence, physical harm, sexual offending against a child under 16 or a child exploitation material offence. The PSA also requires a court to have regard to “the presence of any aggravating or mitigating factor concerning the offender”. A person’s ‘otherwise good character’ is an established mitigating factor at common law.”

The report details the case of a 32-year-old man who raped an eight-year-old girl.

He was sentenced to three years in prison, suspended after 12 months – in other words, just one year behind bars.

The Attorney-General appealed the leniency of that sentence, and lost, with the Court of Appeal citing his “good character” as among the reasons the sentence was not inadequate.

“These were loathsome offences, but until he committed them, he had led a stable and normal family life with his wife and children. He had been a respected member of his community,” the court wrote.

Shadow Attorney General Meaghan Scanlon. Picture: Annette Dew.

Attorney-General Deb Frecklington. Picture: Dan Peled / NewsWire

The report also notes another separate case where an eight-year-old was raped.

“The Court noted his (the perpetrator’s) higher education, work as a teacher, community service and references tendered on his behalf,” the report said.

The court had described his “previous good character and exemplary working history” as “powerful factors in mitigation”.

As mentioned before, the report’s authors found that, of 131 rape cases in the District Court, “good character” got a mention in sentencing remarks in 120 of them. 91.6 per cent.

And no wonder, when justices are obliged to take so-called “good character” into account when sentencing.

There is, of course, only one kind of “good character” walking around – the kind that has never and would never rape or sexually assault anyone.

As Ms Scanlon said: “Someone who commits rape is not a good bloke.”

The good news is that – in a rare act of bipartisanship – it was on Tuesday confirmed in parliament that the state government is in furious agreement with Ms Scanlon on the matter. Attorney-General Deb Frecklington has introduced laws to reform the use of good character references in cases of rape and sexual assault.

It is an important reform, but this column hopes it does not stop there.

While rape and sexual assault are among the most serious of crimes, the issue of defendants using evidence of good character to minimise their vile behaviour is a sickness that is rife across the criminal justice system.

It is almost impossible to attend a court case without hearing from a defence lawyer some tale of woe about the guilty party’s life – whether their upbringing, a recent bereavement, a medical issue, or whatever. And without hearing about what an otherwise fine person they would be, were it not for the unfortunate events that befall them.

It’s a bit of an industry down at Southport courthouse.

Courts regularly hear tales of woe regarding the lives of offenders.

To be fair, magistrates and judges are no fools and take a large number of factors into account when determining sentences – not just these plaintive tales of woe.

But in a system where justices are obliged to consider the prospects of rehabilitation for offenders it leads to the grotesque situation where it can appear their welfare gets far more airtime in court than that of victims.

Here’s the thing though. Who sails through life without any difficulty? How many reading this article can truly say they have never lost someone close to them? Or lost a job in unfortunate circumstances? Or faced a health challenge?

Bad things happen to everyone at some point. But not everyone engages in criminal behaviour. Far from it.

Enough of the tiresome pity party.

It’s good to know that “good character” evidence will carry less weight in sentencing for crimes of rape and sexual assault under the proposed reform.

If the public are to have faith in the criminal justice system, it would be good if such matters were given less weight in other cases too.

Follow @keithjwoods

Originally published as OPINION: Spare us the pity party - crime has no excuse