Rita Panahi: Measly sentences are no surprise with a Labor state government
The decision to let a paramedic basher walk free has rightly triggered outrage in Victoria — and the blame can be laid squarely at the feet of the Andrews government, writes Rita Panahi.
Rita Panahi
Don't miss out on the headlines from Rita Panahi. Followed categories will be added to My News.
It’s a little rich for the Victorian Premier and senior ministers to be decrying inadequate sentences when Labor is responsible for appointing soft-on-crime magistrates and judges.
Jill Hennessy has been state Attorney-General for less than a year but her Labor predecessors, Martin Pakula and Rob Hulls, served about 16 years collectively and their legacy is felt daily in Victorian courts.
Indeed, the impact of their judicial appointments will be felt for decades to come.
It would be naive to think that Hennessy will be any different in appointing ideological bedfellows to the bench. And, once appointed, they have a job for life — or at least until their 70th birthday.
Next time you see an inadequate sentence imposed, before you bust a gasket, call the talkback line or write an angry letter to the paper, have a look at who appointed the judge responsible.
Mandatory sentences are an acknowledgment that the judiciary is out of touch and not delivering terms in line with community expectations.
Even Labor belatedly acknowledged the growing gulf between the courts and the community and last year toughened the mandatory sentencing requirements that are meant to send those who attack emergency workers to jail for at least six months.
But the loopholes that have allowed thugs to dodge jail for five years, despite mandatory minimum terms, are still big enough for judges to let offenders avoid jail with little more than community service and a requirement to seek mental health and drug treatment.
On Thursday, Premier Andrews urged the Director of Public Prosecutions to give “urgent consideration” to appealing against the 18-month community correction order handed to James Haberfield, who assaulted two paramedics after binging on “a cornucopia” of drugs including ice, ketamine and MDMA at a music festival.
The construction management student assaulted two paramedics trying to help him, inflicting injuries so severe that one of them has not been able to return to work.
Haberfield punched Monica (who does not want her surname published) in the face and put her in a chokehold; her screams brought her colleague Sam Smith to her aid and he too was assaulted.
But magistrate Simon Zebrowski determined it was best not to imprison the 22-year-old who the court heard was in a psychotic state after consuming the drugs during the four-day festival.
“Your clinically depressed state … would mean that you would find any term of imprisonment more burdensome than a prisoner not so afflicted,” said Mr Zebrowski, who also noted that jail “would have a disproportionate and catastrophic effect” on the offender.
“Your autism spectrum traits would … make it very difficult for you to navigate the rather complex social environment of prison. A rehabilitated James Haberfield will never be a danger ever again to any emergency workers on duty or anyone else for that matter.”
Though the magistrate said a “message needs to be sent to the community that emergency workers are not punching bags” he declined to jail Haberfield.
That left police prosecutors in tears and the victims retraumatised by a justice system that lacks justice.
On Thursday, Monica, who feared for her life during the attack, spoke of her disbelief and disappointment.
“He is being treated like the victim here,” she said on 3AW. “There’s no punishment for him putting drugs in his system and punching me in the face and pinning me at the back of the ambulance.
“I’m upset and disappointed that our safety really doesn’t mean much to the court system.”
Using illegal drugs and then indulging in more criminality should see an offender’s sentence increased but often the former is considered a mitigating factor.
Surely, if an individual chooses to break the law in obtaining and using illegal substances then they are responsible for whatever follows. And being on the autism spectrum should not be a get-out-of-jail free card.
Shadow attorney-general Edward O’Donohue lays the blame squarely at the feet of the Andrews Government for allowing loopholes that can be easily exploited.
“The court’s decision not to send James Haberfield to jail is entirely predictable because Daniel Andrews’ weak and flawed legislation had more holes than Swiss cheese,” he said.
“The special reason provisions were too broad and left far too much discretion for the courts … all the hand-wringing this week from the Premier down does nothing to protect the ambos, police and other emergency service workers going to work tonight, tomorrow and next week.”
The soft justice meted out to criminals in Victoria has drawn comment far and wide, including from federal Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton last year. “If you’re appointing civil libertarians over a long period of time, then you’re going to get softer sentences,” Mr Dutton said.
Don’t expect the situation to improve unless the state government brings in more mandatory minimum terms and removes the wriggle room so easily available to magistrates and judges.
Rita Panahi is a Herald Sun columnist
Human cost of pandemic goes much further than virus
Whether you are pro or anti-lockdown the grim, unintended consequences of the fixation on coronavirus are undeniable, as other diseases — including cancer and heart disease — go unchecked, and despair from joblessness, poverty and financial stress rises, writes Rita Panahi.
Will buck really stop with Dan after disastrous decisions?
While Daniel Andrews repeats the “we’re all in this together” mantra, the reality is only the private sector is making huge financial sacrifices as he refuses to face up to scrutiny over the hotel quarantine fiasco and contact tracing chaos, writes Rita Panahi.