It is reported that the thug first came under police notice at the age of 11 and since then has racked up over 400 offences and been bailed over 50 times, continually breaching Bail.
This case highlights the inadequacy of the justice system, the judiciary, and Child protection, which have failed dramatically.
It is time these bureaucrats are held accountable, and if their current management can’t deliver good results, then the solution is clear: remove them and find someone who will make the system work.
There is no need for an inquiry, the popular go-to diversion used by Governments.
What is needed is capable management with a focus on innovation and repairing a broken system.
What is particularly appalling is that, given the high number of offences that this juvenile has committed, why should the Court foist this one-person crime wave back on the community? They must take responsibility for the actions of this youth.
The courts will not learn that protecting the community is an essential role of their being. The chances of reoffending and the possibility that someone will get injured or killed by them are real.
The argument of avoiding this child thug from being institutionalised just doesn’t wash with the community, nor should it. This thug is the master of his own destiny, good or bad, and while he chooses bad, then the community must be protected, and if, consequently, he is institutionalised, so be it. It’s up to him.
The risk to the community from this thug is in the extreme range, with a real potential that he will kill or maim an innocent citizen in a high-speed jaunt he has regularly performed over his thus far criminal career.
The same risks apply to the thug himself, from which the risk of institutionalisation would be a small price to pay to protect him from himself.
If the worst happens, where does that leave the Magistrate who had the opportunity to mitigate that risk?
The Magistrate sentenced the youth to four months’ Youth Detention, meaning with time already served, he was able to walk from the Court back into society and his normal criminal lifestyle without any supervision.
The boy had previously had 388 criminal charges against him struck out, due to the doli incapax rule, which states that a child aged 10 to 14 can’t be held criminally responsible.
And that is how this rule change works against society and perpetrators alike. How can it possibly be that after being charged with 388 criminal charges, and multiple Court appearances where the judiciary would have berated him on his behaviour, the perpetrator still claims the doli incapax rule applies and that what he was doing he didn’t know was wrong.
There is an urgent need to place a cap on offending where the doli incapax rule allows protection against prosecution. After two or three Court appearances for a crime, the doli incapax rule for that individual must be modified and or removed.
If the Courts won’t do it, then the Legislators need to step in to protect the community.
The changes in the age of young people accessing protection by the doli incapax rule have now been exposed by this criminal as wrong, and the ages of criminality should be re-adjusted back to where they were.
The status quo allows for the intent of this rule and the age limits to be abused.
It is staggering that, as a country, we have offered this child protection and a new opportunity by granting him a Temporary Refugee Visa.
His abuse of this country’s generosity and the danger to its citizens, despite multiple chances, has demonstrated clearly that he has abused the gift.
He must now be referred to Immigration to take action to withdraw the visa and return the individual to his country of origin.
If this offender is a migrant, it’s simple – his visa must be cancelled and he should be deported to his home country.
It’s fundamental, Australia must control it’s borders and the migration system for the betterment of the country.
It has been estimated that there are between 50-60 million “illegals” (undocumented) people in the United States and this is a serious issue for that country.
Let’s not follow that example.
The court system has seriously and repeatedly failed this offender and his victims and those that he will next put at risk or put in danger. The court system associated with this offending is not fit for purpose and the Minister, together with all associated bureaucracy, have failed in their absolute duty to the community. They cannot be devoid of accountability for allowing this unacceptable farce to continue. The offender is already institutionalised – and in such a way that he is sure to be a societal problem hereafter, unless he is “stopped” now. Paradoxically doli incapax might genuinely apply to this youth because his experiences within the inept court system inform him that whatever he chooses to do is endorsed by the court.
Lawyers are “officers of the court” and they play a significant role in these matters. Failure to take proper action, ie advising the court of previous appearances, is in my view, prima facie, perverting the course of justice.
When refugees abuse the people, disregard the country’s laws and are a danger to all, cancel his temporary Visa, send him back to where he came from and put a lifetime ban on him from ever returning to AUSTRALIA again. When something like that happens get rid of them.
Yep, if possible deport them and their family.
If not then there has to be severe consequences for their actions.
The problem is the pollies, judges, magistrates and lawyers etc have little or no ‘skin in the game’, they live in wealthy areas where the benefits of cultural enhancement are only felt in a wider range of restaurants or cheap menial labour. They should be made to house and care for these young criminals in their own homes.