Ivan Ray May ’26

The Herald Sun reported on the 26th of May 2026, the comments from Victoria Police regarding the youth crisis.

The report calls on the Government to coordinate a response to tackle Melbourne’s gang scourge better.

That is code for “It’s about time to get your bloody act together”.

We, like the vast majority of the police and large swathes of the community, are heartened by the Force being so outspoken, calling out the flaws within the Legal processes.

It augers well for VicPol as Chief Commissioner Bush finds his feet, the Force finds its voice and throws the shackles of silence in the WPB – good stuff, really.

However, the response from opposing quarters, the self-righteous left who make up the majority of these Government functions, will be interesting, now that the boot is on the other foot, and they are being roundly criticised, supported by the majority of Victorians, who are tired of inaction and lack of accountability in some Government quarters.

We hope the media will sharpen their pens and focus on these entities, who are generally just unaccountable, wind whistlers.

This police criticism is aimed, not too subtly, at the Courts, particularly the Children’s Court, Corrections Victoria, Departments of Education, Families and Housing, Youth Justice, as well as Local Community leaders  (Local Government).

The one glaring anomaly that jumps out is that while the Police are under constant scrutiny, and that is not necessarily a bad thing, these other Government functions are not, to any effective degree. And that is despite what they claim.

The other issue is the apparent lack of accountability among these government entities for youth or for their functions generally.

We have a huge problem, largely created by the Courts, and there are no signs they are taking responsibility or taking action to rectify the issue.

With all their bluster and rapier criticism, particularly of the police, they generally get away scot-free and, while drawing indecent salaries, show no interest in their organisations performing to an acceptable standard.

Benchmarking performance is one of those terms that they believe does not apply to them. After all, they are the Public Service, two words whose natural meaning is foreign to them, Public and Service.

Additionally, it would be useful if the outcomes of the judges’ sentencing decisions, in particular, were monitored electronically to weigh against benchmarking.

If an offender who has been sentenced or bailed reoffends, then the original decision was flawed.

A jurist’s failing would, at least, practically trigger the need for additional training, but continued failure must raise the question of the jurist’s suitability to sit on these matters.

The CAA has, for nearly ten years, coincidentally a similar time frame to the escalation of our current crime Tsunami, argued for a Judicial Review Panel to monitor and take action where necessary for failures in the judicial system and the performance of Justices.

While we continue to have Jurists playing at Social Engineering instead of dispensing Justice, we are never going to see improvements in crime rates.

A very relevant comment in an article on youth crime was attributed to an experienced police officer who said,

“We’ve got a cohort who are disconnected from reality,” he said.

“They don’t understand consequences. They don’t understand that if you stab someone, they could die.”

One could effectively argue that youths are not the only ones disconnected from reality.

This could equally apply to many of the Judicial brethren.

Another glaring example of Social Engineering trumping Justice was reported on the same day, when a Children’s Court Magistrate sent a sixteen-year-old home after the teenager pleaded guilty to four charges of arson, including the high-profile Bar Bambi fire.

The youth, it was claimed, had an IQ of less than 40, allegedly somewhere between that of a child aged 6 and 8.

The court accepted that he was mentally disabled, and as his parents had provided incredible love and support, the child didn’t understand.

As the experienced Policemen elsewhere in this piece claimed, this youth fell into the category of ‘disconnected from reality’ and ‘not understanding the consequences.

So, the magistrate sent him home.  As he did with the other coofenderrs.

Precisely where the clash of Social Engineering fails, and how the Courts feed children into the revolving door of crime.

All the lectures from the judges are just white noise to these kids, a waste of the court’s time.

The child now has bragging rights over the Court and is enabled to gain respect from his peers and to move up the social pecking order within his network , strengthening his lack of accountability.

What the Court overlooked was that he had the mental capacity to carry out the crime successfully. Would a 6-8-year-old be physically or mentally capable of such a crime?

Twelve months away from his phone, his criminal masters, and loss of freedom might just let him escape the crime revolving door as he matures a bit. Of course, that depends entirely on the effectiveness of the other services responsible for managing intellectually inept young people, in teaching them that unacceptable actions attract unpleasant consequences.

The Judge in this case directed that, among other things, the boy delete all his contacts on his cell phone. The chances of compliance with these or the other instructions in the Judicial lecture are next to zero.

That is a disconnection from reality by the bench, not the perpetrator.

Counselling and all the other nice-to-dos with kids are a waste of time, and they need to be taught that certain behaviours have uncomfortable consequences, and that has no bearing on their IQ. Even 6–8-year-olds can and do understand right from wrong, no matter how much certain sectors promote the view that they do not- these out-of-touch ideologues need to step aside to allow for pragmatic justice.

A Justice Review Panel would have a field day with this magistrate over his failure to explain why he took a Social justice approach instead of serving justice, not only for the child but also for the victims and the broader community. This is an inappropriate approach to this child’s life.

As stated elsewhere,

“We’ve got a cohort who are disconnected from reality,” he said. 

 In this context, we are referring to jurists and others in the juvenile justice system.

It’s no good looking to the Police for a solution; the majority are ever more asking the same question about their role: ‘what’s the point?’

Why should they put their life on the line, risking Physical as well as Mental injury, when all their hard work is thrown aside for Social Engineering by the judiciary?

There is one outstanding positive from this debacle for the Police: the Force has become vocal on this issue, and that will have a very positive impact, at least on mental injury – the Force supports them.

DONATE