AN APPEALING SIGHT

Two things happened to me this week that made me rejoice even more about an Appeals Court decision yesterday. I was not on 3AW on Wednesday for medical reasons but spent about three hours that night reading court transcripts of some of the most ghastly child rape evidence I have ever seen. For legal reasons I cannot give you details, at this stage, but I can assure you, it involved crimes committed by monsters against little kids.

It was sickening reading.

Then yesterday a colleague wished me happy anniversary. I had no idea what he was talking about. May 28?  What was significant about May 28?  It was on that date back in 1986 – in an  earlier life on 3AW – that I was first sentenced to six weeks jail and fined $25,000 for naming and detailing the crimes of Catholic priest Michael Glennon.

I went after that evil paedophile, hiding behind a clerical collar, because even though he had served time for raping a young girl he was still practicing as a priest, still embraced by his church, and still running a camp for kids at Lancefield where he kept offending.

It’s been a 25-year campaign under the slogan ‘Who’s looking after the children?’ and more recently a Name Them and Shame Them campaign on the Internet which has attracted nearly 7000 signatures.

So what’s to rejoice about? Well yesterday an Appeals Court got tough. It overturned two lenient sentences against two child sex offenders and increased their jail terms.

In one case, the original County Court judge told the offender the sexual offences against a three-year-old girl and a six-year-old girl were ‘extremely serious’. As they were. Their attacker was a predator who met his victims’ parents at a parenting class and ingratiated himself with the family.

The maximum penalties for sexual penetration of a child under ten is 25 years jail. The maximum for an indecent act with a child under 16 is 10 years.

The judge gave the man 2-1/2 years with a minimum of 15 months. The Appeals Court increased that sentenced to six years with a minimum of four.

But what is most encouraging is what was said by Justices Chris Maxwell, Robert Redlich and Ross Robson.

They said one sentence was ‘so disproportionate to the seriousness of the crimes as to shock the public conscience’.

With respect, gentlemen, the public conscience has been shocked and battered for years. It’s your judges who need a jolt. The statutory maximum for penetration is 25 years. The heaviest sentence by any judge in recent years is 6-1/years. A quarter of the maximum. Please explain?

For too long judges have been ignoring the will of the Parliament and therefore the people.

I hope these tough words from the Appeals Court that ‘sentencing judges may not disregard the will of the Parliament’ reverberated around courtrooms today.

One major problem, still, is that judges must consider other judges’ sentences for similar crimes and until that cycle is broken victims will still suffer.

But today I feel real hope. Next step:  Megan’s Law in Australia.

Friday, May 29, 2009

© Copyright Derryn Hinch 2009