Legal loopholes !

Magistrates are often criticised for handing down ridiculously light sentences, but in many instances the fault lays with those framing the charges.

This week brought the case of a twenty year old man, recently out of gaol on another matter - who fell asleep on a late night bus in the Illawarra. Awakening - and realising that he had missed his stop - he demanded the driver act as a taxi and drive him back to his home.

The driver refused - and suffered a vicious attack that had the bus veering onto the wrong side of the road and which required him to have hospital treatment for the injuries received.

The attacker was given a two year gaol sentence, eighteen months to be served before possible parole. This was back dated to the time of the February arrest - and the magistrate commented that in his opinion a much longer sentence would have been appropriate.

The problem was that those laying the charges chose " assault occasioning actual harm " - which mandates a lesser sentence - to " affray " - which has a maximum ten year sentencing option.

Because of this, the magistrate's hands were tied and an appropriate sentence could not be delivered.

This raises the question of responsibility in charge laying.

Getting the charge correct in relation to the seriousness of the crime is just as important when it comes to achieving an outcome.

There is no point in criticising magistrates if the reason for inadequate sentencing is incompetence in the prosecutors office. The charge laid must equate the sentence available under the law to the serious nature of the crime - and for that to happen the person framing the charge must be of high legal calibre.

Time for a long, hard look at the qualifications of those who do this work !