Mandatory sentencing !

There is no doubt that the vast majority of people think that the prison sentence handed down to Kieran Loveridge was far too light for the offence committed.   Before heading off for a night at Sydney's Kings Cross, Loveridge told others that he intended to " Bash someone tonight ".

He " King hit " four complete strangers, and one of them - Thomas Kelly - fractured his skull when he fell to the pavement and subsequently died.   This high profile case resulted in Loveridge pleading guilty to manslaughter - and effectively being sentenced to just four years in prison before he will be eligible for parole.

Public anger is causing the New South Wales parliament to consider introducing mandatory sentencing for " assault that results in death ".   It is suggested that a ten year prison term will be the likely penalty.

Every aspect of mandatory sentencing is fraught with danger.  It flies in the face of the principle that each case will be considered on it's merits and that an experienced judge will bring wisdom to the outcome.  Just as the public will disagree on the lack of time to be served in some cases, in others there will be sympathy for the person convicted and concern that the penalty imposed is too harsh.

A century ago, causing the death of another could easily  result in the offender facing a death sentence.  Today, capital punishment has ceased and the impetus of sentencing is on rehabilitation.   The " punishment " aspect relies on a shorter term in prison, followed by a longer period under the supervision of a parole officer.    Unfortunately, in practice this has many faults.

It is a fact of life that those who serve a long prison sentence become " institutionalised ".   The prisoner loses the ability to make even minor personal decisions and when released - find it impossible to adapt back into normal society.    As a result, these people usually reoffend and become habitual criminals.

There is no evidence that mandatory sentencing will reduce the spate of deaths resulting from street fights.   In the vast majority of cases, where an assault occurs - alcohol in excess is part of the problem.   The venue is usually in close proximity to a club or a pub, and the timing is concentrated in the wee small hours of the morning.

It is doubtful if the prospect of a prison sentence is passing through the mind of those looking for a fight in those circumstances.   The punch that is thrown is more a matter of moronic irrationality than any form of wisdom.   Facing reality comes later - when the damage is done - and that involved person is again sober and called upon to account for the action.

If mandatory sentencing is adopted it will be a knee jerk reaction to reduce public outrage.  It will add despair to the state of mind of those who genuinely regret what they have done, and it will not curb the future aggression of those who have a mental disorder that makes them offend.

Worse - it will remove the opportunity for an experienced judge to consider all the aspects of what has happened in his court and make a judgement call based on those facts - and his gut feeling.   The judiciary will not get every decision they make right - but neither will mandatory sentencing reduce the tragedies that happen to some families for no fault of their own !