" Bail Laws " eased !

Bail laws are always contentious and New South Wales has eased the criteria that applies to the granting of bail.  From July those charged with an offence will " automatically qualify for bail if a magistrate believes that they pose no risk ".

A test case is waiting in the wings and the outcome will be eagerly watched by both the police and the legal profession.   It concerns a man charged with the alleged  murder of his wife seventeen years ago - and who has been held in a remand prison for the past year.  No doubt the magistrate will be warned that this man might be a flight risk and that there is concern that he may approach witnesses.   His defence lawyer will certainly claim that he has lived lawfully in the community for seventeen years and has the full support of his children and family.

Options exist and are in a magistrate's hands.   He can demand that the accused surrender his or her passport and report to police at regular intervals.  The age of the accused would certainly be a consideration.  It is also likely that the outlook of individual magistrates will be a factor in making bail applications because their record in granting bail will depict them as either " hard " or " soft ".

There is no doubt that a dangerous person who is likely to reoffend needs to be confined for the protection of the public, but remand has long been a police tactic to wear down a supposed offender and try and obtain a confession.   Often, such a prisoner is put in a cell with a gaol informant in the hope of obtaining further information - and delays in bringing the case to court can be little more than an extra judicial sentence.  The person on remand is " innocent until proven guilty ", but actually serving a sentence similar to a convicted felon.

Another reason for this law change - is the cost factor.   Our prison system weighs heavily on the public purse and few convicted of crimes are given the maximum sentence.   Usually, whatever sentence is handed down carries a non parole period and hence the actual time served is usually miniscule.   Parole is the easy option, freeing up prison space and making the convicted person responsible for his or her own living costs.

There is another option that should go hand in hand with these new bail laws.    We need a defined limit on the time a person can be held on remand before their case goes before a court.   As things stand, the prosecution can apply for extended delays that sometimes result in the accused  being behind bars for years - with jobs, family obligations and personal property allowed to disintegrate.   A vindictive prosecutor can actually replace the role of judge and jury - and impose a penalty far beyond the jurisdiction of a court.

No doubt this law change will bring contention.  It is almost inevitable that some people will be granted bail and tragically re-offend, causing a public outcry and much finger pointing.      It is also likely that compassion will bring rewards that result in less broken families and destitution caused by long spells on remand - that ended with acquittal in court.

This easing will certainly increase the load on magistrates called upon to make bail decisions.  Each decision will have it's supporters - and it's detractors.   The ones that they get right will pass virtually unnoticed - but those that go spectacularly wrong will be long remembered !