It was a sad story, but only too familiar through all stratas of todays society. Harriet Wran, 28 was the daughter of former New South Wales state premier Neville Wran. Estranged from her family because she was in the grip of an uncontrollable drug habit she was arrested by the police investigating a Refern murder.
It seems that Harriet Wran accompanied her boy friend Michael Lee and Lloyd Edward Haines to a known drug den in the city with the intention of obtaining drugs. Wran knocked on the door and lulled the drug dealer to open up because he contended his caller was " only a girl ". Her companions rushed in, intending to commit a robbery and in the ensuing fracas the dealer - Daniel McNulty - was killed.
Then came the inevitable apportioning of individual charges and this investigation dragged on for over a year, and during that time Harriet Wran was locked away in a high security female prison. Her case was sensationally played out in the media and inevitably the the reporting was coloured by the individual political bias of the media proprietors. Harriet was fortunate that her family stuck with her and as a result she was served by top lawyers and attended by gifted psychiatrists and social workers. She was also at high risk of personal attack behind bars and the sensational nature of this case will make rehabilitation eventually difficult.
The presiding justice had a thorny issue to decide. Justice is never clear in the eye of all beholders. It is much easier if the offender is a " nobody " and the decisions attract little media attention, but that was never going to be an option in the Wran case.
The DPP decided to charge Harriet Wran with " harbouring and maintaining " her boy friend when they went on the run. The Justice handed her a one year sentence. She was also charged with " robbery in company " and awarded a two year minimum prison term. She was not charged with murder because both her companions pleaded guilty to that charge - and are awaiting sentencing.
With time served and credits for good behaviour it is quite likely that she may be granted her freedom in a matter of days. Her time in prison has certainly broken the drug nexus and her loving family can be expected to cushion her return to personal freedom. The sentencing Justice opined that he had every expectation that there would be no further criminal occurrences.
To a fair minded person that is probably a very reasonable outcome to what can happen when normal behaviour becomes deranged by drug cravings. That expedition to Redfern had the intention of committing a robbery. They were desperate for drugs beyond the money available to make a legitimate purchase and Wran took no part in the killing of the dealer. The culprits have admitted their guilt - and will be punished accordingly.
The only jarring note is the fame connecting to the prisoners father. It raises the question of whether those close to the public eye should be treated differently to what some may refer to as " ordinary members of the herd " ! The question in some minds is whether Harriet Wran got off lightly - because of who she was ?
There is no doubt that she was legally better represented by the family engaged lawyers rather than having legal counsel drawn from the pool of freshly minted lawyers on low salaries available to the courts. But that is a very normal hazard of justice. Some of the biggest criminals are also very rich people - and they deploy their wealth accordingly.
In the end, it rests in the hands of whatever Justice draws the case and has to try and juggle together the contrasting ends of justice and mercy. He chose to give a twenty-eight year old woman a chance to return to a normal life and perhaps create a future family. There is a very good chance that she will never again cross the law, but the curse of drugs is rife with temptation.
No comments:
Post a Comment