CRIME ESSAY PLANS

Young offenders
Effective as seen in within laws reflecting Young offenders who are treated differently in the criminal justice
system with the purpose of embodying various societal values
 “treating the best interests of a child as the paramount” in the criminal justice system (as stated in the
Conventions on the Rights of a Child (CRC) 1989).
 The juvenile justice system features two ‘models’, the ‘welfare model’ and the ‘justice model’; each prioritising
contrasting values (welfare prioritising rehabilitation, whereas the latter prioritises punishment and deterrence).
- These two models ultimately combine creating a wholesome juvenile justice system, which acknowledges
the vulnerability of children and their inability to make informed decisions and aims to promote the
protection of and prevent the exploitation of young offenders.
 The Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) is an ideal example of a domestic legislation that is
explicitly relevant to why and how young offenders should be treated in the juvenile justice system.
- The practices of prohibiting a child’s name and clearing of their convictions after 3 years outlined in the
mentioned legislation, both aim to minimise the impact of the offence on the offender’s future and allow for
rehabilitation; once aga
|”{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{in taking into account children’s vulnerability and their inability to make
informed decisions.
- The most significant legal concept outlined in the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW)
however, is the concept of doli incapax, surrounding the age of criminal responsibility – entailing that “no
child who is under the age of 10 years can be guilty of an offence”.
- This key concept applies the belief that children have the inability to form criminal intent (which removes
mens rea from the necessary elements that constitute to a crime).
- R v LMW [1999] is one of the most renowned cases entailing the concept; where the 10-year-old offender
who was originally charged with manslaughter, after many appeals was acquitted, after determination that
there was sufficient evidence for the jury to make a decision on doli incapax.
Use of diversionary programs and other routes makes the justice system moderately effective
 the favourable option of diverting youth from court and presenting them the opportunity to rehabilitate;
 an array of diversionary programs (alternatives to court) are provided for them through the Young Offenders
Act 1997 (NSW).
- Examples of these alternatives include warnings, cautions, the Youth Drug and Alcohol Court program
(YDAC) and youth justice conferences (YJCs).
- Warnings consist of on-the-spot warnings by police that are issued for minor breaches of the law. They are
used by police, in attempts to keep young offenders out of the court system by informing them of their
wrong doings and hopefully deterring them from committing the same offence. Warnings do not extend to
where violence has occurred.
- Cautions are of a similar nature to warnings; however consist of a formal record. These are issued when an
offender admits to a more serious offence (such as larceny or causing damage to public property) after
having the opportunity to seek legal advice (through Legal Aid or another group alike to the Shopfront
Youth Legal Centre, etc.).
- The use and admission of warnings and cautions are relatively effective; as they are quicker and easier to
administer than a formal charge. However warnings and cautions only have the potential to deter an
offender from repeat offending and it most likely will not be as effective unless it is a caution at the very
least.
 The Youth Drug and Alcohol Court program (YDAC), is a community-based program, initiated through the
courts, and aimed towards diverting young offenders (with substance-related histories of crime) from further
alcohol and drug abuse.
- The YDAC is highly effective with its individualised, holistic and proficiently managed and supervised
program; that if successfully completed, will result in almost certainly avoiding control orders.
- Furthermore, through the extensive program, it corrects and rehabilitates the young offender, and also
provides them with many opportunities and lots of support to aid their transition back into their
community/society.
- An example of the impact this alternative to court is present in ‘Nick’s story’, where Nick had gotten into a
fight with his step-father while his behaviour was influenced by his addiction to methamphetamines. He
was grateful to be given “another opportunity” and successfully worked towards rehabilitation and
completing the program.
 2016–2017, 1,500 young people were being supervised either in the community or in a youth detention centre
 R v Cortez 2002 (NSW) Supreme Court
The requirements of the arrest and interrogation process is relatively effective when dealing with young
offenders.
 Under s99 of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) (LEPRA) the requirements
of arrest are strictly imposed to ensure arrest is utilised as a last resort as obliged under the article 37(b) of the
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
 Despite legislative attempts to limit the arrest of child, the Shopfront Youth Legal Centre has stated "[section
99]…does not seem to have made police think more carefully before arresting suspects".
 During the interrogation process, an "interview friend" is required to assist the young offender and ensure the
interview is conducted lawfully as stipulated under s13 of LEPRA.
- The Seen and Heard: Young People and the Legal Process (1997) by the Australian Law Reform
Commission recommended that the parents or guardians be notified as soon as possible.
 Similarly, interrogation proceedings were further acknowledged in the R v Cortez (2002) that set a precedent
that the custody's managers duty includes informing a young person that the Legal Aid Hotline is available and
giving them an opportunity to ring.
International crime
Domestic measures such as the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (ACIC) and it’s
communication with the legislative arm of government is extremely effective in dealing with transnational
crime
 not only does it identify and create reports on the status of transnational crime, but it also enforces changes in
parliament so that there are effective measures in place to combat the rise of this type of crime.
 ACIC creates reports based on the international criminal landscape and in their recent report for 2018-2019
described it as ‘proficient and enduring’, possibly becoming ‘pervasive and complex’ regarding the security of
Australia’s borders.
 The rising transnational crime rate as a result of increased globalisation has the ability to not only undermine
the Australian economy but also infringe on the border integrity.
 During the 45th Parliament, five legislative amendments were passed in order to create a stronger defence to
transnational crime.
- ACIC were the main promoters for this change, enforcing through their reports and statistics.
- The particular issue found was that through an increased awareness and use of technology, the risk of
transnational crime was also increasing dramatically.
- A change in this amendment granted law enforcement access to communications and data to more
effectively investigate transnational criminal law.
International measures such as the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime
(UNTOC) are relatively effective in dealing with transnational crime
 while there are protocols which align with changing values, it is limited primarily by the concept of state
sovereignty.
 The UNTOC and protocols thereto came into force in 2003 and is the main international measure used to
combat transnational organised crime.
 As of 2020, the convention has 147 signatures and highlights the need for a more connected international
community in this period of rapid globalisation against transnational crime.
- For example, the protocol against the smuggling of migrants by land, sea and air deals with the increasing
issue of human trafficking, particularly the organised criminal groups who smuggle migrants for high profit.
- The protocol prevents and combats against the issue and protects the rights of these migrants who have been
exploited.
- While this has an element of binding nature on nation states who are signatories, it is limited by those who
are not.
 As signatories are bound by the concept of ratifying ‘in good faith’, international measures are effective in
dealing with transnational crime, it’s effectiveness is limited by those nation states who do not sign and are
therefore not bound to it.
Law Reform
statutory guidelines for mandatory sentences has been ineffective in relation to achieving justice to a large
extent
 Previously the Crimes Act 1900 and the Crimes (Sentencing Procedures) Act 1999 solely identified the
minimum and maximum sentences for offences.
- Crimes Amendment (Murder of Police Officers) Act 2011 was created providing a mandatory sentence of
life imprisonment for the killing of a police officer.
 - The Sydney Morning Herald’s article ‘Cowdrey lashes on Mandatory Life for Police Killers’ (2011) ‘it
inhibits judges to effectively provide the most appropriate sentence’. He goes onto say that this reform is
making ‘the doing of justice… impossible as justice is not received for the offender’.
- R V Jacobs (2013), where Jacobs was found guilty of murdering a police officer and given a life sentence.
 one punch attacks resulting in deaths.
- R V Loveridge (2013) case
- This led to the enactment of Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Assault and Intoxication) Act 2014
which created minimum (mandatory 8 years) penalties for assaults causing death.
- may not reflect the culpability of offenders, for example Richard Everleigh was convicted for throwing a
punch that was fatal onto his best friend of 46 years, he confessed that he was mortified as it was just a
‘silly row’.
- Nicholas Cowdrey also stated that ‘no crime is uniform in nature, and it is the function of the courts to
honour this principle’.
- While law reform is designed to reflect changing societal values and increase the effectiveness and
efficiency of the criminal justice system, this reform of mandatory sentencing has limited judicial discretion
bail is ineffective to a significant extent.
 the Bail Act 2014 was introduced, as a result of the bail act of 1978 being ‘unintelligible’ However, the
introduction of show cause offences into the Bail Act amendment 2014 highlights the ineffectiveness of the
reform as it shows the inability of the criminal justice system to protect the interests of the offender over time.
- Under this statutory provision, suspects accused of indictable offences must prove, on the balance of
probabilities, why they should be granted bail which renders the Act incapable of effectively upholding the
rule of law principle of the presumption of innocence.
- Former DPP Nicholas Cowdrey argues that the criminal justice system ‘should provide fair and equal
treatment to all accused persons and forcing them to show cause is a breach of this’, affirming that the
amendments to the Bail Act are ineffective and unjust.
- As a result of this injustice within this reform, there has been a 40% increase of bail refused prisoners over
the last five years.
- The NSW Corrections Minister David Elliot has stated that “All incarceration has gone up because we
toughened the Bail Act” (Sydney Criminal Lawyers, March 2017).
Law reform has been moderately effective in dealing with domestic violence as whilst a DV has gone down
significantly, laws put into place are subject to non-compliance.
 Law specifically around domestic first occurred in response to public outcry in 2007 under crimes (domestic
and personal violence) act 2007, showing reforms effectiveness in achieving justice due to its evident high
responsiveness
- This act introduced ADVO’s as a means to achieve justice for the victim through enforceability
 Further law reform came through the crimes (domestic and personal) amendment act 2013 brought better access
to victims to have justice achieved through the easier obtainment of ADVO’s.
- Under this amendment victims no longer have to prove they fear the perpetrator, nor must they go through
the longer process of court proceedings.
- The effectiveness of this amendment is shown through nsw bureau of crime statistics and research study
who stated that 98% of women reported no further violence after having taken out an ADVO
 However ADVO’s as a result of reform are subject to non-compliance and therefore can be seen to lack
enforceability.
- As per the Daily telegraph 2015, 44% of all ADVO’s are broken in some way
- This can be seen in the case of Sharon Michelutti where she was stabbed by her partner of who she’d had an
ADVO’s placed upon.
- Rosie batty In a 2016 SMH interview stated that “it (ADVO’s) only really works when somebody is going
to follow it”
 Furthermore ADVO’s do not account for the victim and perpetrator to attempt to reconcile their relationship on
their own accord, putting the victim in a dangerous position.
- This can be seen in the case of Roy V Roy 2014 to which a mother had taken an ADVO out against her son,
only months later he’d moved back, opening her up to a potentially dangerous situation