Sentences according to the crime; what a novel idea. Just where may we see this in operation? Will the law-breaking high court judge be subject to your novel approach punishment or shall he continue to sit in judgement of others?

Maybe instead of the additional expense of "advocates", Mandatory sentencing, based on tested community expectations would serve better than leaving out-of-touch judges to decide.

Alternatively, maybe judges from a wider range of backgrounds than the rarified atmosphere of "the law" would prescribe more appropriate and "balanced" sentences.

Further, I see no reason why judges should not be elected - as they are in USA. - The problem with the current system of "tenure" is - it protects the mediocre from the realities of life - just like "tenure" in "academia" - they are just sheltered workshops for the incompetent and invariably paid from the "public purse".

Good article. It seems to me that the proposed approach is not to different to suggesting differing sentences for someone who rapes a sexually active woman compared to raping a celebate woman. A approach which I understand is widely opposed.

It is always a problem when society attempts to treat people differently based on value judgements regarding the impact of something on them. Society might measure aspects of the impact differently to the way I would choose to measure them.

R0bert

Col Rouge

I like your first sentence.

Who are the "mediocre"?

I was bashed first, and then raped by 2 strangers in 1993.

The DDP took the "Judge" back to court on the grounds that he was using data 20 years out of date. The Judge admitted that in the papers. Even so - one got off on 200 hours community service (because he had a built-up shoe and was disabled), and the other had his sentence increased to 4/12 years!

Am I "mediocre"?

The VICTIMS OF CRIMES GROUP VIC helped me a great deal - on an emotional level.

And thanks Alexander for your article, just that I find Col Rouge's comments difficult.

Cheers to all

May I suggest that before people start getting stuck into this topic they spend a bit of time doing some research? Like maybe reading through the the remarks on sentencing available via such websites as 'Lawlink' in NSW, or maybe more radically sitting through some entire trials and sentencing procedures?

I am not a lawyer, but I have had quite a bit of time sitting in court rooms listening to trials. Judges are not as detached as some people would have us think that they are. Judges have families, sometimes families that are touched by tragedy and crime. They have guidelines and principles to follow, and sentences passed by them are always able to be appealed by either side.

And maybe we should all remember my namesake's(ha ha)injunction in Shakespear's play:

"Treat them better. Use every man after his desert, and who shall scape whipping?"

Col Rouge and others

Total embarrassment from me. Please disregard my previous post. Clearly I totally misinterpreted what Col was saying.

My apologies
Kay

What a great innovation. I have never understood why the defence are given such a huge head start. Criminal histories and any other assortment of negative behaviour from witnesses is permitted to be dragged through the court yet we don't dare mention that the accused has more convictions than all of them combined as that would not be 'fair'.
PFH

Victim statements heard are extremely important to the progress of understanding how all parties are connected to crime through the human experience.

In civil society, in government and throughout the world media, it is claimed; judges need to build awareness of what the law requires.

Awareness means to acknowledge statements as they are being made from a diversity of backgrounds. It is to promote a sense of pro-active justice in a way that could assist the law to prescribe more appropriate balance, as a means to focus on crime prevention, in the ways it contributes to the whole of society, so as to build a world climate whereby outcomes reflect the handling of sentences appropriately.

The sentences are light because it is too expensive to keep criminals in gaol.Govts ar quite happy with the present arrangement.They will eagerly listen to all the soft option socialist rethoric since there will be more money to expand their fifedoms.

As far as crime goes ,it is far better for Govt that we have insurance.As premiums go up,Govt can then get not only the GST but also State govt stamp duty.You see,crime does pay.To keep a single prisoner in gaol costs between $60 and $90 thousand p.a.Just 10,000 prisoners can cost almost a $ billion p.a.Surely it is far cheaper to train people to work rather than indulging in a life of crime.

Only when crime impacts serverly on productivity will they react.It usually takes a few terms of office before they are forced to act.

If there are no serious deterents to bad behaviour and crime,our society will continue to deteriorate.The most salient factor in keeping Third World countries in the cycle of poverty is crime and corruption.There can be no productivity when everyone is consumed with cheating.

It all starts with us all showing good manners and respect towards each other.The increased rudeness and agression on Sydney Roads is a sign of our social disintergration.

Kalweb – I was wondering - when I read your first post – realising you had got me wrong.

Thanks for the apologies –

However, that you should have suffered at the hands of thugs and rapists is intolerable and something for which you have my every sympathy and sense of outrage – but to then have seen them dealt with “lightly” (as I glean from your post) is even more insufferable, adding insult to your injury.
The “mediocre” are on the bench and they do as much harm by their incompetence as the offenders who, in our name and on our behalf, they are appointed, tenured and paid to “judge” - to a standard to reflect societies expectation (and not the rules of their own individual fairytale expectations).

Victim advocates would not be needed if judges, in the exercise their power, were doing something in closer keeping with community expectation.

Arjay – your observations of the cost of prisoners is correct – one option which the truly heinous deserve (as in those who attacked kalweb) but which we continue to retreat from is the death penalty – a length of rope or a few volts of electricity cost a lot less than keeping some blob of scum in prison for 20 - 30 years.

and to anyone who say "death penalty leaves no room for rehabilitation" - all I can say is - some do not deserve the opportunity to rehabilitate.

Col,there is an alternative to the death penality for really debauched crims with no prospect of rehabilitation.Simply subcontract their internment to third world countries for a quarter of the cost.It gives them much needed income,us cheaper alternatives and really serious deterrents to committing crime.

Arjay - that is a very reasonable suggestion - at least it would get them away from the bleeding hearts who think their is redemption in everyone.

Certainly the facilities offered by say China would be a far cry from the palacial facilities which we provide here and thus a smaller burden on the "law abiding tax payers" - as well as a greater deterent - however - a bullet is still cheaper - and dispenses with the need for "security costs" completely.