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.