Recent events in Melbourne have again illustrated another serious failure in the Parole system. Yet there are no end of experts, telling us that by and large, Parole is a very useful tool in assisting offenders to review their previous lives of crime, and by so doing, manifestly assisting with their own rehabilitation ?

If we the community accept that notion, would it not be better and much safer overall for society, if certain offences occasioning aggravation and extreme violence, having previously been established, then any possibility of Parole, should be forever, extinguished ?

Those category of offences would include, but not limited to, violence against the mentally disabled, women, children, the elder, and all emergency workers, who are pursuing their duties ?

o sung wu

secular humanism has led to a hopelessly balanced set of values in community. a couple of years ago in wa a man went to prison for chopping a few trees down on his own property. He would of received a lighter sentence had he belted someone. Parole frees up full prisons to receive more prisoners. The no smacking brigade and the enemies of fathers have reaped what they have sown (ie streets full of violence). Violent criminals are now convinced they are the victims. Parole very rarely works. Simple fact that the judges in Victoria who only gave the criminal a few years after 8 plus rapes and a string of other offences should lose their job. Parole just continued the mockery of the victims of crime in this instance and led to the enivatable. How the police must despair.

Hi there RUNNER...

I reckon you're right ! That WA example sounds really stupid ? Despite how many trees the man felled (on his own property!) a custodial penalty is quite absurd.

I will agree with many of the experts when they claim that gaol is a facility, for turning petty criminals into harder, more serious criminals. The only way to stop that, is to keep the younger offenders quite separate from the 'hard heads'. But that would cost huge money, and the public don't like seeing precious resources spent on criminals, for whatever reason.

Prison classification is vital in my opinion. Separation, and then segregation, is part of the solution. Keep 'apples with apples', and so on. Carefully sort through the various offenders ensuring none are coupled with divergent groups, thus creating a dangerous environment where one inmate is submissive or yielding to the other. A tough and economically prohibitive ask, I do realize, but it must be done, if the authorities ever hope to curb the high levels of recidivism.

Many thanks for your contribution RUNNER, I appreciate it.

The whole legal system is a failure.

1)In August 2011 Burmese refugee Habiburahman assaulted a serco guard he was initially given a three-month suspended jail sentence.
Concerned the decision would result in him failing the character test to stay in Australia, Habiburahman successfully appealed.
The Northern Territory Court of Appeal has decided not to record a conviction against a refugee .
All at Taxpayer expense.

2) A VIOLENT Tongan man jailed for bashing police, prison officers and a shopping centre security guard has beaten his deportation order.
He has spent 15 of the last 18 years in jail for violent crimes including assaulting police, beating a prison guard with a shower rail, and stabbing a security guard.

In what the sentencing judge described as a "completely unprovoked" attack, the man followed a security guard into the toilet at Campbelltown Mall in 2006 and stabbed him four times.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) says the man has a "very extensive criminal record" and a "long history of violent offending" - but has ruled he should stay in Australia.
Again all at taxpayer expense.

There are lots of more examples that show the whole system is failing.

How long before it is safer to be locked up because all the violent criminals have been released into the community.

You know me o sung, As far as I'm concerned the whole point of law & law enforcement is protection of the public. You would have to be crazy to believe this concentration on the well being & rehabilitation of criminals is in any way successful in that objective.

I want to elect our judges, or at least be able to vote them out if they don't do what the majority want. I also want minimum sentences, with no judge able to listen to "mitigating circumstances". Until we can remove bleeding heart judges we will continue to suffer this stupidity.

Then the parole boards are full of people who feel for the criminal, & don't give a dam which poor innocent is likely to suffer from their releases.

How is this for an idea. Any parole board ordering parole, or judge who gives bail to have to serve 10% of the sentence of any criminal who commits another crime while released on their decision. That just might cause them to be a bit more careful who they let out.

Sentences for rape with violence & armed robbery are far too light. First offense should attract at least 10 years, & a second life. Violent rapists just aren't worth trying to rehabilitate.

About three weeks ago a woman was attacked at work & she only just managed to free herself from her young attacker. He is out on bail. Last weekend a young girl got gang-raped & I'm not sure if her attackers have been found yet. I spoke with some young fellers & said to them "why do you young blokes play up so much". I was told that first of all they do it because they know there's no punishment or hardly any & second if they do go to jail the conditions are exceptionally good in fact much better than at home in the community.
Just think those Magistrates who treat them so nicely are University educated !