Judges and Parole Board should be charged
Stephen Franks Tuesday,
6 September 2005 Press Releases - Crime & Justice
The Christian Harry Brusey case encapsulates both the immorality of current criminal law, and how it will be repaired
under ACT's criminal justice policy, ACT Justice spokesman Stephen Franks said today.
"Future offending by Brusey was absolutely predictable. If the smug prigs who've been in charge of our justice system
had to face the same tests of foreseeability and negligence as they impose on drivers and employers and sport organising
volunteers, they would all be bankrupt or in prison.
"In April 2001 when Brusey was sentenced by Judge Dalmer for serious firearms thefts he had more than 90 previous
convictions. The Judge said "it was frightening that it needed only a few wires to be cut and a simple jemmy to break
through the defences." This sanctimonious criticism of the victim described a monitored alarm system.
"Brusey would still be in prison now if he had not been released on parole from that sentence, despite having committed
another offence while on bail for the firearms charges.
"By December 2003, Brusey was before the court again on robbery, grievous bodily harm and indecent assault charges
involving women in two home invasions," Mr Franks said.
"Now in 2005, Brusey's record shows he's been able to add 130 offences to the list he had in 2001, including the three
sleeping women violated and bashed in the recent cases. Even taking account of multiple charges, those 130 offences
represent many lives blighted, countless sleepless nights and years of future anxiety. They all happened while he should
have been locked up where he could do no harm to innocent people, if even one of Judge Dalmer's sentences had meant what
it said.
"The parole system forces the courts to lie with every sentence, but the judges are complicit in not protesting every
time they are forced to lie, and in not giving maximum sentences to ensure they do justice despite parole.
"The suffering of the three recent women victims should be on the conscience of Justice Minister Phil Goff, every member
of the Parole Board, and all judges involved over the years.
ACT's criminal justice policy would have protected all those women in four ways:
a) Abolition of parole would have kept him in prison throughout the relevant times.
b) Cumulative sentencing would be keeping him in prison for good.
c) Under our Kiwi version of "three strikes and you're out" he would have drawn the maximum applicable sentence on all
of his recent convictions.
d) If he was out, under our strict post sentence surveillance and open criminal record he would not have had to leave
his cell phone at a crime scene to be caught.
ENDS