Free Press, February 15, 2016
Free Press, February 15, 2016
ACT’s regular bulletin
Three
Strikes
ACT’s three strikes legislation has
been a success already. Statistics show strike warnings are
deterring offenders from reoffending. Even opponents are
having to admit that the policy is working to reduce violent
crime.
The Two Strike
Provision
A lesser known aspect of the three
strikes legislation is that an offender convicted of a
grievous murder should be sentenced to life without parole
on the second strike. It was an answer to the common
criticism of three strikes: why on earth do you wait for
three?
Three Strike Outs
So far
three second strikers have been convicted of a grievous
murder requiring life without parole under the law. In all
three cases the sentencing judge has refused to give life
without parole.
Say, What?
The
judges are not breaking the law, just interpreting it.
Three strikes has a safety valve letting judges avoid giving
the mandatory sentence if they believe it would be
‘manifestly unjust’ to give it. It just so happens that
all three cases so far have been exceptional.
A Pattern
We at Free Press
have an abiding respect for the judiciary. We understand
that the judges made their decision with all the evidence
before them. However we note that the manifestly unjust
clause was only ever meant to be a safety valve and three
out of three is a pattern.
Will the Crown
Appeal?
The Crown is already appealing the first
two decisions. We wonder if they will appeal the third and
latest decision, made last week in Hamilton, that it would
be manifestly unjust to give life without parole to a man
who bashed an old man to death in a public toilet. Watch
this space.
Burglary
In 2014 ACT
campaigned on three strikes to burglary. Even David
Seymour, who would normally rather talk about tax,
regulation and education than crime, was converted to the
policy by door knocking burglary victims.
Fortress Epsom
The Epsom electorate
has a lot of stuff worth nicking. The houses are fortified
with electronic gates, intercoms, and alarms as a result.
People have a right to be safe but most would prefer not to
lose the openness.
Victimisation
The other thing about
burglary is that it is not only about nicking stuff, it is
about invading private space. David Seymour has met
constituents who are nervous wrecks after being burglarised
three times. One man had his copper spouting nicked right
off his house (technically not a burglary because the house
wasn’t entered but he was still pretty pissed off).
Nine in Ten Get Away
People in Epsom
report burglaries because it is a requirement for claiming
on insurance. In less affluent communities there is not
much point in reporting it because people lack insurance and
they know burglars have only a 10 per cent chance of being
caught. Burglary is a blight on those trying to make ends
meet and get ahead.
We Tried
ACT
believes we need to lock up the burglars who are caught. On
Thursday David asked Parliament for leave to debate ACT’s
Three Strikes Burglary Bill. The Bill would mean three
burglary convictions get an automatic three years. Any MP
can object to leave and several Labour and Green MPs did.
Parliament moved on to debate the Home and Community Support
(Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill
instead.
We’ll Keep
Trying
Three Strikes Burglary is a policy whose
time has come. ACT will keep seeking avenues to make this
Bill a law, the National Party should adopt it as policy and
New Zealand First should cross the floor to support it.
Those are the natural supporters, but the Maori Party should
consider whether Maori are disproportionately affected by
unreported burglary.Free Press suspects yes.
Don’t Forget
ACT’s conference is
now under two weeks away. It is not too late to register
here:www.act.org.nz/events
ends