Andrew Little talking rubbish – three strikes a great success

7th November 2017

Andrew Little says that the three strikes law has caused a lot of harm. Sensible Sentencing says this is absolute nonsense and that on the contrary, three strikes has worked exactly as intended, and is a great success.

“Mr Little needs to tell New Zealanders exactly why he thinks three strikes has caused a lot of harm and give some examples of cases where he thinks individuals have been treated unjustly by the law” said Sensible Sentencing founder Garth Mc Vicar.

“Little will look in vain for cases of poor young boys doing 25 to life for stealing a pizza or a set of golf clubs, or any such case. The reason is very simple: the law was carefully crafted to avoid those sort of cases which were sometimes seen in other jurisdictions, and Mr Little knows that. I went to California in 2007 with our legal advisors to learn how to avoid such consequences here, and our law makes such cases impossible”.

“Perhaps Mr Little thinks third striker Kingi Ratima has been treated unjustly? Ratima is serving a third strike sentence for yet another robbery, after an extensive criminal history pre three strikes. Corrections says he is ‘at high risk of reoffending, and high risk of causing harm to others’. The public is currently protected from him for ten years – when does Mr Little think he should get out?” said McVicar.

“What about Rhys Ross, who is serving his second strike sentence in full without parole for holding a knife to a pregnant woman’s stomach and demanding the occupants of the house he had invaded pay a ‘tax’ to the Black Power gang for being in the area? Ross is doing five years jail without parole for that – what sentence does Mr Little think would have been just?”

“Hugh Tareha is serving 12 years nine months without parole for dragging an 87 year old woman inside her house and attempting to rape her. Later the same day, before the police arrested him, he tried to do the same thing to another elderly lady aged 73. Tareha has a history of violence, indecent assault, and home invasion. Mr Little needs to tell us how long he thinks Tareha should serve inside if not 12 years. Should it instead be the four or five years he would have served pre three strikes?”

“Little cannot come out with a nonsensical statement such as he has without giving some examples. We can provide dozens of examples of how the law is working exactly as intended – locking up serious violent offenders for significantly longer. What examples does Mr Little have for the public to consider?” said McVicar.

“Mr Little also knows that in the five years after three strikes came into force, there were 35% fewer second strike offenders convicted than there were in the five years prior – assuming three strikes had been in force then. That is what’s called ‘specific deterrence’ – deterrence of first strikers not keen to do a second. What does Mr Little say about those figures?”

“So what exactly then is the harm Little refers to? Both we and the public would be very keen to know”
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/shows/2017/11/three-strikes-law-repeal-won-t-be-retrospective-little.html

ENDS

© Scoop Media