Renae Lawrence in Hot Water Again
Despite appeals for privacy, the media has hounded Renae Lawrence, the recently freed fellow member of the so-chosen Bali Nine, interrogating every detail of her post-prison life.
With the Daily Mail "reporting" last calendar week she had "purchased half a dozen breadstuff rolls" at an Aldi supermarket, it seems no detail is besides mundane to escape comment.
The media pursuit was so intense following Lawrence's arrival back in Australia from Indonesia last calendar week that she was forced to bypass the baggage carousel, sprint to her car, and as the pack of reporters closed in, cover her face with a towel.
There has likewise been much speculation over whether or not Lawrence should face criminal charges for outstanding warrants issued by NSW constabulary in 2005.
NSW police allege that Lawrence had been involved in a car theft and high-speed hunt from Sydney's inner west to the Central Coast, along with swain Bali Nine member Matthew Norman, in March 2005. Norman is serving a life sentence in Kerobokan prison.
Lawrence was unable to attend courtroom for the declared automobile theft in 2005 as she was and then in an Indonesia prison, pending trial for attempting to smuggle 2.7 kilograms of heroin into Australia.
She attended Waratah constabulary station in Newcastle in respect of the warrants on Fri, a solar day later on her arrival dorsum in Newcastle. Constabulary granted Lawrence conditional bail, and she is expected to appear at Newcastle Local Court on December vi.
Among the suggestions is that she deserves leniency due to her time spent in prison.
Representing the opposing view, Dwelling house Affairs Government minister Peter Dutton — e'er eager to comment on criminal matters exterior his remit — said: "If you've committed offences in our country you need to face the justice system here."
Lawrence entitled to presumption of innocence
Amid all this speculation, what is overlooked is that Lawrence is entitled to the presumption of innocence.
She has not fifty-fifty had the opportunity to appear in courtroom, let alone entered a plea of guilty or non guilty to the charges.
With and then many discretionary steps in the criminal justice procedure, it is impossible to prejudge how Lawrence's outstanding criminal charges volition be resolved.
How every criminal matter proceeds depends on myriad discretionary choices exercised by police, and for more serious matters also the NSW Managing director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). The constabulary are tasked with deciding whether or not to investigate, charge or abort someone. Police may instead choose to ignore a matter, warn or caution the person.
Police prosecutors, who may or may not have legal qualifications, prosecute less serious offences, such as offensive language or behaviour, modest drink driving matters and small assaults. Meanwhile legally qualified practitioners working for the DPP prosecute more than serious "indictable" offences.
Where the person faces multiple charges, the prosecutor and the defendant's lawyer (if the accused is represented) often negotiate the number and seriousness of the charges, in a process known as charge negotiation.
Accordingly, it is by no ways inevitable that a suspected offence will go along to trial.
Is prosecution in the public interest?
The resource of the state are finite, and in many cases it may be undesirable, unfair or unjust for a criminal trial to take identify. Instead, prosecutors must consider whether or not criminal prosecution is in the public interest. This is the paramount consideration for a decision to prosecute an offence.
Whether or not the prosecution of a affair is in the public interest involves consideration of a number of not-exhaustive factors.
One factor that may be relevant to Lawrence's case is the "staleness" of the alleged offence, given that the incidents were recorded more than 10 years agone.
Other matters for consideration include the seriousness or triviality of an alleged offence; whether or not the proceedings or a conviction would be unduly harsh or oppressive; and an accused's willingness to co-operate and assist in the investigation of an alleged offence or other offences.
Importantly, the Prosecutorial Guidelines provide that whatsoever such decision should not be influenced past "possible media or customs reaction to the decision". In addition, political pressure level should take no bearing on the decision.
Lawrence 'paid her price for her sins'
If Lawrence'due south thing does proceed to trial and she pleads not guilty, her charges will take to exist proven by the prosecution to the criminal standard of "beyond reasonable dubiety". This is a key tenet of the criminal justice system.
If, on the other paw, Lawrence enters a plea of guilty to the charges, the matters volition go on to sentence.
Could a judgement served overseas mitigate whatever sentence imposed for an unrelated criminal matter? In response to this issue, Dutton has suggested that a judgement served elsewhere "doesn't give you credit when y'all get back to Australia".
Police force Commissioner Mick Fuller presented a more than nuanced perspective, stating" "I recollect she paid her price for her sins. Nevertheless we will still accept those … matters to court."
The sentencing of an individual takes identify following a sentencing hearing, in which bear witness is presented past the prosecutor and the defence. The presiding magistrate or judge must consider the evidence presented, including the relevant objective and subjective features of a person's example.
Subjective factors may include if and when the offender has entered a plea of guilty, any rehabilitation undergone during a period of delay, whether the offender has demonstrated 18-carat remorse for their actions, and any aid given to law enforcement for past and nowadays criminal investigations. This includes help to authorities in other countries.
'Instinctive synthesis' guides court
Another consideration, which may mitigate or aggravate the sentence imposed, is whether an accused has minimal prior convictions or a substantial criminal record.
After weighing upwards all the relevant factors, the court then hands down a sentence which is proportionate to the gravity of the offence. This process is known equally "instinctive synthesis".
With all these factors taken into account it is impossible, and undesirable, to prejudge how Lawrence's outstanding criminal charges will be resolved.
This is especially so when the facts of high-contour cases are distorted through a narrow and sensationalised media lens.
Discretion pervades every step of the criminal process and police and prosecutors must exist able to practice that discretion considerately and free from political or media pressure.
Dr Elyse Methven is a lecturer in the UTS Constabulary faculty.
Posted , updated
Source: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-28/bali-nine-renae-lawrence-car-theft-nsw-sentence-jail-time/10557670
0 Response to "Renae Lawrence in Hot Water Again"
Post a Comment