Both legal and non-legal responses to Christopher Michael Dawson’s criminal case were mostly effective in achieving justice, however, there are factors that have restricted the overall efficiency of the Australian criminal justice system. Whilst Dawson’s eventual sentence resulted in justice for the victim, the legal and non-legal responses involved in the investigation present themselves to be mostly ineffective due to the prolonged process of conviction. Legal efforts made to ensure that the trial process was fair for the offender proved to be effective in achieving justice for Dawson himself. This then led to further retribution for the victim with the effective legal response and law reform of the government; the introduction of ‘no body, no parole’. Legal and non-legal responses have been somewhat effective in achieving justice throughout Chris Dawson’s case, but have shown limits in achieving this due to the convoluted nature and time efficiency of the case. …show more content…
Two coronial inquests were made in February of 2001 and 2003, concluding that Lynette was in fact dead and had been murdered by an individual known to her. (Sterling Law QLD, 2023) Despite the mounting evidence against Dawson, no physical means were found in order to warrant charges against him. Authorities did not provide legal repose, disregarding justice for the victim and her family even after requests were made to convict and further investigate Dawson. He was finally charged in 2018 despite the long-standing investigation into his crimes. The prolonged investigation proved the ineffectiveness of the legal responses in achieving justice, it took an unnecessarily long time for justice to be served for the victim and related
The applicant Mr. Arthur Hutchinson was born in 1941. In October 1983, he broke into a house, murdered a man, his wife and their adult son. Then he repeatedly raped their 18-year old daughter, having first dragged her past her father’s body. After several weeks, he was arrested by the police and chargedwith the offences. During the trial he refused to accept the offence and pleaded for innocence. He denied accepting the killings and sex with the younger daughter.
The conviction of guilty offenders when adhering to the guidelines of the NSW criminal trial process is not difficult based on the presumption of innocence. However, due to features of the criminal trial process, established by the adversarial system of trial, cases can often involve copious amounts of time and money, particularly evident in the case of R vs Rogerson and McNamara where factors such as time and money are demonstrated to be in excess. In addition, characteristics of the adversarial system such as plea bargaining has the power to hinder convictions due to the accused having the authority to hire experienced and expensive lawyers to argue their case, hence maintaining their innocence.
R N Howie and P A Johnson, Annotated Criminal Legislation NSW, 2011-2102, (Lexis Nexis Butterworths 2012) 17769-1774
A landmark case in Australia remains Ridgeway v R, a case considerably substantial as it caused a vast echo sufficient enough to cause legislation to be enacted. The facts in Ridgeway revolved around John Anthony Ridgeway, participating in controlled importation of 140.4 gram of Heroin into Australia. An informant remained unscathed by customs and delivered the drugs to Mr Ridgeway, leading to an arrest by the Australia Federal Police. Chief Justice Mason delivered a decision of Ridgeway not guilty, due to no evidence of the heroin being imported into Australia. The effect of the Ridgeway decision was that all evidence of the commission of an offence is liable to be excluded if that offence was the product of entrapment by law enforcement officers or agents. Presently in Commonwealth common law and statute systems it must be clarified that there is no defence for entrapment. Ridgeway caused an implementation of numerous statutory protections for police officers at Queensland and Commonwealth levels of government. Since Ridgeway, the Crimes Act 1994 has been amended to enact a scheme to authorize participation in otherwise unlawful activities for investigative purposes. Section 15G of the crimes act seeks ‘to provide for the authorisation, conduct and monitoring of controlled operations; to exempt from criminal liability and to indemnify from civil liability law enforcement officers.’ Consequent to this
Just and equitable legal outcomes to evaluate the case include of many expectations that may be met, the outcome of the case was discovered by fair trial which includes correct punishment theories and procedures, Justice Roslyn Atkinson met these through the trial also making it equitable because the punishment theories were applied to the offender Brett Peter Cowan. Punishment options and procedures in Queensland met the current needs of the society throughout this
How to appropriately and fairly carry out criminal justice matters is something that every country struggles with. A major reason for this struggle is the fallibility of the justice system. It is acceptable to concede that the possibility of human error in every case and investigation may lead to a wrongful conviction. In the case of David Milgaard, however, Canada's Criminal Justice System not only erred, but failed grievously, resulting in millions of dollars wasted, in a loss of public confidence in the system, and most tragically, in the robbery of two decades of one man's life. Factors including, but not limited to, the social context at the time of the crime, the social perception of deviance, the influence of the media, and the misconduct of investigating police and prosecution played a substantial role in the subsequent miscarriage of justice.
Wrongful conviction is an issue that has plagued the Canadian Justice System since it came to be. It is an issue that is hard to sort out between horrific crimes and society’s desire to find truth and justice. Incidences of wrongful conviction hit close to home right here in Saskatchewan as well as across the entire nation. Experts claim “each miscarriage of justice, however, deals a blow to society’s confidence in the legal justice system” (Schmalleger, Volk, 2014, 131). Professionals in the criminal justice field such as police, forensic analyst, and prosecutors must all be held accountable for their implications in wrongful convictions. There are several reasons for wrongful convictions such as racial bias, false confessions, jailhouse informants, eyewitness error, erroneous forensic science, inappropriate, professional and institutional misconduct and scientific limitations that society possessed prior to the technological revolution (Roberts, Grossman, 2012, 253 – 259). The introduction of more advanced DNA analysis has been able to clear names and prevent these incidences from occurring as often. As well as the formation of foundations such as The Association of Defense for the Wrongly Convicted (AIDWYC). Unfortunately, mistakes made in the Canadian Justice System have serious life altering repercussions for everyone that is involved. Both systematic and personal issues arise that require deeper and more intense analysis.
From the aforementioned cases, it is evident to see that the Australian legal system has not always been fair and just, however, over time it has been shaped and moulded to clearly represent what is now considered to be fair and just in our society. From the procedures and presumptions of how the legal system is administered to the law and regulations which determine what is the crime and punishment – these are based on the transparency, equality, freedom from bias, human rights, and established set of rules adhere to the justice and fairness of the legal system.
In today’s Canadian society, it is certain that criminal law is to serve and protect and its fundamental purpose is to prevent crime and punish offenders. However, there have been cases where criminal law has punished the offender who turned out to be innocent. A conviction is needed to show that the system is not in disrepute and to keep order and people safe in society. If a criminal cannot be caught then people will look down upon the system in disgrace. In many cases, officers will arrest an individual who fits a certain description that they know will lead to an arrest and conviction. In the case of Guy Paul Morin it shows how the system failed in aiding the innocent who abide to the law. The law is established to protect those who are innocent from being targeted because of the law.
But as will be discussed, there are major flaws in the Australian criminal justice system with issues focussing on three main concerns: (i) lenient sentencing in the criminal justice system particularly with white-collar and blue-collar crimes (i) recidivism and lack of support for offenders (iii) public safety concerns. This essay will examine issues with the Australian prison system, and explore the punishment of shaming and if it is an effective method in preventing general and specific deterrence using sociological frameworks and theories.
The gross over representation of indigenous people in the Australian criminal justice system (CJS) is so disturbingly evident that it is never the source of debate. Rather it is the starting point of discussions centring on the source and solutions to this prominent social, cultural and political issue. Discourse surrounds not only the economic and social disadvantage of indigenous communities, but also the systemic racism and continuing intergenerational trauma resulting for the unjust colonisation of a nation which has profited whites at the detriment to indigenous people throughout history. In respect to the currently CJS, trepidations are raised by indigenous communities around the lack of culturally diverse laws and punishments within the system. The overtly western system does not provide a viable space for indigenous
Is this type of legislation justified? In simple terms no. It removes basic human rights such as the Common Law belief of innocent until proven guilty, it also takes away the adversarial nature of our justice system and replaces it with the possibility of arbitrary imprisonment (NSW Law Commission, 2004). This type of legislation also fails to adequately balance the goals of Imprisonment instead focuses on the punitive goals and contradicts the goal of rehabilitation.
Punishment occurs to individuals who break the law. It is also used to maintain the level of crime and to protect community members in Australia. To determine that society is content with maintaining the crime rate, this essay will discuss punishment types given to offenders and how society justifies the use punishment. Additionally, providing a brief overview of the community correction and prions rates to show that communities prefer to incarcerate lawbreakers. Highlighting that crime rates are being maintained by looking at the personal crime rate for assault before concluding that Australian society feel safe enough to allow the criminal justice system to sustain the crime rate.
The criminal justice system views any crime as a crime committed against the state and places much emphasis on retribution and paying back to the community, through time, fines or community work. Historically punishment has been a very public affair, which was once a key aspect of the punishment process, through the use of the stocks, dunking chair, pillory, and hangman’s noose, although in today’s society punishment has become a lot more private (Newburn, 2007). However it has been argued that although the debt against the state has been paid, the victim of the crime has been left with no legal input to seek adequate retribution from the offender, leaving the victim perhaps feeling unsatisfied with the criminal justice process.
Urbas, G. (2000) ‘The Age of Criminal Responsibility’, Australian institute of criminology, trends and issues in crime and criminal justice, no.181., viewed 20 March 2015, 1.