Discretion In The Australian Criminal Justice System

In the criminal justice system, discretion is often performed by the police, prosecutors, judges and juries, correctional officials and

In his book that was produced at least seven years ago and sought to look at the criminal justice process, Nicola Padfield

1: Before I begin, for those within the audience who are unsure of what bail is, it is the temporary release of a person awaiting trial. We imposed this very important question to you tonight because since its first introduction in 1978, there have been more than 85 amendments to the Bail Act. We, all together are going to investigate why, how and who pushed for these amendments and reforms.

The Australian Criminal Justice system has an intricate and diverse structure that makes it one of the most unique systems in the world. The Commonwealth of Australia was approved by the British Parliament in 1900 and came into existence on January 1, 1901. The federal constitution combined British and American practices, with a parliamentary government, but with two houses - the popularly elected House of Representatives and Senate representing the former colonies. This began the start of a new era of policing. (Findlay, Odgers, Yeo). The Commonwealth of Australia is a federalist government composed of a national government and six State governments. There are nine different criminal justice systems in Australia - six states, two territories, and one federal. The eight States and Territories have powers to enact their own criminal law, while the Commonwealth has powers to enact laws. Criminal law is administered principally through the federal, State and Territory police. (Chappell, Wilson, Heaton). In this essay an in depth analysis of the Australian criminal justice system will be given, along with a comparison to the United States criminal justice system throughout the essay. As well as an evaluation of the effectiveness of the system and finally a brief summary of how the Australian criminal justice system structure could be improved to better suit the evolving society. Australia has a complex and very intuitive system of policing that

Cunneens (2007) articles showed relative statistics, showing the negative effects of the relationship between the two groups, whether it is one groups wrong doing or not, the evidence shows that there is an issue that needs urgent attention and resolving. “Indigenous people were 17 times more likely to be held in custody than non-Indigenous people in Australia” this raw fact can be looked at from two different perspectives; number one the indigenous community are victimised by the police, or two a major percentage of the indigenous community are being involved in crime. Considering the indigenous population compared to the non indigenous community is so small, it does

In Section 4 of the Bail Act 1978, it states that ‘authorisation to be at liberty under this Act, instead of in custody’ . This is otherwise known as bail, the act of permitting a person to a brief period of freedom who

The Public Policy of Crime and Criminal Justice, by Nancy E. Marion and Willard M. Oliver. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2006 by Pearso

To map the development and recognition of disadvantage stemming from Aboriginality as a mitigating factor when sentencing Indigenous offenders in Australian courts.

The over-representation of Indigenous people in the criminal justice system is a large problem in society and reasons as to why this may be occurring need to be examined (Walker & McDonald, 1995; AIC, 2013). Indigenous Australians make up less than three per cent of the overall Australian population, however Indigenous people are over-represented in Australian prison populations, with imprisonment rates that are around 12 times those of the rest of the Australian population (AIC, 2013). Rates of over-representation are even higher in juvenile detention, with a 10-17 year old Indigenous person being around 24 times more likely to be in detention than a non-Indigenous person of the same age (AIC, 2013; Cunneen & White, 2011). Indigenous Australians overrepresentation in the criminal justice system is usually due to offences pertaining to violence and public disorder (ABS, 2010; Hogg & Carrignton, 2006). This is endorsed by the fact that Indigenous Australians currently make up 40 per cent of those imprisoned for assault offences (AIC, 2013). The over representation of Indigenous Australians in the criminal justice system may be attributed to a variety of reasons, known as risk factors (AIC, 2013).

In what ways is the indigenous justice paradigm in conflict with the principles of the traditional, adversarial American criminal justice system? In what ways do the principles of Native American justice complement more mainstream correctional initiatives?

Provision [SCRGSP], 2005; Jeffries and Bond, 2012). It is also widely discussed that there is an overrepresentation of Indigenous Australians in the criminal justice system itself (Jeffries and Bond, 2009), representing up to one quarter of prisoners in Australia (Makkai and Payne, 2003; Payne, 2005). This essay will address the current issues that Indigenous Australians face within the criminal justice system, particularly, with courts. The aim of this essay besides addressing these issues will also be to provide suggestions or alternatives that may help resolve the presented issues and improve the experience for Indigenous Australians in court.

Observers have noted in recent years a shift in government policy toward what is perceived as ‘redressing the balance’ in criminal justice, to be more advantageous to victims and less so to the accused. (have implications for current exclusionary rules)

White R & Haines F, Crime and Criminology: An Introduction, 2nd ed, Oxford University Press, Melbourne, 2000.

One of the earliest cases of bailment was Brabant & Co. v. King which held that a bailee must “exercise the same degree of care towards the preservation of the goods entrusted to him from injury which might reasonably be expected from a skilled storekeeper, acquainted with the risk to be apprehended either from the character of the storehouse itself, or of its locality.” The Southcote’s case held that a common bailee was strictly liable for any damage or loss of the goods in his possession even if the goods were stolen by force. But this was changed in Coggs V. Bernard which sets out the duties owed by a bailee and the six types of bailment.

On a bail bond, the accused and the sureties are the obligors, the accused being the principal, and the government as the obliged. In the event the conditions of the bail bond are