| |
Mission Statement and Goals
Victims before criminals - When a conflict of interests arises between the rights of a victim and a criminal, the victims rights takes precedence even when, in its fulfillment, the rights of the criminal may not only be ignored but actively infringed upon.
Justice before legalism - The law should stand to serve justice not hinder it. If the mere application of law undermines apparent justice, then the legal principle should be considered subservient to the dictates of justice.
Victims of crime eligible for legal aid assistance to pursue justice.
A complete overhaul of the criminal justice system - The justice system to be predicated on the three prioritized goals of crime reduction and prevention; siding with victims of crime and the law-abiding; and the re-instatement of punishment, shame, and retribution as legitimate means to deter re-offending.
Assets of those punishable by imprisonment for a term of three years or longer are to be seized for victim support unless proven to be lawfully obtained.
Everyone accused and charged of crime will have a limited right to legal aid - those found guilty will have the full cost of their legal aid bill as a debt to be paid and/or worked off during their prison term except and unless, they have pleaded guilty.
Fundamental changes to the criminal justice system to be assented by referendum. |
|
|
Opinion
An interesting conversation
I was privy to an interesting conversation recently about GH’s. (gormless hoons [aka] boy racers) An adult observed the following: Who imports the cars GH’s drive – adults. Who are the immoral financers of the vehicles at a dollar down and a dollar a day – adults. Who manufactures the go fast add on bits and pieces they buy – adults. Who fits them (in the main) – adults. Who turns a blind eye when it is one of their own kids – adults. The suggestion was the next time an adult complains about a GH they have influence over, they pause as they pass a mirror.
Having said that what do we do about the GH’s who terrorise the population at most uncivilised hours? They need to know their behaviour isn’t acceptable and they must live with the consequences. Third party insurance isn’t the solution it’s too easy to circumvent. Three strikes and out is the answer. First offence the car is impounded (on the spot, passengers walk home) and the owner and driver (if they are different people) are hit with a substantial fine – to be paid within 28 days while the car is impounded, the car is sold to pay the fine if they don’t. If it doesn’t bring enough cash an order is put on their wages or benefits until it is paid. Second offence the same fine and the car is sold without appeal, balance (shortfall off wages or benefits) to the state. Third offence, same fine and the car is crushed. The owner/driver attends the crushing (in their orange PD, XGitmo boiler suits) together with the media, no acceptations, end of story. No room for bleating libertarian lawyers hell bent on funding their own lifestyles, crying about the fact the GH cant get to work to earn the money to pay the fine. There are buses, bikes and walking!
Before all this happens judges and JP’s have to be given the power to apply what will be new strengthened laws. Can you hear the cries of anguish from the limp wristed, dewey eyed, gilt ridden, PC libertarians. (mostly lawyers with a vested interest in perpetuating crime you’ll notice)
As GH’s are driven from town they move to terrorise the lifestyler's on the fringe of the city. What has amazed me is farmer Brown and his neighbours haven’t blocked each end of a road with a tractor and hay trailer. Then come in with their front end loaders, dogs, stock whips and some vigilantes with baseball bats, tow truck drivers and panel beaters would doubtless be lurking in the shadows. They’d cause a little mayhem but where would you find an unbiased jury to convict them?
Before the libertarians start bleating about me fostering vigilantes, they should remember vigilantes been round for thousands of years. Doubtless I’m not the first who has suggested this as one way to curb the problem.
There is another, whether it would, work only trying will tell. How about making it ‘cool’ to have the quietest car in the group? One, which whispered along and the stereo was the dominant sound. Opps haven’t thought of that one they said. The city elders could give out awards for the winners, how about that?
Lou Harrison-Smith is the moderator of this website. |
|