| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: |
RE-TRYING people found not guilty of serious crimes would destroy an 800-year-old principle that has served Australia well in protecting citizens' rights, legal groups said today.
The New South Wales Government will this week introduce laws to abolish the longstanding double jeopardy rule for serious crimes such as murder, manslaughter and gang rape carrying sentences of 20 years or more.
Under the rule, once a person has been acquitted of an offence they cannot be charged with it again.
With the Opposition flagging its support, NSW will become the first state in Australia to overturn the convention.
Premier Morris Iemma today said the move would allow authorities to make use of advances in DNA and other technology which could prove who had committed a crime.
“It's common sense to make use of technology where it can provide certainty and clarity,” Mr Iemma said.
“If someone had been acquitted and there was fresh and compelling evidence that in fact they were guilty, using DNA technology to prove that and provide certainty and clarity and greater justice is a commonsense measure.”
But the NSW Bar Association says the Government's move is a political manoeuvre to win votes, and could lead to people being put in jail unfairly.
“What the Government is doing with this bill is overturning a few hundred years worth of legal history and legal principle,” NSW Bar Association treasurer Robert Toner SC said.
“That's a principle that's existed for a long time and it is part of the matrix of protections for people's liberties in our community.”
Mr Toner said despite new technologies it was important that the original judgment was respected.
“Our concern is that this really is part of a reflex response to the law and order debate with the Government not wanting to be seen as weak on crime,” he said.
But Martha Jabour from the Homicide Victims' Support Group said overturning double jeopardy would bring much relief to the family of a homicide victim whose killer had walked free despite evidence they were guilty.
“With the advances especially with DNA evidence it will give us a second chance at having these people being brought to justice,” Ms Jabour said.
The NSW Council of Civil Liberties said innocent people could end up in jail.
“We are concerned that once you start going down this path it means that people can never be certain, even after they've faced trial and been acquitted,” vice-president David Bernie said.
“They should be able to know that they will not face trial again.” |
interesting, and surprised i hadnt heard more about this before a news update tonight.
whilst i understand the role of double-jeopardy, it seems a bit silly to ignore compelling evidence which could come to light somewhere down the road. police & the courts will have to be very careful in not undermining the new law though. legal harassment of defendants is the prime reason the law existed in the first place.
so, at the moment im a bit 50-50, kinda hedging my bets til we see how it works in practice.
you? |
|
|
