Review of Maximum Penalties for Serious Offences

One of our quick surveys on this website asked people to choose which was the most serious out of the following two scenarios:

Scenario 1: Valerie is walking down the street. David forces her into the back of his car and ties her up. He drives to a remote area, and leaves her in the car alone for 1 hour. When he returns and unties her, she escapes without physical injury.

Scenario 2: Valerie walks into a shop where David is working. No-one else is in the shop. David locks the door, forces her to the store room and ties her up. He leaves her there alone for 1 hour. When he returns and unties her, she escapes without physical injury.

Of the people who responded, three-quarters thought that both scenarios were equally serious. Do you agree with this? Why or why not?

The offence of burglary involves breaking into a building or part of a building without permission intending to steal something or commit another offence, like physical or sexual assault or property damage.

The offence of burglary is aggravated if:

• the offender has a real or imitation firearm or offensive weapon; or
• a person is present in the building and the offender knew or was reckless as to whether a person was present in the building or part of the building.

Below are examples of the offences of burglary and aggravated burglary.

Burglary
David breaks into a house, intending to steal property from the house.
read more  …

One of our quick surveys on this website asked people to choose which was the most serious out of the following two scenarios:

Scenario 1 – David throws a rock off a freeway overpass into moving traffic. The rock narrowly misses the windscreen of a car and bounces to the side of the road. No one is physically injured.

Scenario 2 – David punches Victor once in the face, intending to injure him, Victor’s face is bruised.

Of the people who responded, the majority thought that Scenario 1 was more serious.

Do you agree with this? Is an offence that only risks a high level of harm more or less serious than an offence that actually causes a lower level of harm? Why or why not?

In response to our forum question on offence seriousness, some  of you raised the issue of the use of a weapon. There were different views on whether this made an offence more serious and and a range of reasons given for these opinions.

Does using a weapon in committing an offence make it more serious? Does it matter what the offence is? Does the type of weapon make a difference?

In response to our forum question on what makes an offence serious, some people have focused on the offender’s intention, while others have emphasised the consequences of the offence.

Looking at the three scenarios below, are they of equal or different seriousness and why?

Scenario 1 - David enters a service station carrying a gun. David points the gun at Victor who works at the service station and says “Give me money or I will shoot you”. When Victor hesitates, David fires three shots in the air. Victor gives David $500 from the cash register and David leaves with the money.

Scenario 2 read more  …

One of the purposes of a maximum penalty is to indicate how serious each offence is compared to other offences.

During the community panels recently held by the Council, when participants were asked what elements make one offence more serious compared to other offences, two of the elements commonly referred to were:

• the intentions and actions of the offender;
• the consequences and impact of the offence.

However, people differed in their opinion as to how important these elements were in deciding whether one offence is more serious than other offences. Some people thought that one was the most important than the other and others thought that they were equally important.

How important do you think these elements are in deciding what offences are more serious than other offences? Are they equally important or is one always more important than the other? If so, which element is the most important to you?