|
|
The
Christchurch Civic Creche Case |
|
|
|
|
It's not uncommon for
people convicted of serious crimes – and sometimes not so serious crimes – to
claim they are innocent of the charges against them and their being behind
bars is a gross miscarriage of justice. In a very small number of cases the
claims turn out to be true and after an often lengthy battle, the innocent
are set free. But it is not easy to fight against a judicial system that puts
people in prison and the obvious solution is to reduce the risk of getting it
wrong in the first place. Of course that's easier
said than done and the burden of proof – of innocence or guilt – is not
always an easy one to determine. But now a retired High Court judge, Sir
Thomas Thorp, is recommending an independent authority to oversee
controversial cases. He has analysed 53 applications to the Ministry of
Justice that are claimed to be miscarriages of justice and found just over a
quarter of the applications raised issues in need of further investigation. Innocent people can be
found guilty for a variety of reasons – a genuine error of identification by
the victim, a faulty prosecution case, a jury that makes its decision on
emotion rather than fact, to name just a few. In recent years, new technology
and improved scientific detection tools such as DNA testing have helped
establish guilt or innocence, but can also lead to mistakes being made. The
case of David Dougherty, who was wrongly convicted of rape in 1993 and spent
three and a half years in jail for a crime he did not commit, is a classic
example. It was DNA that finally cleared him of the charges when an Auckland
scientist expressed concern about discrepancies in the DNA evidence in the
case. More recently, three
teenage girls spent seven months in Auckland's Mt Eden women's prison after
being found guilty of aggravated robbery and sentenced to prison for 18 to 24
months. They were awarded compensation, but were unhappy with the amount and
took an unsuccessful case to the High Court for more money. They could end up
with nothing once court costs have been paid. Sir Thomas' proposal
for an independent authority looks on the face of it to be a good idea, but
it is inevitable that should such an system be set up, there will be a huge
upsurge in applications for cases to be reopened. The justice system often
seems reluctant to take a fresh look at cases that have already been closed,
and it is no easy task to fight against that attitude. A system that makes it
easier for justice to be done has to be worth investigating. One more thing: The
news that New Zealand's youngest killer, baby-faced Bailey Kurariki, has been
refused parole because of his violence in prison is a very good reason why
someone like Kurariki should be incarcerated somewhere away from hardened
adult criminals. Kurariki, who is now 16, was sentenced to seven years' jail
for his role in the death of pizza delivery man Michael Choy. Kurariki has
been in 19 fights with older inmates in Hawke's Bay prison in the past year.
Because of the publicity surrounding the case, it was inevitable that he
would be a target for older lags. The teenager deserves no sympathy for his
crime, but with the increase in juvenile serious offending more urgent
attention needs to be given to housing people like Kurariki where they have
some chance to be rehabilitated. That will never happen if he stays where he
is. |
