Aussies: Do you think prison sentences for violent crimes are too short?

Question

Is it right that a man got eight years for bashing a woman to death and hiding her body!!?

Keith Herbert Smart bashed his son's ex-gf to death, hid her body, refused to say where it was, and his minimum term is 8 years!! (Eleven maximum.)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/05/13/2243030.htm

http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/man-jailed-over-young-mums-death/20080513-2djs.html

Can you believe this sentence?

Do you agree that property crimes get disproportionately longer sentences?

(I know of a man in Victoria who is serving 11 years for white-collar crime.)

I don't advocate more violence in retribution, I don't condone corporal or capital punishment: I just want sentences that reflect the gravity of the crime. Don't you?

Answer 1

I definately agree. They should have thrown the book at that animal! Australia's laws are ridiculous, we need much more harsher punnishments and longer sentencing.

Answer 2

YES YES YES .....

shortly .. it will be the 17th anniversary( 19th July) of the murder of an 18 yr old girl who worked in the same shopping centre as myself ... The man who murdered her ... also worked in the same shopping centre ( he was a butcher by trade)... he recieved 8 yrs for her murder ..

I think .. with good behaviour .. he would have been out in less time .. so let's say he served seven years ... Her parents .. Her friends.. her little brother .. her Boyfriend . .have had to learn to live without her........

she has been gone .. almost as long as she lived .. and she should have lived to be a little old lady in a nursing home .. but she was snuffed out in a moment .. He lives ...

I appreciate your opinion re capital punishment ... but 1991 was a year that turned me back to believe that some people definitely should be made to forfeit their right to breath oxygen.. was a very bad year in melbourne. I would be contented though .. .if life meant life.. you take a life .. you stay in prison for the rest of your life....

I do not understand how the theft of money/property can be considered crimes that have longer sentences than the theft of a life.....

Answer 3

yes, infact i think murders should be sentenced to death. cuz u killed some1 and oh you go to jail for 10 years and u come out and cause more trouble. No offence but, some aussies never learnt the lesson

Answer 4

You know this is such a tough one. I think the sentences definitely do not reflect the crimes, but then how do you come up with appropriate time? This crime was shocking, and the fact that it was pre meditated and he even thought clearly enough to hide the body is enough evidence for me that he definitely has problems, but should he be released back into society with this knowledge? Dunno.

Having been the survivor of a violent home invasion last year that left me in hospital for over a month, split my family, and caused me to have to move across to the other side of Australia due to the harrassment of the offenders family...I am extremely anxious about the sentencing policies of our courts. Will have to cross that bridge when it finally happens.

Answer 5

I totally agree with you. !*!

My man got shot 11 years ago, the guy only got 5 years for attempted murder, but was out in less than two years!

It's a real pity sentences don't mean what they say, I mean 'life' is NEVER life,,,,

Answer 6

The first thing you have to realise is that no press report of a sentencing hearing is complete, accurate or even a reasonable description of the factors that go into the sentencing decision.

The second thing you have to realise is that research by criminologists shows that the general population is more lenient with sentences than judges when all material the judge sees is presented to them.

The third thing you have to realise that politicians perceive being "tough on crime" is a vote winner.  Actually doing something about the causes of crime, or anything to reduce crime, costs money, but complaining about lenient sentences and even increasing sentences is a cheap, but ineffective, way to look tough.

The fourth thing you have to realise is that the severity or leniency of sentence makes no difference to a criminal's decision to commit a crime.  The reason is simple - no criminal expects to get caught.  Research consistently demonstrates that harshness of penalty makes no difference to the rate of reoffending.  What does make a difference is the likelihood of apprehension.

Personally, my mental compass has no way of determining equivalence between property crimes and crimes against the person, but that is apparently my problem.

Answer 7

No I don't. I don't think any jail sentence that is passed down will ever fit the crime.. If you have ever visited a prison they are awful places and I think there is a better way of dealing with people rather than just locking them in prison for a set period of time.

Answer 8

Yes, I agree it's not fair, but there's a lack of evidence and the location and condition of the body so the man cannot be convicted to a higher sentence. According to the Amendments, a man is innocent until proven guilty, and there's little to prove him guilty besides the fact that he admits the crime.

Answer 9

Sorry love but i have to say this--S HIT YEAH!!!...

Back in the late 80's my big bro was sentenced to The Pen for 3 years-Drugs,Theft,Burgs,Assult..You name it he did it(apart from rape and murder).....

Instead of giving him 3 years the bugger was out in 1 and 1/2 years,i wish they had of made the sentence stick-then he might still be here,he OD 6 months later,if they had of kept him in MAYBE? he would be here now...

Answer 10

I agree with your views. Sometimes a simple "crime" gets a harsh sentence while those horrible crimes get sentences that are so ridiculously inappropriate! I wonder what the present legal system is doing?

Answer 11

I don't know about the case you mention and won't comment on that, but I do believe that sentencing for all types of crimes is incredibly inconsistent.

It's not that the law doesn't cater for longer sentences, but that magistrates and judges don't seem to be realistic and aware of community expectations when sentencing. Also, juries should be made aware of previous convictions for similar crimes. How often have we seen a violent criminal with more than one previous conviction for the same type of crime, be aquitted because he had a clever lawyer who managed to convince the jury that the accused was a decent and honourable person who wouldn't dream of doing such a thing. The appalling  'provocation' defence  has seen a number of dreadfully violent crimes go virtually unpunished in recent times. Most of us have been badly provoked at one time or another (I certainly have), but most of us are civilized and don't react violently.

The most ridiculous thing to me is 'time off for good behaviour'. If someone is sentenced to 10 years, that's what they should serve instead of 6 years and 3 months because they found God or something. If they don't behave themselves and work towards rehabilitation, the sentence should be increased - that should be sufficient incentive to behave well. I also think that concurrent sentences are a joke. If you do 10 crimes, you should serve at least a few times, not just 1.

I agree that property and white collar crimes seem to get longer sentences (unless you're a celebrity), but I guess it's because they're often easier to prove. It certainly seems wrong that the sentence for stealing a few thousand (or even million) dollars should be far longer than that for a violent crime where someone's life is taken or destroyed. Violent crime doesn't affect only the victim, but whole families and the wider community and sentences should reflect this. I don't believe that sentences have any effect on how much crime is committed, particularly with violent crime which is often unpremeditated, but longer sentences would at least ensure that the perpetrators were out of the community for longer and thus unable to reoffend.

Answer 12

So true.

I was the 4th and final victim of a serial rapist, who decided to go out with a bang. By trying to murder me and leaving my body in a swamp!

Do you know what this 17 year old got????

3 lousy, stinking years in Terrana Youth Centre. With a pool, gym, TV in rooms, tennis court, school etc.

What a joke!

I got life thanks to him.

It would be a TOTALLY different story if it happened to the Judge or his/her relative.

That was 22 years ago now and although I would still gladly castrate this man with no pain relief, I still think he got off lightly.

Answer 13

I think judges are way out of step with reality.   Here in Western Australia we had a man convicted of attempted murder using a sword, he will be serving a short sentence and be out in 18 months.   You can get more for a driving offence!!!!!   Some deterent eh!

If pplneedu can give us a better answer to prison, then lets hear it.

Answer 14

Not sure about 'too short', but I do see them as inconsistent, especially in relation to property crimes.

My own view is that judges need to be able to adjust sentence lengths based on varying factors, but some guidelines as to 'minimums' would probably be useful.

It would be better, particularly where the crimes have an element of premeditation, to send a strong message to the community, without creating a 'revenge is everything' culture.

Also, the effect on the victims needs to be factored in. I know the theory is that the victim should feel 'justice is served' by the sentencing, but this often doesn't happen, especially when sentences are ameliorated by mitigating factors.

Mandatory sentencing is unworkable and hugely inefficient, but people do need to see that the justice system works in a satisfactory and relevant way, or they lose faith in it and the rule of law is compromised.

Cheers :-)

Answer 15

Ridiculously short we had a guy rape and kill a little girl in a toilet over here and he will be out in 12 yrs.

Also I don't see why previous convictions should be left out of the court procedures if they have committed a similar crime the court should know about it.