Free Press, February 15, 2016

ACT’s regular bulletin

Three Strikes
ACT’s three strikes legislation has been a success already. Statistics show strike warnings are deterring offenders from reoffending. Even opponents are having to admit that the policy is working to reduce violent crime.

The Two Strike Provision
A lesser known aspect of the three strikes legislation is that an offender convicted of a grievous murder should be sentenced to life without parole on the second strike. It was an answer to the common criticism of three strikes: why on earth do you wait for three?

Three Strike Outs
So far three second strikers have been convicted of a grievous murder requiring life without parole under the law. In all three cases the sentencing judge has refused to give life without parole.

Say, What?
The judges are not breaking the law, just interpreting it. Three strikes has a safety valve letting judges avoid giving the mandatory sentence if they believe it would be ‘manifestly unjust’ to give it. It just so happens that all three cases so far have been exceptional.

A Pattern
We at Free Press have an abiding respect for the judiciary. We understand that the judges made their decision with all the evidence before them. However we note that the manifestly unjust clause was only ever meant to be a safety valve and three out of three is a pattern.

Will the Crown Appeal?
The Crown is already appealing the first two decisions. We wonder if they will appeal the third and latest decision, made last week in Hamilton, that it would be manifestly unjust to give life without parole to a man who bashed an old man to death in a public toilet. Watch this space.

Burglary
In 2014 ACT campaigned on three strikes to burglary. Even David Seymour, who would normally rather talk about tax, regulation and education than crime, was converted to the policy by door knocking burglary victims.

Fortress Epsom
The Epsom electorate has a lot of stuff worth nicking. The houses are fortified with electronic gates, intercoms, and alarms as a result. People have a right to be safe but most would prefer not to lose the openness.

Victimisation
The other thing about burglary is that it is not only about nicking stuff, it is about invading private space. David Seymour has met constituents who are nervous wrecks after being burglarised three times. One man had his copper spouting nicked right off his house (technically not a burglary because the house wasn’t entered but he was still pretty pissed off).

Nine in Ten Get Away
People in Epsom report burglaries because it is a requirement for claiming on insurance. In less affluent communities there is not much point in reporting it because people lack insurance and they know burglars have only a 10 per cent chance of being caught. Burglary is a blight on those trying to make ends meet and get ahead.

We Tried
ACT believes we need to lock up the burglars who are caught. On Thursday David asked Parliament for leave to debate ACT’s Three Strikes Burglary Bill. The Bill would mean three burglary convictions get an automatic three years. Any MP can object to leave and several Labour and Green MPs did. Parliament moved on to debate the Home and Community Support (Payment for Travel Between Clients) Settlement Bill instead.

We’ll Keep Trying
Three Strikes Burglary is a policy whose time has come. ACT will keep seeking avenues to make this Bill a law, the National Party should adopt it as policy and New Zealand First should cross the floor to support it. Those are the natural supporters, but the Maori Party should consider whether Maori are disproportionately affected by unreported burglary.Free Press suspects yes.

Don’t Forget
ACT’s conference is now under two weeks away. It is not too late to register here:www.act.org.nz/events

ends

© Scoop Media