Introduction
The duties of a police officer are to ensure that there is maintenance of public peace and order. In order to perform their duties and obligations they require certain powers, authority in order to perform their duties and this extends the power to arrest. This paper focuses on the decision of the court in DPP v Carr, the amendments on Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act (LEPRA) section 99 and a critical evaluation of statements made by Sentas and Cowdery.
The decision in DPP v Carr
The case of DPP v Carr is a fundamental case in evaluating arrest as a measure of last resort in the execution of a police officer’s duties. The brief facts of the case were that the defendant Mr. Carr was arrested for having insulted and hurled offensive words at the arresting officer. In the decision of the court it stated that “arrest ought to be the last resort and should not be done if the name and address of the defendant is known by the police and that one will not fail to honour summons issued” . The decision in DPP v Carr has been used as the yardstick under common law in determining the threshold for which a police officer uses before arresting a suspect. In the appellate decision despite having held that the arrest was lawful, it went ahead to declare that it was improper since the police officer had the option of issuing summons.
Smart AJ specifically gave due regard to the statements made by Sentas and Cowdery that “an arrest should be a measure of last resort” . The appropriateness of an arrest when the offence is of a minor nature, the name of the defendant is known to the police officers and the defendant does not intend to depart and there is no reason to believe that summons issued will be honoured. The...
... middle of paper ...
...in keeping the peace and protecting the public.
REFERENCES
Attorney-General’s Second Reading Speech (NSW Legislative Assembly Hansard, 17 September 2002)
Kate Warner et al, ‘Consolidation of arrest laws in Tasmania’, (Issue Paper No 10, Tasmanian Law Reform Institute, 2006), 3
Legislation Review Committee, Parliament of New South Wales, Law enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Amendment (Arrest without warrant) Bill 2013, Law Review Digest (2013 November)
Police Association of NSW, Judge Calls for Urgent review of arrest law, (PANSW 2014) https://www.pansw.org.au/public/newsevents/media-releases/2013/judge-calls-urgent-review-arrest-law
R N Howie and P A Johnson, Annotated Criminal Legislation NSW, 2011-2102, (Lexis Nexis Butterworths 2012) 17769-1774
Vicki Sentas and Nicholas Cowdery, ‘Focus on police, not the laws’ (2013) Sydney Morning Herald Online
The conviction of guilty offenders when adhering to the guidelines of the NSW criminal trial process is not difficult based on the presumption of innocence. However, due to features of the criminal trial process, established by the adversarial system of trial, cases can often involve copious amounts of time and money, particularly evident in the case of R vs Rogerson and McNamara where factors such as time and money are demonstrated to be in excess. In addition, characteristics of the adversarial system such as plea bargaining has the power to hinder convictions due to the accused having the authority to hire experienced and expensive lawyers to argue their case, hence maintaining their innocence.
Just and equitable legal outcomes to evaluate the case include of many expectations that may be met, the outcome of the case was discovered by fair trial which includes correct punishment theories and procedures, Justice Roslyn Atkinson met these through the trial also making it equitable because the punishment theories were applied to the offender Brett Peter Cowan. Punishment options and procedures in Queensland met the current needs of the society throughout this
Marques, O. (2013, October 23). Issues in Policing [Lecture]. SSCI 1000 Introduction to Criminal Justice. University of Ontario Institute of Technology . Retrieved November 18, 2013
(1996). Volume 2, Sixth Edition, Australian Geographic: New South Wales. 8. Victory, M. (2004). End of the Line- Capital Punishment in Australia, CIS Publishers: Victoria.
The issue I have decided to analyse is that concerning the implications of bail and remand. Bail is an option a court must confront when temporarily releasing an accused individual until their expected appearance at an appointed time, before the determination of innocence or guilt is concluded. Several guarantees that secure the person’s appearance at an appointed time include a guarantor, bond assurance paid by a surety holder, summons or court attendance notice. Remand is the refusal of bail, when the accused is to be detained prior to there trial, remanded into custody until the hearing is resumed, or the trial commenced. Remand is given if there is an increased probability of the defendant committing another offense, failing to turn up to court, intimidating someone or obstructing the course of justice. The matter addressing bail and remand is that specific criteria for courts when determining bail is that they need to meet consistently high requirements and is extremely convoluted. The past decade has revealed that the proportion of remandees in NSW has doubled to the aggregated prisoner population, while prisoners remanded into custody has tripled.
344. The. Australian Institute of Criminology, [Online]. Available at: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/0/C/5/%7B0C5DFDDF-7A72-43F9-80A1-CA6D51B635B6%7Dtandi344.pdf, [Accessed 14 April 2011].
Several states across the Country have enacted or attempted to enact legislation which can enable detention of a prisoner past his/her release date. This type of legislation’s general purpose is to provide a mechanism whereby prisoners who, if released pose an unacceptable risk of committing further serious offences, may be detained where it is deemed appropriate to do so for the protection of the community (Field, 2003). The most recent of these being the Queensland Government’s passing of the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003. Similar laws were introduced in New South Wales in 1994, however they were ultimately ruled invalid by the High Court. Prior to this in 1991 Victoria enacted legislation known as the Community Protection Act 1990, which allowed for the continued detention of one prisoner known as Garry David. Whilst this Act applied to no one else the Victorian Government attempted to broaden the legislation with Draft Bill proposals which ultimately lapse in the face of wide ranging criticism from lawyer, psychiatrists and academics. (Greig 1995)
Defenders of the Miranda decision say that fewer crimes solved are for a good reason. They believe that law enforcement officers were forced to stop coercive questioning techniques that are unconstitutional. Over the years, the Supreme Court has watered down its stance in saying that the Miranda rules are not constitutional obligations, but rather “prophylactic” safeguards intended to insure that officers do not force a confession from a suspect. The need for both effective law enforcement as well as protection of society dictates the need for potential alternatives to the limitations of Miranda that would simultaneously protect the interest of society in effective law enforcement while at the same time providing protection to suspects against unconstitutional force (www.ncpa.org).
Police officers are faced each day with a vast array of situations with which they must deal. No two situations they encounter are ever the same, even when examines a large number of situations over an extended period of time. The officers are usually in the position of having to make decisions on how to handle a specific matter alone, or with little additional advice and without immediate supervision. This is the heart of police discretion. As we shall find, the exercise of discretion by police has benefits and problems associated with such exercise. The unfettered use of discretion can lead to the denial of citizen rights. Strategies that control the use of discretion are, therefore, very important. The benefits and problems of police discretion and controlling strategies are the focus of this essay.
NSW Government 2014, Courts & Tribunal Services Attorney General & Justice, viewed 30 April 2014, .
The Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule has undergone a harsh and controversial development. This article not only critically analyzes the numerous alternatives and slight modifications to the exclusionary rule but the advanced by courts and commentators as well, (Schroeder, 1361). The article also puts emphasis on the alternative route of police policy making and a means to control official misconduct and violations of citizens rights. The exclusionary rule is one of the most significant defense stance of the fourth amendment. ITs establishment has created a wide spread of protection against violations of citizens rights.
There are four sources of Law in the Australian Legal System. They are Statute Law, which is made in Parliament, Common Law and the Law of E...
White, R., and Perrone, S. (2009) Crime, Criminality and Criminal Justice. Melbourne: Oxford University [Chapter 2 ‘Crime and the Media’]
The focus is on the issues of police accountability in modern society, and in particular why their accountability is more important than other professions. This is not surprising considering the amount of power and discretion police officers have, and the level of trust that the public holds with these civil servants. Police officers accountability is the biggest thing in their profession which has been an issue of concern they have to be accountable to the police department who want the officer to be an effective and responsible person, to people in the community who have best expectation from an officer and being accountable to themselves for their acts. An ordinary citizen of a country cannot obtain the powers that police officer’s have.
This is one of the most important aspects of the criminal investigation process due to the fact that if the proper procedures aren’t followed, the validity of the case will be jeopardized. The Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) outlines the conditions of which a person can be arrested and detained. A key term in the arresting process is ‘suspicion on reasonable grounds’ as this describes the discretion of the police in making arrests. Although for most arrests, a warrant is needed, police can arrest someone if they genuinely believe that the person is guilty of a crime. After a person has been arrested, they will be detained in a police station and this process is also outlined in the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW). The Act outlines the rights a person who has been detained, such as refreshment periods, and the procedures that the police must follow, this is all done to help protect the rights of citizens. If a person is charged with a crime, they will either be put in remand or be allowed to post bail. Bail, also referred to as conditional freedom, allows a person to retain certain rights, such as spend their time awaiting trial in their home, and this is outlined in the Bail Act 1978 (NSW). Bail is a great example in the criminal trial process achieving justice, as the concept of bail seeks to