Changes to the criminal justice system
The Government announced a fairly comprehensive package of changes to the criminal justice system today, and it looks, encouragingly, like the some of the Greens’ messages are finally getting through, with enhanced rehabilitation programmes and new services to help prisoners after they are released featuring highly.
However, Nandor has also expressed concern about some of the new measures, especially the biggest news that prisoners will be required to serve two-thirds of their sentence before becoming eligible for parole. It’s good news if it means that the system will be more transparent and that sentences handed down will correspond more closely to the actual time served, but there’s also a concern that it could be a backdoor measure for longer sentences, unless we ensure that sentences are reduced accordingly. It’s also a worry if people on bail, who haven’t yet been found guilty of anything, will be subject to electronic monitoring.
August 15th, 2006 at 9:41 pm
Better than awaiting trial sitting in jail I would think.
August 16th, 2006 at 9:35 am
“but there’s also a concern that it could be a backdoor measure for longer sentences, unless we ensure that sentences are reduced accordingly”.
What planet do you lot live on, why are you greens soft on crime and Criminals ??
why the hell should some stinking crim get a shorter sentance
lock the scum up and throw away the sodding key !!
And yes my business was broken into last week and more than 5K stolen !!!!!
August 16th, 2006 at 10:43 am
Longer sentences don’t work - look at the US which has the highest rate of detention in the world - and the most violent crime.
And yes - I have had my business broken into too - and the safe carried away. The police told us never to lock drawers or safes etc because it encouraged the crims to break into things looking for stuff.
I think we need to start looking at the root causes of crime. Otherwise what do you think the crims do when they get out? Feel ok about the world and the way they have been treated? Or just get smarter and meaner?
August 16th, 2006 at 12:17 pm
esay fixed
dont let the sods out
if you do make it so unpleasent in there they dont want to go back
August 16th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
prison numbers will continue to grow under the present system. as long as they are run by ex school boy bullies overseeing educated and qualified social workers and psycologists who understand rehabilitation. screws are interested in continuing there bludging existance and work to ensure their clients return. in the north now there are people paid to reasure the inmates that they represent the future of their people and that there present problems with rape, child abuse etc are just understandable reactions to the whiteys oppression. lf anyone is interested their are countless examples of the systems abuse of funds and dedication to maintaining growth. as a civilised person it is so unpleasant that i have no wish to return.
cheers
August 16th, 2006 at 2:18 pm
If I had a prison I’d put the inmates on a cron diet (calorie restriction with optimal nutrition), they’d come out healthier than they went in. I would have a noose in the murderers cells to be used at their convienience. [..and that’s just for starters. The criminal justice sysytem needs practical people not wankers]
Henri
August 16th, 2006 at 4:05 pm
poffa Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
prison numbers will continue to grow under the present system. as long as they are run by ex school boy bullies overseeing educated and qualified social workers and psycologists who understand rehabilitation. screws are interested in continuing there bludging existance and work to ensure their clients return. in the north now there are people paid to reasure the inmates that they represent the future of their people and that there present problems with rape, child abuse etc are just understandable reactions to the whiteys oppression. lf anyone is interested their are countless examples of the systems abuse of funds and dedication to maintaining growth. as a civilised person it is so unpleasant that i have no wish to return.
cheers
Poffa, do you honestly believe this rubbish?…I can only assume this entire post is a wind up.
August 16th, 2006 at 4:23 pm
Panda’s “solution” of not letting them out will cost a lot more than the 5K that was ripped off. Why should the rest of us tax payers fund your revenge?
August 16th, 2006 at 5:39 pm
typical soft lefty green response I call it “Tellie tubby Justice “BIG HUG”
why should they not be made to serve their full sentance !!!!!!
why do you call it revenge ?
if the prick had not robbed my shop I would not care about the scumbag but the moment he did he becimes of great interrest to me
dont let them out untill they have served 100% of their time
August 16th, 2006 at 5:48 pm
There is an old association word-game; a word is mentioned, and you say what springs into your mind. ‘Crime and…?’ If you said punishment, consider - do we want to punish, or stop crime? If you treat a leather binding with insecticide, insects will munch it till it’s gone, others taking their place as they die. If you use an insect repellant, none will die and none will munch. I suggest long sentences are ineffective, expensive, and a school for further offending on release. Isn’t it HARSHER deterrants we need? Plus investigating the causes of crime. 20 years inside is cruel to a mediaeval degree. A single day in the stocks or pillory would be far more effective and humane. Short-term hard labour, with all stigma removed on release. We can’t AFFORD to ‘lock ‘em up and throw the key away’.
August 16th, 2006 at 6:01 pm
As long as the “punishment” idea is current, deterrants will be considered barbaric and slowly eroded in the name of humanitarianism. Certainly the rights of crims should be accomodated, but as third priority. After 1) The rights of society to live in a crime-free, or nearly, environment 2) The rights of victims to be recompensed for crimes affecting them. Also, it is illogical that a naive person who becomes addicted to ‘ P ‘ as a result of pushers and manufacturers, and commits a murder without being aware of it, should go to prison for life, whereas the real crims who got him addicted get much milder sentences.
August 16th, 2006 at 6:31 pm
big bruv so you’ve been there otherwise how can u comment i have and i no the 2 things that got me away from it .yoga and toastmasters are now no longer available but there are heaps of classes where you can learn to maim with pointed sticks.
cheers
August 16th, 2006 at 6:41 pm
I saw a “60 Minutes” program where a drunk driver had killed a girl. (I think) the offenders sentence was to right out a cheque for $1 each week to the dead girl. After a while he chose to stop the cheques and do a lag. I suppose that would be considered “cruel and unusual” here.
I saw a TV program where the prison head told the interviewer “they aren’t here for punishment”……. Where is the dissinsentive these days? You need a carrot and a stick.
[pour accountant walking home in Chch; some bods with a baseball bat took exception to the fact that an intoxicated man was walking home at 2:30 in the morning. xxx wacked him so hard people heard it in the next street… musta hurt..oohhh!!! The bleeding hearts block all that stuff out (there seem to be two fundamental reactions to events like that: anger at the perpetrator or love and forgiveness… (the poor wretch was forced to become bad by unfortunate circumstances) He did it for enjoooyment!!!!. ]
Henri
August 16th, 2006 at 6:56 pm
Ahh yes, sentencing lengths, parole. Lets have a discussion on how big a lock to put on the open stable door, now that the horse with Panda’s 5K has made it off down the road.
I’m sure Panda would rather not have his 5K stolen in the first place. Prison sentencing still remains an ineffective tool to stop people becoming career criminals.
(No slur of any sort on Panda intended - it’s just convenient to have a real example rather than the usual hypothetical case)
August 16th, 2006 at 10:20 pm
“typical soft lefty green response I call it “Tellie tubby Justice “BIG HUGâ€? ”
Not a particularly intelligent or coherent rebuttal, and exemplifies a childish and extremely selfish response by the “hang ‘em high” brigade.
“I have been hurt, so the person who did it to me has to SUFFER. Never mind what it costs anyone else, never mind whether it works, never mind whether they even catch the right person.”
It is that kind of attitude that has produced inquisitors and wars. It does not make sense to base policy on the reactions of those caught up in powerful emotions.
It is interesting that Jeffrey Archer (hardly a “soft lefty greenie”) changed his rather conservative attitude about the effectiveness and justice of imprisonment after he had been in the nick himself . His prison diaries are well worth reading.
August 17th, 2006 at 12:05 am
kiore1 Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 10:20 pm
“typical soft lefty green response I call it “Tellie tubby Justice “BIG HUG� �
Not a particularly intelligent or coherent rebuttal, and exemplifies a childish and extremely selfish response by the “hang ‘em high� brigade.
“I have been hurt, so the person who did it to me has to SUFFER. Never mind what it costs anyone else, never mind whether it works, never mind whether they even catch the right person.�
It is that kind of attitude that has produced inquisitors and wars. It does not make sense to base policy on the reactions of those caught up in powerful emotions.
[You minimise the effect of crime. Consider the case of Beverly Boma. They forced themselves into the family home and just had ….Fun!! Her husband had to endure hearing her being raped and then shot through the head.]
“It is interesting that Jeffrey Archer (hardly a “soft lefty greenieâ€?) changed his rather conservative attitude about the effectiveness and justice of imprisonment after he had been in the nick himself . His prison diaries are well worth reading. ”
[Problem is you people don’t approve of anything other than “BIG HUGSâ€? as an alternative to prison; we’re left with a system without teeth.
What about tazers???? “dear! dear!, can’t have that!! Might hurt the little dears!” >>>Policeman: “If you don’t stop that I’ll hold my breath until I turn blue!!! [policeman holding breath] ]
poffa Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 6:31 pm
big bruv so you’ve been there otherwise how can u comment i have and i no the 2 things that got me away from it .yoga and toastmasters are now no longer available but there are heaps of classes where you can learn to maim with pointed sticks.
cheers
[prison needs punishment and rehabilitation. Apart from my 500 a day calorie diet, I would ad classes in cognitive behavioural therapy, yoga, toastmasters. The prisoners in my prison would come out better than the average citizen (the murderers would still have the noose to be used at their convienience)]
Henri
August 17th, 2006 at 7:06 am
um..panda..
“..And yes my business was broken into last week and more than 5K stolen !!!!!..”
yes,yes..i know it’s annoying…(were you not insured..?..is that the reason for your agitation..?.)
.if you were insured..?..get a grip..dearheart!…nobody was hurt or bled…
(y’know..on the overall scale of death and destruction..
it hardly rates..eh..?)
and those ‘hang-em-high’ advocates should just beetle off to rightwing blog co-op sir humphrys..eh..?
‘cos there they will find sympathetic murmmers of assent are the reactions to their foam-flecked diatribes…
and as for what to do about jails/prisons/re-offending…?
as far as i can see…nothing much has changed since my excursion there….
they put them in illiterate/untrained..they tip them out again illiterate and untrained…with (of course)..in the main…no options but to return to crime…
it ain’t rocket-science…eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 17th, 2006 at 9:21 am
“You minimise the effect of crime. “. Not sure how you work that out. I was not talking about Beverley Borma but about 5K being stolen. Hardly mass genocide is it? But accoridng to the mentality of the right it justifies keeping someone in prison at the cost of 50K a year to the tax payer. It is actually not about ethics, it is economics, something right wingers are supposed to understand, but seem particularly dense at grasping when it comes to their personal revenge.
And if anyone is serious about minimising the effect of crime then perhaps they should take a serious look at corporate criminals. A British judge for example found that MacDonalds exploit children, pay low wages and are cruel to animals. Shell have been responsible for murder in Nigeria. Here in New Zealand Dow Elanco poisoned a whole lot of people in Taranaki. A pig producer in Levin was accused of cruelty to animals after his crime was exposed on national TV, but he is likely to get off as MAF are reluctant to prosecute and always side with industry.
One of my main objections to tough sentencing is that the wrong criminals get it. So corporates or rich crims like Huata can afford smart lawyers and get a slap on the wrist but blue collar crims get the book thrown at them. And another objection is not so much that nobody is bad enough to be punished but tht nobody is good enough to punish. Have any of the judges sanctimoniously handing out tough sentences to some petty crim ever filled out a false tax claim? Have they ever made a false insurance claim? If so, they are criminals themselves and should be less self-rightous in their condemnation.
kiore1 (www.epf.org.nz)
August 17th, 2006 at 9:39 am
phil u. Says:
August 17th, 2006 at 7:06 am
um..panda..
“..And yes my business was broken into last week and more than 5K stolen !!!!!..�
yes,yes..i know it’s annoying…(were you not insured..?..is that the reason for your agitation..?.)
.if you were insured..?..get a grip..dearheart!…nobody was hurt or bled…
(y’know..on the overall scale of death and destruction..
it hardly rates..eh..?)
and those ‘hang-em-high’ advocates should just beetle off to rightwing blog co-op sir humphrys..eh..?
‘cos there they will find sympathetic murmmers of assent are the reactions to their foam-flecked diatribes…
and as for what to do about jails/prisons/re-offending…?
as far as i can see…nothing much has changed since my excursion there….
they put them in illiterate/untrained..they tip them out again illiterate and untrained…with (of course)..in the main…no options but to return to crime…
it ain’t rocket-science…eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Of course I was insured but you lefty greens just don’t get the point
criminals have to PAY for their crimes
if not what stops most normal law abiding citizens from breaking the law
Your comments are typical of anytime someone with an alternative point of view dares speak their mind on a subject contradicts Left wing green dogma!!
you green fascists have to realise we all have the right to our opinion and get this !!!
you might not be right !!!
wow there’s a thought to ponder.
perhaps you might someday realise that idealism will only get you so far and realism is what life is all about >
one day you may wake up to that that there are just some bad bastards out there and that the only place for them is locked up
i
August 17th, 2006 at 10:03 am
“Problem is you people don’t approve of anything other than “BIG HUGSâ€? as an alternative to prison;”
Put the straw man down, take a deep breath, calm down, have a coffee and actually READ this blog, the links provided, the government policy and replies of other contibutors.
…
Have you finished? Good, then you will, like me, be able to list all the alternatives to tough sentencing that have been proposed. These are:
1. Home detention.
2. Hard labour (periodic detention)
3. Better rehabilitiation in prisons (yoga and Toastmasters specifically mentioned)
4. Stocks or pillory (actually worth serious consideration IMHO starting with corporate criminals)
5. Paying the victim $1 per week.
I would also add that in the case of white collar crims like Huata and Archer who love money so much, that a substantial fine (and I mean SUBSTANTIAL ie millions not hundreds) would be a far better deterrent than prison as well as being better for the tax payer.
Interestingly, big hugs, small hugs or indeed hugs of any size or description have not been mentioned at all.
August 17th, 2006 at 11:47 am
kiore1 Says:
August 17th, 2006 at 10:03 am
Have you finished? Good, then you will, like me, be able to list all the alternatives to tough sentencing that have been proposed. These are:
1. Home detention.
2. Hard labour (periodic detention)
3. Better rehabilitiation in prisons (yoga and Toastmasters specifically mentioned)
4. Stocks or pillory (actually worth serious consideration IMHO starting with corporate criminals)
5. Paying the victim $1 per week.
You forgot the cron diet:
http://www.calorierestriction.org/
I think what gets peoples back up is that punishment is considered barbaric and therefore we musn’t go there. Effectively, the crims do what they like and the state gives them a realitively soft landing. I think criminoligists and psychologists could find relatively humane ways to shorten their sentences while making prison a deterent, but for an over abundence of human rights legislation.
Henry
August 17th, 2006 at 12:03 pm
Sorry about forgetting your corn diet Henry. The importance of diet in preventing anti-social behaviour is certainly underestimated in my opinion. There has been quite a lot of research on how diet high in sugar increases bad behaviour in schools. and diet in prisons should certainly be looked at more closely. As a vegan you can guess what diet I would advocate, though perhaps meat eaters consider that forcing prisoners to eat a vegan diet would be cruel and unusual punishment : )
August 17th, 2006 at 12:11 pm
” When I arrived at the federal detention center in Los Angeles, I felt like I had died and gone to Disneyland. The difference in the two prison systems is incredible! The treatment I received in the American prison was humane and tolerable. The Japanese system lacks any trace of humanity.”
This is a good case study of a prison system with real detterence. The advantage is that the correct people bare the horror of crime.
http://www.phaseloop.com/foreignprisoners/exp-japan01.html
Henry
August 17th, 2006 at 12:40 pm
Henry
An interesting link - thank you. However - you missed the important bits out.
Just wondered why you didn’t link in the whole of the final paragraph.
August 17th, 2006 at 1:22 pm
panda..through the nose darling…breath through the nose..
of course you are entitled to your opinion..(however bug-eyed it may be..)
and ‘tho i’d be pushed to die for you to have that right..you’ve got me onside a fair way down that road..
(’tho your (worldweary/plaintive?) cry that there is no point to idealism is sad..eh..?..)
do you feel you once had ‘ideals’..but life/realism bashed them out of you..?
and thank you to the humourist who thought to quote jeffrey archer….(he’s always good for a giggle..eh..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 17th, 2006 at 2:00 pm
I have just finished reading Henry’s link, and I am amazed that anyone can condone that sort of physical and psychological torture unless they are some sort of twisted sadist. The most shocking aspect is the secrecy. I spent 5 years working in Japan and never knew what went on. I did not find that Japanese were particularly cruel or sadistic people, and I am sure most of my colleagues over there would be just as shocked as I am. Interestingly the narrator dd not excuse his crime, and did not say he should not have been put in prison. His complaint was the treatment meted out while in prison. His crime was certainly not victimless, but the punishment went way beyond an eye for an eye.
Certainly criminals need to be made to come to terms with what they have done, and make restitution if possible. But we need to distinguish between the need for discipline, restitution and rehabilitation and the revenge mentality seen in the Japanese prison link and among certain right wing factions in New Zealand. It is the disproportionate howls for revenge that have led to ever more viscious wars as well as the hanging drawing and quartering, breaking at the wheel, burnings at the stake and other barbarous punishments that we have thankfully moved away from.
kiore1 (www.epf.org.nz)
August 17th, 2006 at 2:59 pm
No no no… if you put people on a calorie restricted diet they LIVE longer… that’d never do!
respectfully
BJ
August 17th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
Ay caramba! I was hoping we could have an objective debate about this without particpants resorting to the same-old-same-old tired worn out screeches of “prisons are like 4-star hotels”, “people who want to deal with the root causes are just soft”, “if you don’t want to torture offenders you must be a pinko lefty”, “lock them up for the rest of their lives”, yada… yada… yada…
I would like to see the focus of debate framed within the context that offenders are human beings and that human beings are not criminals at birth. To be part of the solution instead of being part of the problem requires examining the issues from a human level and from the premise of “people doing bad things” rather than “bad people” - although I am not disputing there may be a very small percentage of offenders who pathologically fall into the latter category, but that requires a seperate debate in my opinion.
I would also like to see this debate framed from the perspective of restitution rather than punishment, prevention rather than offending, rehabilitation rather than re-offending, and sentencing that it is relative to harm done to the victims of the crime. Having people confined in a space such as prison offers us enormous opportunities for education and re-education and we need to focus on that aspect too.
In the wise words of Mahatma Ghandi, “…an eye for an eye leads to a world of blind people.” I worry just as much about those who are *already* blinded, but by their rage. So how about it panda, wanna step over the fence and participate with us in our quest for effective solutions?
August 17th, 2006 at 3:48 pm
offenders are human beings and that human beings are not criminals at birth.
of course they are not but your trendy lefty ideals wont allow the right intervention be take at a time when it can do any good
90% of crime in any town in NZ can be laid a the door a very few FAMLIES
sort out those scumbags and their kids have a half decent chance of breaking the cycle and not repeating the mistakes of their so called parents
Look ,I am not a hang em high guy
I don’t support the death penalty but this notation that criminals have to be understood and then they will change is total shite
I don’t mind reputation from the scumbag that robbed my shop but he also needs to be punished !!!!!
Whyy is the concept of punishment such an anathema to you lot
as the old saying goes
do the crime do the time !!!!
August 17th, 2006 at 4:07 pm
Man to serve 18 years for ‘horrific’ murder of Christchurch prostitute
1.40pm Thursday August 17, 2006
A man who repeatedly ran over a prostitute in his car, before throwing her body in a river, will serve at least 18 years of an indefinite jail term after a judge described his crimes as “absolutely horrific”.
Fan-bloody-tastic
Big hug anybody ?
was he breastfeed long enough?
he should never see the outside of a prisen wall untill he is to old to care
this is the type of scumbag who should be never seen again
come on feel free to feel sorry for him !!
August 17th, 2006 at 4:26 pm
I’d say prison is a pretty good deterrent for a lot of people, problem is for others it doesn’t sound too bad a deal, it all depends on the quality of your life, and how much you value your freedom. I was sitting in a cell a few years ago contemplating the possibility of spending several years in prison, and I found the prospect of being locked up for that time terrifying (the charges were dropped, so I only experienced a few days of prison life).
But on most occasions, what actually prevents me committing crime is an unwillingness to hurt people or rip them off, not the threat of punishment.
August 17th, 2006 at 5:00 pm
Panda, I am not arguing “that criminals have to be understood and then they will change”, any more than my trying to understand your bilious points-of-view would change you into being a respectful and productive participant in this debate.
Understanding the roots of crime is just one very very small step on the pathway of creating effective prevention, intervention and rehabilitation programs that will create a safer society for all. Understanding without appropriate action would be an utterly pointless exercise, as I think you well know.
Didn’t anybody ever teach you that only a person with a weak argument will resort to name calling? Because I would really appreciate it if you keep your hateful labels to yourself and joined us in a civilised debate here.
August 17th, 2006 at 8:10 pm
what aggreives me about the political and media comnmentary surrounding “NZ crime” is that the non-evidence-based criminalisation (of ubiquitious weed) is not on the radar screen for reducing criminality, when in fact to make it R18 would close the criminality gateway big time. (and separate off the hard drug market)
the pot black market is the bread and butter of the crime scene in NZ - surely it isnt rocket science to put this goddammend law in the gun?
the law acheives nothing whatsoever but dysfunction and alienation. why arent the green party saying this loud and clear?
criminalisation is self fulfilling policy
weedeater
August 17th, 2006 at 8:36 pm
I agree the Green fascists label was out of line and I apologise
but this comment by Phil leads me to the conclusion that alternative are not allowed on the blog
and those ‘hang-em-high’ advocates should just beetle off to rightwing blog co-op sir humphrys..eh..?
‘cos there they will find sympathetic murmmers of assent are the reactions to their foam-flecked diatribes…
August 17th, 2006 at 8:38 pm
Oh golly weedeater dont even start me on the Greens and Dope !!!!!
August 17th, 2006 at 9:57 pm
have you also had a sense of humour bypass..panda…?
can i suggest you make a real effort to get over yourself..
and..btw..i have no say over anything on this blog…
and my suggestion you go investigate humphreys is because there are a lot of you around those parts..(i thought you might need some sympathetic company..eh..?)..
and no..please “..don’t even start..on the greens and dope..”
((we sorta already know what you are going to say..eh..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 17th, 2006 at 10:17 pm
On that Japanese link, I was pointing out what a really tough prison is like A system like that must act as a strong detterent. On the plus side consider the crime rate in Japan; how many innocent lives saved???. I haven’t formed a conclusion but ideally detterence is just enough; no more, no less.
Henri
August 17th, 2006 at 11:58 pm
OMG
come on Phil, I know what you meant
You cant have someone crashing this cosy little green biosphere and polluting it with such outrageous dissent and inderpendant thought
off with his head !!!
August 18th, 2006 at 6:55 am
you really have got hold of the wrong end of the stick..panda…and seem unwilling to let it go….
“..such outrageous dissent and inderpendant thought…”
(you have just confirmed my previous assessment that you really do need to get over yourself…eh..?..what with your ‘inderpendant’ thought and all…
and some regular readers here could be bemused at me being portrayed in your little universe…as a force for censorship…and the muffling of dissent…
maybe you should drop russell norman an email..and ask him his views on that….
(i see you are also a mindreader….do you perform in public..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 18th, 2006 at 8:16 am
OK this topic has done its dash
is seems no one here wants to debate the issue, and there is no real plan in the green agenda to keep New Zealanders safe from crime other than decriminalizing dope,letting convicted criminals out early to save money and more understanding for the poor unfortunate criminal who just happen to commit crime because they were not breastfeed long enough
August 18th, 2006 at 8:59 am
No it hasn’t.
What I want is quite clear - I want a reduction in crime.
The criminal justice system and sentencing cannot reduce crime, it by definition gets involved once crime has occured, by which time its all too late. Someone is a victim.
I want to see discussions on how we can reduce crime. Crime is rooted in social problems.
So any discussions about sentencing (which is what most of this thread and most discussions anywhere center on) is rearraning the deckchairs whilst the ship is sinking.
August 18th, 2006 at 9:03 am
It is rather simplistic to say that the Japanese have a low crime rate because they have a tough prison system. In fact, as the post was pointing out, the prison system is secret, so it can’t act as a deterrrent if nobody knows about it. Japanese society is very different from the western competitive model, and is based more on fitting in and co-operation and they have a stronger sense of community. At the university where I worked, lecturers did not see their job simply as walking into a lecture, givign it, then walking out, but the welfare of the whole student was their concern.
This conformity does have a negative side if you are not part of the main stream, for example a criminal in jail or someone in a mental health institution . And personally, since I like to question the values of society and am considered rather a geek and oddball, I prefer western respect for the individual in this regard.
But a greater sense of civil responsibility instilled from the time students go to primary school and are taught ethics and expected to take turns cleaing the school grounds, does have some advantages in reducing crime and ensuring jobs for all.
The Japanese are also keen on restorative justice, and wil make an effort to broker agreements between the criminal and the victim, rather than simply lock everyone away for the smallest offences. So Japanese prisons may be inhumane, but there are not so many of them.
Panda, like Henry, enjoys straw man arguments, but breastfeeding has not been mentioned on this post any more than hugs. In fact there have been some quite sensible suggestions made on this blog on alternatives to tough senencing, both in and out of prisons, so I cannot see why he/she is saying nobody wants to debate the issue.
kiore1 (www.epf.org.nz)
August 18th, 2006 at 9:41 am
Thanks for commenting on my pre prison alternative
I did offer a solution, but I cant see how in this PC society you and your labour friends have created it has any chance of the correct authorities making it work
August 18th, 2006 at 9:59 am
“Man to serve 18 years for ‘horrific’ murder of Christchurch prostitute”.
Is this the same man who actually realised he had a mental health problem and sought help but was turned down? If we were spending less of prisons perhaps we would have more resources for mental health services and could prevent more horrific crimes in future. As it is, the taxpayer will be 50K out of pocket for the next 18 years keeping this man out of harms way, when the crime could have been prevented at a fraction of the cost.
This is not being “soft”, it is not even being ethical, it is simply a matter of economic efficiency and best use of resources.
August 18th, 2006 at 11:26 am
My what an interesting debate here. I think we are confusing natural justice with being soft. My view (and yes I got burgled too and the cops appear to have done nothing but that’s another story..):
If people commit crimes there needs to be some kind of outcome. That could be punishment (lock up and throw away key), and for some offences where people are at risk of being seriously harmed again, that may be appropriate in my view.
It could also be rehabilitation - why did the crime happen? What could this person do different so they don’t get to go to prison again. And no I really don’t think being in prison is all that great actually.
For those to the right of Attilla the Hun, lock people up in incredibly punitive situations for a really long time, and then let them out… what, they are going to feel suddenly really good about themselves and society and never ever reoffend again because now they have learned something very useful..?? Don’t think so.
If we want to reduce reoffending, how about making a good start by looking at the society the offending takes place in? So Maori get to be in prison a lot? Wonder if that could have any connection with historic dispossession, deliberate cultural damage, lack of cultural connection, massive poverty and living in crappy houses without any hope of a job. No couldn’t possibly.
So we have a guy who ran someone over - apparently just like in one of the delightful videogames that we give our youngsters to play with day in day out. The daily engagenment with brutal and horrific imagery in videogames couldn’t possibly have a link with violent crime could it? (Actually research suggests it might…)
Anyone living in rural NZ probably has a really good idea where the local P gets made. Apparently the cops don’t. Maybe they just don’t want to run the risk of upsetting their local gangs. I don’t know. Might be that if they spent a bit more time being proactive in preventing crime instead of collecting speeders, crime might seem a bit harder and so less would happen.
I don’t think the Green party is “soft” on crime. I just think there is a focus on looking at all the reasons why crime takes place - and trying to address the social issues that underly crime. Yes sure we can carry a big stick. But the other part of that analogy involved that tasty vegan snack the carrot. I wonder if as a society we could find a way to change our approach, and instead of punishing those that do things that upset us, we could perhaps make some social changes that make them want to do something else. Bit radical I know, but as an old teacher once said to me: If you keep on doing what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got.
As a party, the Greens do like to think outside the square. Why not, when the only other option is to shove everybody’s taxes up to pay for loads more prisons so we can lock up everybody who upsets us. I would love to see some more radical ideas on this blog, especially from those who have experienced inside the system: what policies would stop crime from being committed, or what would stop people from wanting to commit crime again?
August 18th, 2006 at 7:26 pm
Steve Williams:
Well said!
The quote: “Give me the child until he is seven and I will show you the man” is very apt for this discussion.
I’m out of date now, but for several years I worked with young women in a precursor to the now official Child Care Training. As one part of their course they each spent time regularly in the home of a mother with young children (selected by Public Health Nurses as being “at risk”). In this one-to-one situation, seen as a “trainee” by the mother (and thus not “a threat”) and under the guidance of an experienced PHN, the young woman was instrumental in helping the young mother to break the cycle of violence that she had been raised under. This was 20 years ago.
Wherever they each succeeded, there is likely to be yet another young adult who DIDN”T end up in prison … It would have been interesting to have followed this through.
It really can be “that simple”. We as a society just have to spend the money for appropriate intervention in the MANY areas it is needed in our society. Personally my vote is for spending much more of the money in looking after the colts (and fillies) in this way rather than in building more places that “lock the stable door after the horse has bolted”…
What are the Netherlands and the Scandinavian countries doing is this regard? They usually seem to be well ahead in social issues.
August 18th, 2006 at 7:36 pm
“Arnett’s experiences were not unusual for Japanese prison inmates, about 100 of whom at any time are Americans serving sentences for crimes ranging from minor drug offenses to murder. But, surprisingly, Arnett, home in Omaha, Neb., says he prefers Japan’s legal system to ours. Why? “Because it’s fair,” he says. “The never tried to trick me, even in interrogation. They were always trustworthy. 1 could have got five years and they gave me two. The Americans who were helping them wanted me to get 20. The guards at Fuchu were hard, but they never messed with you unless there was a reason. You didn’t have to worry about the other prisoners coming after you, either. And the laws of Japan are for everybody. That’s the main thing. The laws in this country depend on how much you can pay. I’d rather live under a hard system that’s fair.”
http://www.jameswebb.com/articles/parade/japanprison.htm
August 18th, 2006 at 8:09 pm
“MARK SIMKIN: The overcrowding reflects some seismic shifts in Japanese society. Japan has long been proud of its status as the safest developed country, but as the economy has deteriorated, the crime rate has soared.
Figures released today suggest the overall rate dropped in 2003, for the first time in eight years, but the number of serious crimes continues its upward march – murders up 4 per cent, robbery up 10 per cent.
HARUHIKO UKAWA: Power of the family, school, or the society itself to suppress crime, well, it has changed. Thirty years ago we had more stronger community ties and family ties were stronger, now the society’s changing and the change in such aspects of the society itself has had some effect on the rise in the number of crimes.”
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2004/s1235961.htm
August 20th, 2006 at 1:32 pm
Oh please Henry, I can see that you are stuck on the point that harsher prisons make for a powerful crime deterrent but I just don’t accept that as an argument, for most of the reasons already mentioned above.
Following along the thread of Eredwen’s comments about the need for supporting early parenting, I would like to highlight another area which I passionately believe society needs to support more and that is active prevention and rehabilitation programs for drug and alcohol abuse.
I was loathe to mention the “D” word here, because it usually comes as an invitation for the morally outraged to step in with a tirade of “greens are the cannabis party”, “being soft on drugs only encourages more drug use” etc etc etc. Nethertheless it doesn’t change the fact that substance abuse and drug profiteering has a significant impact on domestic violence statistics and the motivation to commit crime to fund addiction.
The amount of government health spending that goes towards addiction education and treatment is absolutely appalling, just as appalling as the amount of police and justice spending that goes into pursuing minor victimless crimes related to drug possession. I have had decades of experience dealing with the imapct of these issues in my personal life and it outrages me to see the importance of this factor so minimised.
I am also outraged that we have organised crime here in my beloved Aotearoa and it is an undisputable fact that much of it is funded by drug profits. If we want to weaken the influence of that in our communities we seriously have to look at the impact of how decriminalising cannabis for personal use will destroy a large part of the funding base of their operations.
We also have to seriously consider the impact of incarcerating youths for minor drug offenses, placing them in an enviroment with more serious criminals where they invariably are released with the stigma of a criminal conviction over the rest of their lives and more likely to gravitate towards more serious crimes with the types of people they met in prison.
Seriously folks. This happened to a young man in my extended family - a kind, lovely young kid who would never hurt a fly - who was sent inside for a minor cannabis offense. He came out of prison a few months later as a changed man, recruited into a gang and his life has taken a downward spiral ever since. It just makes me cry.
August 20th, 2006 at 2:46 pm
Actually I agree about the early intervention thing. I had a talk once with a young feral who was part of a group who were making nuisances of themselves. His eyes lit up when I told him how one day he would be able to earn money as (maybe) a truck driver!. What struck me was the plasticity of his young mind.
In the past the local policeman would give a recalcitrant youth the proverbial “boot up the bum” and send them in the right direction. Unfortunately civil liberties lawyers craving for the limelight (”does my hair look o.k?”) got in on the act.
On the Japanese prison thing; if you could eliminate the sadistic behaviour of the guards I think it shouldn’t be written off. For one thing prisoners don’t get to other prisoners in any way (it seems). Our prisoners have earned too many human rights.
I notice that prison patronage increased in Japan when the economy got into trouble and I would also blame modern consumerist society which can in an instant push some people out the door and elevate others in a flash.
Henry
August 20th, 2006 at 4:43 pm
As far as being in prison goes, I would actually prefer to be an inmate in a place where the guards take a tough line on misbehaviour, for the simple reason that I would be less likely to be knifed or raped by another inmate. But the problem with the Japanese system as described was that there was no similar tough line being taken on the guards, who seemed to be able to do what they like, and there was not even minimal care taken of prisoners’ basic needs like nutritious food and warmth.
Something else that has not been mentioned is that a large proportion of prisoners are certifiably insane. So even if one does not have philosophical objections to punishment, it would be unjust to punish these people who are not responsible for their own actions and have no idea what they have done wrong. Such people either need to be cured, or if that is not possible and they are likely to be a danger to society, then kept out of harms way. In the latter case, they are not being punished, simply isolated, and so they should receive a decent standard of care.
August 20th, 2006 at 6:23 pm
In the past the local policeman would give a recalcitrant youth the proverbial “boot up the bum� and send them in the right direction. Unfortunately civil liberties lawyers craving for the limelight (�does my hair look o.k?�) got in on the act.
Romatically, a lot of folks lament the passing of the “boot up the bum” from the beat bobby, but that is the old rose tinted specs at work. Its not the boot thats missing, it’s the local policeman on the beat.
It’s generally best to assign blame where it’s due.
August 20th, 2006 at 9:23 pm
Agree with dbuckley here. I don’t think the local cops have the faintest idea what crime prevention even means. The idea of spending time out in public when no-one’s done a crime yet… why would they do that??
I reckon the reason they do so well at murder investigations is that mostly they know what’s going on, they just can’t be bothered to do anything until someone’s dead…
Agree with whoever was talking about the drugs connection. I work as a drug and alcohol counsellor, and still support the Green party. Why? Cos in the Uk (where I used to live and work) when they changed the law on cannabis it meant that youngsters with a bit of weed could get a good bollocking from the local cop, and not get put in the can with all the other bad guys. Police could then focus their drugs resources on going after the heavy guys like pushers and dealers. I think we get a big social reaction around “legalisation” when in actual fact I view it as “decriminalisation” for simple possession - which would save everyone a lot of paperwork and time that could be better spent actually investigating people’s burglaries…
(The Green party is also the only party with a drugs policy that I can identify, and the only party that wants to make a commitment to increasing the amount of education provided to youth about what drugs can do to munt their brains up). Off topic but there you go.
August 26th, 2006 at 9:47 pm
Criminal Reform. Rehabilitation Is The Only Way Out
Stiffer laws, more jails do nothing to deter crime and can be seen to make things worst.
More Crime, leads to more police which leads to more jails which cultivates more criminals,
leading to more crime, more police more jails etc.
If we produce more criminals than we rehabilitate, we are on a downward spiral. If we turn that around and rehabilitate more criminals than we create, only then can the tide of rising crime and violence turn.
The figures speak for themselves. The 85 percent re-offending rate makes a mockery of current psychiatric-oriented rehabilitation methods, demonstrating that, for all intents and purposes, there is in fact no such thing as criminal rehabilitation practised by these so called experts.
We continue to blame the criminal for the rise in crime and violence. How can they rehabilitate
themselves, when the so call experts [psychiatrists, psychologists, criminologists and sociologists etc] who the tax payer has forked out a fortune to, and most criminals have visited endlessly to get some help, is only able to produce an 85% re-offending rate. With statistics like that, one might think that they had a hidden agenda to produce more criminals and crime.
If you put criminals in charge of crime, one would expect more crime. Are the above criminals or are they just pretending to be experts. Experts get results which is something those above
have failed to do. Many of them unable to help themselves let alone others. I refer to the higher
than normal suicide rate among those professionals.
If a factory produced a product that had an 85% defect rate, it would be closed down. What does our government do? It throws more money at this dead horse. It didn’t work in the first place and has shown not to work now.
We have been conditioned to accept a failure rate that couldn’t go any higher if we worked at increasing it. [85%]
Real rehabilitation seems to be a thing of the past in the schools of crime [prisons] Is it because there is no way to rehabilitate the criminal, once he/she has learnt the trade, or is it that those in charge of rehabilitation, have failed miserably to do anything about the problem?
I would go with the later. Criminals can be rehabilitated and are being rehabilitateted.
It’s about time we demanded results and accountability for our bucks.
My website covers many successful programs, with pilots and statistics that could turn crime, literacy and drug problems on their head. http://www.rehabnz.co.nz
If we continue to follow the same path as we are today and pour more money into failed
programs, without accountability, things can only get worst The existing system has shown that over a period of thirty years, with corrections and police ministers screaming at us, that things are improving because statistics show a miserable two half percent decline in some areas of crime, in an election year.
No one believes this spin anymore, as the facts state differently.
Lets hope the New Minister of Corrections, Hon Damien O’Connor is able to do something
constructive about our dangerous environment [crime, violence, drugs etc] or will he just be
another has been, like the corrections ministers before him, with an increase in crime over the
period they reigned. He has the power , but will he use it wisely?
August 26th, 2006 at 9:49 pm
Criminal Reform. Rehabilitation Is The Only Way Out
Stiffer laws, more jails do nothing to deter crime and can be seen to make things worst.
More Crime, leads to more police which leads to more jails which cultivates more criminals, leading to more crime, more police more jails etc.
If we produce more criminals than we rehabilitate, we are on a downward spiral. If we turn that around and rehabilitate more criminals than we create, only then can the tide of rising crime and violence turn.
The figures speak for themselves. The 85 percent re-offending rate makes a mockery of current psychiatric-oriented rehabilitation methods, demonstrating that, for all intents and purposes, there is in fact no such thing as criminal rehabilitation practised by these so called experts.
We continue to blame the criminal for the rise in crime and violence. How can they rehabilitate themselves, when the so call experts [psychiatrists, psychologists, criminologists and sociologists etc] who the tax payer has forked out a fortune to, and most criminals have visited endlessly to get some help, is only able to produce an 85% re-offending rate. With statistics like that, one might think that they had a hidden agenda to produce more criminals and crime.
If you put criminals in charge of crime, one would expect more crime. Are the above criminals or are they just pretending to be experts. Experts get results which is something those above have failed to do. Many of them unable to help themselves let alone others. I refer to the higher than normal suicide rate among those professionals.
If a factory produced a product that had an 85% defect rate, it would be closed down. What does our government do? It throws more money at this dead horse. It didn’t work in the first place and has shown not to work now.
We have been conditioned to accept a failure rate that couldn’t go any higher if we worked at increasing it. [85%]
Real rehabilitation seems to be a thing of the past in the schools of crime [prisons] Is it because there is no way to rehabilitate the criminal, once he/she has learnt the trade, or is it that those in charge of rehabilitation, have failed miserably to do anything about the problem?
I would go with the later. Criminals can be rehabilitated and are being rehabilitateted.
It’s about time we demanded results and accountability for our bucks.
My website covers many successful programs, with pilots and statistics that could turn crime, literacy and drug problems on their head. http://www.rehabnz.co.nz
If we continue to follow the same path as we are today and pour more money into failed programs, without accountability, things can only get worst The existing system has shown that over a period of thirty years, with corrections and police ministers screaming at us, that things are improving because statistics show a miserable two half percent decline in some areas of crime, in an election year.
No one believes this spin anymore, as the facts state differently.
Lets hope the New Minister of Corrections, Hon Damien O’Connor is able to do something constructive about our dangerous environment [crime, violence, drugs etc] or will he just be another has been, like the corrections ministers before him, with an increase in crime over the
period they reigned. He has the power , but will he use it wisely?
September 12th, 2006 at 6:30 pm
the reason we have punishment is so the person learns and grows..
have you ever though that maybe after 20 year that person isnt the same criminal that did the crime…think hard people are you the same person you were 20 years ago…Im not even the same person 5 years ago…
do any of you have children?? when a child is put in timeout..and after a few minutes of thinking about what they did wrong..arent they sorry..and if they are good and sit there with out a peep dont you let them out earily??…
if your anger be anger…you want justice..help teach the youth its wrong…because you can lock up all the criminals forever but that isnt going to stop the youth from doing crimes….but isnt it called justice when someone is punished for the crime they did…and learned from it….