Justice - for who?
It turns out that the killer was William Watkins, a neighbour of the victims. He has a record of violence and sexual assaults as long as your arm. His last 2 convictions were for breaking into a blind woman’s home and bashing her, breaking her jaw, and robbery and rape of a neighbour. This happened in 1998 and 1999. He got 4 years 3 months gaol for the rape, with another year added for the bashing of the blind woman. He also had other convictions for assault.
The Irwin’s father said with good cause that the justice system had failed his daughters, in allowing Watkins to live next door without being monitored or put on a sex offenders register. He was also critical of the light sentences Watkins received for brutal crimes which were not his first offences.
Anyway, given that he was said to have lived where we did, near the Irwin’s, for about a year. Given his last sentencing was in 2000, it looks then that he served at most about 4 years for the rape and bashing. Had he got the sort of sentence most people would think he should have, he’d still be in gaol, not out raping and murdering again. He was well and truly rehabilitated and ready for release without supervision, wasn’t he? The justice system certainly served his interests far better than his victims.
The only good thing to come of this is that Watkins got himself summary justice when he drove off from a remote roadhouse in Western Australia without paying, and then when pulled over by police, attacked the police offer and was shot and killed for his troubles. Serendipitous, yes, but good riddance!
Today’s news in another case has 2 14 year old girls being charged with the bashing murder of 53 year old taxi driver, Youbert Hormozi, in Sydney on Tuesday morning. These charmers repeatedly bashed him and left him to die on the street, stealing his taxi, and maybe running over him as he lay on the road. In addition, they armed themselves with a knife and attempted to rob 2 people and did rob someone else yesterday. How long will it be, I wonder, before it comes out that these girls had extensive criminal records and probably had been recently bailed on some earlier offences, or released on parole? I think there’s a strong case for holding teenagers who commit particularly violent crimes, or who are clearly habitual criminals, to adult standards of accountability for their acts. Its hard to argue we should go softer on someone who is young beating the shit out of someone compared to an adult - whether 14 or 44, they are still vicious thugs who need to be kept out of the community. Problem is that many young offenders are given numerous chances - while this undoubtedly works with the right people, their are many such young criminals who are never going to improve and should be weeded out as early as possible.
We had a case in point recently in Canberra. A 15 year old boy driving a stolen car ran down and killed a young woman, Clea Rose, while attempting to escape police. He received a 3 year sentence this week, with a minimum 18 months. Turns out he had a long record and had only 6 weeks before been released from a youth detention centre. Interesting comments from the judge in sentencing the youth - first he talked of the need to deter such behaviour, then proceeded to hand out a namby-pamby sentence. I bet the kid will be out committing his next crimes closer to the minimum sentence than the maximum (potentially he could have got 7 years for the offences he was convicted of).
