In a surprising turn of events, the Queensland Police Service reports a notable 16% decrease in youth offences in Toowoomba and the Darling Downs region. This announcement comes a year after the alleged murder of 75-year-old Robert Brown outside a shopping centre, which sparked increased scrutiny on youth crime in the area. However, as the police commend their strategies, a criminologist from Griffith University argues for a shift towards a more preventative approach.

The Numbers Tell a Story:

The Queensland Police Service released data indicating a drop from 5,277 youth offences in 2022 to 4,408 in 2023, reflecting a 16% reduction. Superintendent Douglas McDonald attributes this success to a combination of strategies, including the deployment of Taskforce Guardian, the use of PolAir, and the effectiveness of the youth co-responder team. Despite the positive trend, concerns linger, prompting a call for further action.

Toowoomba’s Turning Point

The spotlight on youth crime intensified following Robert Brown’s tragic death, leading to the arrest of three teenagers. The subsequent crime forum, attended by Police Minister Mark Ryan and Commissioner Katrina Carroll, aimed to address community concerns. Superintendent McDonald acknowledges progress but emphasizes the ongoing commitment to ensuring community safety.

National Trends and Proposed Law Changes:

While Toowoomba sees a decline, national data reveals a 6% increase in youth offending across Australia. The Australian Bureau of Statistics notes the first rise in the youth offender rate since 2009-10 statewide. Concurrently, the Queensland government considers potential law changes to enhance transparency around Children’s Court proceedings, signalling a broader attempt to address youth crime.

Criminologist’s Call for Rethink:

Griffith university’s associate professor Troy Allard challenges the celebration of the reported decrease. He urges caution in interpreting the raw data, pointing out the absence of population weighting and consideration for serious repeat offenders in custody. Allard calls for a comprehensive re-evaluation, asserting that the youth justice department should lead the charge rather than the police.

Moving Beyond Deterrence:

While Toowoomba’s reduction in youth crime in commendable, the call for preventative measures and a focus on rehabilitation rather than deterrence challenges conventional thinking. As discussions around potential law changes unfold, the community awaits further developments in the ongoing effort to tackle youth crime in Toowoomba and beyond.

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

The recent announcement of Queensland’s police commissioner, Katarina Carroll, resigning from her position has sent shockwaves through the state’s law enforcement and raised questions about the challenges faced by leaders in managing complex issues like youth crime. The decision comes amidst a backdrop of heightened media scrutiny and discontent with the police force, leaving many to ponder the future of policing in Queensland. 

The controversial legacy:

Katarina Carroll’s tenure as the 20th Police Commissioner of Queensland has been marked by both commendable achievements and contentious moments. From overseeing border closures during the COVID-19 pandemic to leading inquiries into police handling of domestic violence, she faced multifaceted challenges. However, it is the escalating youth crime crisis that has proven to be a formidable test for the commissioner, leading to growing dissatisfaction among frontline officers and calls for her resignation. 

Youth Crime and Leadership:

The youth crime epidemic in Queensland has become a focal point of public discourse, with critics arguing that Commissioner Carroll has not demonstrated effective leadership in addressing the issue. The recent incident involving a senior Gold Coast policeman and the authorization to ram a stolen car has intensified the debate. As calls for decisive action and stronger leadership grow louder, Commissioner Carroll’s decision not to seek a contract extension further complicates the situation. 

Commissioner Carroll’s departure prompts reflections on her contributions to Queensland’s law enforcement. Acknowledging the heart-wrenching moments of officers lost in the line of duty during her tenure, she expressed gratitude for the opportunity to lead an organisation with over 17,000 dedicated staff. As she steps down, questions linger about the impact of her leadership style and decisions on the morale and effectiveness of the force. 

The resignation of Queensland’s Police Commissioner sparks a broader conversation about leadership, accountability, and the challenges faced by law enforcement in addressing societal issues. As the state seeks new leadership to guide its police force, the spotlight remains on the critical need for effective strategies to combat youth crime and maintain the morale of frontline officers. The legacy of Commissioner Katarina Carroll serves as a remainder of the complexities inherent in leadership roles, especially in the demanding realm of law enforcement. 

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

In 2004, Tasmania took a significant step forward in addressing the issue of family violence by introducing the Family Violence Act 2004 (Tas). This landmark legislation marked a paradigm shift, in prioritising the safety, psychological wellbeing, and interests of all individuals affected by family violence. It emphasised a holistic approach that not only protected victims but also recognised the need for rehabilitation and support for offenders. As we delve into the particulars of this act, we witness a comprehensive legal framework aimed at fostering a safer and more supportive environment for those grappling with the repercussions of family violence.

A Comprehensive Definition:

The strength of the Family Violence Act lies in its broad and inclusive definition of family violence. It encompasses various forms of abuse, including economic abuse, which seeks to create dependency or strip individuals of assets, hindering their independence. The Act, outlined in section 7, explicitly recognises emotional abuse or intimidation, acknowledging the profound impact these non-physical forms of violence can have on victims.

Legal Aid’s Commitment:

Recognising the critical need for legal support in family violence cases, Legal Aid Tasmania appointed its first legal aid officer specialising in family violence by the end of 2004. Legal Aid continues to provide non-means tested assistance for victims, ensuring that everyone, regardless of their financial situation, has access to the legal resources necessary for protection.

Evolution and Enhancements:

Since its inception, the Family Violence Act and the accompanying Safe at Home Strategy have undergone regular reviews and updates to enhance their effectiveness. The commitment to continuous improvement underscores Tasmania’s dedication to refining the system and adapting to the evolving challenges posed by family violence.

Police Empowerment through PFVOs:

The Family Violence Act empowers the police with tools such as Police Family Violence Orders (PFVOs). These orders grant the police the authority to intervene swiftly and decisively, requiring offenders to vacate premises, surrender weapons, and refrain from any form of harassment or contact with the affected individuals. Enhanced training and specialist response teams in Tasmania emphasize the enforcement of these orders, making it a priority for the Tasmanian Police Service.

Family Violence Orders: A Court-Centric Approach:

Family Violence Orders (FVOs), granted by the court, complement the proactive role of the police. Courts have the discretion to tailor conditions based on what they deem necessary or desirable to prevent family violence. These orders can extend beyond the scope of PFVOs, allowing the court to alter residential tenancy agreements and confiscate firearms, showcasing a more comprehensive legal authority.

The Family Violence Act 2004 (Tas) stands as a testament to Tasmania’s commitment to combating family violence on multiple fronts. By prioritizing the safety of victims, addressing the root causes through offender programs, and empowering law enforcement with proactive tools, Tasmania has laid the groundwork for a more resilient and supportive society. As this legislation continues to evolve, its impact on curbing family violence and fostering rehabilitation remains a beacon of hope for those affected by the shadows of abuse.

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on (03) 6240 5437.

A Family Violence Order is a legal mechanism designed to stop barriers against the turmoil of family violence. Anyone affected by family violence can apply for an FVO. Police officers can also apply on behalf of victims.

Applications and Considerations:

The court considers the safety and interests of the aggrieved party and any affected child, weighing the necessity of contact between parties and assessing any existing Family Court Orders.

Variation, Extension, or Revocation:

Courts recognise the dynamic nature of relationships and allow for changes to Family Violence Orders, taking into account the safety and interests of all parties involved.

Police Family Violence Orders:

Issued by senior police officers, Police Family Violence Orders provide an immediate response to family violence. These orders come with stringent conditions aimed at safeguarding the victim.

Breaching Orders:

The legal repercussions for contravening a Family Violence Order or a Police Family Violence Order can be severe, reflecting the gravity of the offence. Arrests, charges, and potential imprisonment await those who violate the terms of the orders.

In the maze of family violence, understanding the available legal mechanisms in place is crucial. However, it is equally important to recognise that family violence extends beyond physical harm. It is a complex interplay of power, control and manipulation. As we unravel the layers of family violence orders, we must also unravel the societal norms that perpetuate such toxicity, fostering an environment where love and respect prevail over control and dominance.

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on (03) 6240 5437.

As of 19 February 2024, Todd Fuller KC (Kings Counsel) has been appointed Queensland Director of Public Prosecutions.

Todd Fuller was called to the Bar in 1989 and has since held various positions within the legal system. He served as a Crown prosecutor the same year and has been a full-time Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions since 2016.

Fuller’s experience encompasses all aspects of the criminal justice system across different jurisdictional levels. He has appeared in courts throughout Queensland, including significant trials in the Supreme Court and complex matters before the Court of Appeal.

Outside of his legal practice, Fuller is actively engaged in the legal community. He is a member of the Bar Association of Queensland and serves on several committees related to legal education and university relations. Additionally, he has been a long-term member of the Griffith Law School visiting committee.

Our team specialise in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

In a recent ruling, a Supreme Court Justice was highly critical of Cairns’s police officers for conducting an unlawful vehicle search and emphasised that our society is not a police state.

Senior Constable AG stopped Neale Graham Casemore in Edmonton in June 2022, purportedly due to someone linked to the vehicle being unlicensed. However, it was revealed that the officer had previously observed the vehicle parked at a residence where drugs had been found in 2017 and 2020.

During the subsequent search of the vehicle, illicit substances, cash, and paraphernalia were discovered. However, Justice Henry concluded that Senior Constable AG lacked the reasonable suspicion required for a lawful search under section 31(1) of the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld).

The Crown submitted six facts as grounds for a reasonable suspicion, of which Justice Henry stated were “vague”:

1. the time of night (1am);
2. the nervous state of Mr Casemore;
3. that the vehicle’s registered owner had “previous drug intelligence and occurrences”;
4. that Mr Casemore had “previous drug intelligence and occurrences”;
5. that the vehicle had been seen parked at a home where dangerous drugs had been located in the past; and
6. that the driver of another vehicle which had left the property had been charged with drug trafficking.

Justice Henry highlighted the absence of concrete evidence and questioned the validity of the suspicion, suggesting it was more of a gamble based on past occurrences rather than genuine grounds.

Justice Henry noted that the late-night hour and Casemore’s nervousness were insufficient grounds for suspicion, given plausible alternative explanations. He also pointed out the absence of drug testing for Casemore, further undermining the validity of the suspicion.

While acknowledging the seriousness of drug-related offenses, Justice Henry expressed concern over the frequency of unlawful searches. He stressed the importance of law enforcement agencies adhering to legal standards to protect citizens’ rights, even in the pursuit of justice. Ultimately, he ordered the exclusion of the unlawfully obtained evidence to deter future breaches of privacy and uphold legal integrity.

This ruling provides for the delicate balance between law enforcement’s duty to uphold the law and the protection of individual rights and freedoms. Upholding legal standards is crucial to maintaining public trust and confidence in the legal system. Justice Henry’s decision serves as a reminder that law enforcement agencies must operate within the confines of the law, even in pursuit of justice, to safeguard civil liberties.

Our team are experts in criminal and traffic law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

Troy Cridland, a former NSW Police officer, has been condemned by Judge Jennifer English for what her Honour described as “grossly and egregiously abusing the trust placed in him as a police officer.” The ruling came as Cridland was found guilty of engaging in sexual activities with an underage girl while serving in the police force.

In a landmark decision at the Campbelltown District Court, Judge English delivered a 15-year jail term to Cridland. The conviction came from his repeated sexual encounters with the minor over several months, alongside attempts to exploit her for child abuse material. Additionally, he was found guilty of obstructing justice by coercing the victim’s mother into providing false information to authorities.

The victim, whose identity remains protected under legal provisions, was below 16 years old at the time of the offenses, while Cridland was 28.

In her sentencing remarks, Judge English condemned Cridland’s actions as “predatory,” emphasising how he manipulated both the victim and her mother, leveraging his authority as a police officer. Despite Cridland’s claim that he believed the girl was of legal age and had met her through Tinder, the jury dismissed this defense, affirming the Crown’s argument that he was fully aware of her underage status.

Moreover, Judge English criticized Cridland’s lack of remorse, highlighting discrepancies between his personal assertions and the findings of a report from NSW Community Corrections. The report depicted Cridland as maintaining a self-centred attitude, downplaying his offenses and failing to acknowledge the power dynamic he wielded over the victim.

The trial last for 4 weeks in Lismore District Court, with the jury delivering their verdict after just two hours.

Cridland’s sentence includes a non-parole period of nine years and nine months, with eligibility for release in 2033 after factoring in time served. Cridland is continuing his studies toward a university degree while incarcerated.

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

A woman was found dead in the early hours of February 15th 2024, on her property located between Jimboomba and Beaudesert. Police arrived at the property, where they found the body of the deceased. Police were called to the property after receiving a 000-phone call. The husband of the victim Amarjit Sardar is alleged to have been the one to call police to report the death of his wife.

Mr Sardar has been accused of murdering his wife and was seen in court on the 16th of Feb after being taken to the Beenleigh watchhouse in the evening of the 15th of Feb.

Police are concerned that there was tampering with evidence on Mr Sardar’s behalf. Police predict that forensic examiners will be at the scene for the next several days collecting evidence. This investigation includes a dive squad and SES volunteers.

On the first occasion where Mr Sardar was seen in court, police highlighted that pathology reports and the finalization of all evidence will take at least three months. Mr Sardar will be returning to court in June to have this matter heard again, where it will possibly proceed further to a trial if no agreement has been reached prior. Until then he will stay behind bars.

The children of the couple were not at home at the time of the death and are being supported by loved ones during this time.

Murder is a charge in Queensland which is outlined in the Criminal Code.  The punishment for murder is outlined in section 305 which states “Any person who commits the crime of Murder is liable for imprisonment for life.”  

The charge of murder is strictly indictable which means that it cannot be ultimately dealt with by any other than the Supreme Court.  When a person is charged with Murder they will initially appear before a Magistrate until the matter is committed to the Supreme Court.

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.

The recent stabbing death of 70-year-old Vyleen White in Queensland has reignited the debate surrounding youth bail laws, as the accused 16-year-old had been on bail for armed robbery at the time of the heinous crime. The shocking incident, which unfolded in front of Ms. White’s 6-year-old granddaughter, has prompted calls for stronger measures to address youth crime and ensure public safety.

Queensland Deputy Opposition Leader Jarrod Bleijie has criticized the state government’s approach to youth crime, labelling it as weak and holding it responsible for the tragic outcome. The accused teenager, charged last year with robbery offences, was reportedly released on bail despite police opposition. This revelation has sparked concerns about the efficacy of existing bail laws and whether they adequately protect the community.

Bleijie asserts that the state government’s youth justice policies, implemented since their rise to power in 2015, have weakened the legal framework designed to handle juvenile offenders. He argues that putting the rights of offenders before the rights of victims has led to a slap-on-the-wrist approach, allowing young offenders to evade serious consequences for their actions.

The urgency to reassess Queensland’s Youth Justice Act is now a focal point, with calls to rewrite the entire legislation. Bleijie emphasizes the need for a more robust legal framework that prioritizes public safety and ensures that young offenders face appropriate consequences for their actions. He criticizes the current system, suggesting that weak laws contribute to the rising tide of youth crime across the state.

The tragic incident has prompted a broader discussion about the prevalence of youth crime in Queensland, extending beyond specific regions. Bleijie argues that it is a crisis impacting communities across the state, requiring comprehensive and immediate attention.

While early intervention programs have been touted as a solution, Bleijie questions their effectiveness, challenging the government’s claim of investing billions of dollars into such initiatives. The need for a gold standard in early intervention programs is evident, as weak programs may not be deterring young individuals from a path of criminality.

One contentious issue raised by Bleijie is the concept of detention as a last resort. He argues that the current legal requirement for judges and magistrates to explore alternative options for young offenders before resorting to detention may contribute to a lenient approach that fails to deter repeat offenders.

The call for a rewrite of the Youth Justice Act is not just a political stance; it’s a plea for the safety and well-being of Queensland communities. The tragic death of Vyleen White has become a rallying point for those advocating a re-evaluation of youth bail laws and a stronger stance on youth crime. As Queenslanders grapple with the shock of this abhorrent crime, the pressing question remains: Can the existing legal framework adequately protect the community, or is it time for a comprehensive reassessment and restructuring of youth bail laws in Queensland?

Our team are experts in criminal law. Our role is to sit down with you and work out the strategy that will get you the best possible result. If you have any questions about this article or any other topic of law, please call our team of experts on 1300 066 669.