DOCSLIB.ORG

Victims of Crime - Working Together to Improve Services Conference Proceedings

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Victims of Crime - Working Together to Improve Services Conference Proceedings Victims of Crime - working together to improve services Conference Proceedings Edited by Michael O’Connell Published in 2000 by the South Australian Institute of Justice Studies GPO Box 729 Adelaide South Australia 5001 Victim Support Service Inc PO Box 6610 Halifax Street Adelaide SA 5000 Justice Studies Department Adelaide Institute of TAFE 120 Currie Street Adelaide SA 5000 and the Australasian Society of Victimology GPO Box 2296 Adelaide SA 5001 ISBN 0-9578744-0-5 South Australian Institute of Justice Studies GPO Box 729 Adelaide, South Australia 5001 Telephone: +61 +8 82078319 Facsimile: +61 +8 82078263 Typeset by Michael O’Connell & Katrina Ingram, Adelaide, South Australia. Printed in Adelaide, South Australia. About the Victim Support Service Incorporated The Victim Support Service is a non-government non-profit organisation in South Australia, which provides a comprehensive range of services for people who have suffered as a result of a criminal offence. This includes the direct victims, their families and friends and the wider community. Services include: ⇒ Professional counselling, advocacy and support ⇒ Information about victims’ rights and criminal injuries compensation claims ⇒ Group for women whose children have been sexually abused ⇒ Women’s support group ⇒ Armed hold-up support group ⇒ Court preparation programmes for adults and children who have to appear in court as witnesses ⇒ Court Companion Service, providing support and information for victims and witnesses for the prosecution ⇒ Armed hold-up awareness seminars for groups of employees in cash-handling organisations ⇒ Training seminars for professionals who have contact with victims of crime ⇒ Advocacy for reform to the criminal justice system ⇒ Talks to community groups i About the Adelaide Institute of TAFE The Department of Justice Studies, Adelaide Institute of TAFE is the largest provider of justice and legal education in South Australia. Courses are offered in the areas of private security and investigation, justice administration and policing, and range from Certificate II to Advanced Diploma level. Students enrolled in these courses come from a range of justice agencies including South Australia Police and Courts Administration Authority, private security and investigation agencies and the general public. Adelaide Institute also provides training to overseas justice and legal organizations in the areas of policing methods, court administration and parliamentary systems. Countries in which Adelaide Institute has provided justice and legal training include Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Kiribati and Vietnam. Adelaide Institute actively supports community education in relation to justice administration through its extensive sponsorship of the Institute of Justice Studies and The Justice Network. ii About the South Australian Institute of Justice Studies The South Australian Institute of Justice Studies has been created by joint venture between the Adelaide Institute of TAFE, the University of South Australia and the former South Australian Justice Administration Foundation. To establish the Institute, the South Australian Justice Administration Foundation changed its name to the South Australian Institute of Justice Studies in February 1998. The aims of the Institute include: ⇒ to provide education and training programs in justice administration; ⇒ to promote and conduct research in justice administration; ⇒ to facilitate practitioner access to research in justice administration; ⇒ to foster increased community awareness of justice administration issues; ⇒ to provide research and consultancy services to justice agencies; ⇒ to develop publications relating to justice administration; ⇒ to promote South Australian justice administration education, training and research in the international arena. iii About the Australasian Society of Victimology The Australasian Society of Victimology (ASV) was established in 1988. It is a non- profit, community organisation dedicated to furthering the interests of victims, in particular victims of crime, through research, training and education. The ASV is affiliated with the World Society of Victimology which, in turn, is formally affiliated with the United Nations as a non-government organisation. The ASV is not a government organisation and receives no regular grant from government, although funding support has been granted by government for several ASV ventures including the initial issue of the Journal of the Australasian Society of Victimology, the development of educational materials for the first victimology course at the Adelaide Institute of TAFE, and the convening of the 8th International Symposium on Victimology. The ASV pursues its objectives in various ways including: ⇒ by arranging lectures by prominent academics and theoreticians in victimology, criminology and related areas; ⇒ by convening seminars of practitioners in the fields of victim services and victim counselling; by producing the journal and occasional publications. iv Preface The Victim Support Service (formerly the Victims of Crime Service) was established in South Australia over twenty years ago as a self-help group. It has evolved into a lead organisation for providing victims of crime with a range of professional counselling and support services. It plays a major part in the promotion and development of victim oriented initiatives primarily within the criminal justice system. In May 2000 the Victim Support Service convened in Adelaide a conference entitled ‘Victims of Crime: Working Together to Improve Services’. The conference had six main themes— • the changing nature of crime and strategies to help victims; • the effects of crime on front line service providers; • the introduction of diversionary programs within the criminal justice system and their impact on victims; • the identification of gaps in service delivery; • strategies to minimise victimisation; and • developments associated with the on-going review of victims’ services. The conference aimed to increase the knowledge and understanding of individuals working directly or indirectly with victims of crime. A mixture of keynote addresses and workshops advanced this aim. A ‘market-place’ in which information was displayed to promote organisations, services and programs also helped delegates. The following text includes abstracts, keynote papers, workshop reports and rapporteurs’ reports. It is a comprehensive record of the conference due to those who contributed. Thanks are extended to the conference organisers, in particular John Cobb of the Victim Support Service. The detail in this text is testament to their endeavours to ensure that delegates had a reasonable opportunity to listen to noted people in the victimological field and, importantly, to engage one another through a series of workshops that dealt with the practical realities of working with and for victims of crime. It would be amiss not to acknowledge the time and effort given by Katrina Ingram and Rona Thomas of the Justice Strategy Unit, Attorney-General’s Department who were variously involved with the production of this text, and Josslyn Bateman from CALS, Adelaide Institute of TAFE who designed the cover. This text would not have been possible without the support of the South Australian Institute of Justice Studies and the Adelaide Institute of TAFE. Thanks are extended to these institutions and the other conference sponsors. v vi Table of Contents Introduction Michael O’Connell 1 Opening Address: The Hon K Trevor Griffin, MLC 10 The Criminal Justice System - Meeting victims’ needs The Hon Chief Justice John Doyle 14 Working Together to Improve Services for victims of crime Arie Freiberg 22 Panel Debate: Restitution, Retribution, Restoration - What’s in it for victims? Chair - Mark Israel 36 Participants Gabby Brown – Defence Barrister 36 Jo Carlisle - victim of crime. 36 Paul White – SA Police Assistant Commissioner 37 The Hon. Justice Edward Mullighan - Supreme Court of SA 37 John Paget – Chief Executive Officer for Correctional Services 38 Paul Rofe – Director of Public Prosecutions 38 Interactive Workshops: Practical Initiatives to Reduce the Effects of Victimisation Interactive Workshops: 40 Volunteering 40 Correctional Services 42 Part 1 - Victims of Crime Register 44 Part 2 - Towards Restoration 46 Trauma Counselling 47 Self Help Groups 49 Police Services 51 Restorative Justice 53 Part 1 - Victim Involvement in the Case management of Non-Statutory Adult Offenders 53 vii Part 2 - Family Conferences 53 Legal Processes - Victims Compensation 55 Diversionary Programs within the Criminal Justice System and their effects on Victims 59 Presenters Alan Moss - Chief Magistrate, S.A. 59 Rick Sarre - Associate Professor, Univeristy of S.A. 68 Leigh Garrett - Chief Executive Officer, OARS Inc 81 The Traumatic Effects of Crime on Front Line Service Providers Alexander McFarlane 84 Interactive Workshops: Healthy workers & healthy organisations-what can we do? 100 Group 1 - Vicarious Traumatisation 100 Group 2 - Crisis Response and Child Abuse Services 101 Group 3 - Correctional Services 102 Group 4 - Occupational Trauma Response 103 Group 5 - Child Protection 104 Group 6 - Work Place Counselling 104 Interactive Workshops: Practical initiatives to reduce the effects of victimisation 108 Bullying 108 Children & Young Adolescents 110 Part 1 - Children as Witnesses in Criminal Proceedings 110 Part 2 - Clinical work with Children who have been sexually and physically abused 111 Domestic Violence 112 Elder Abuse
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Prison Privatisation in Au Stralia
    The University of Sydney sydney.edu.au Associate Professor Prison Privatisation Jane Andrew, Dr Max Baker and in Australia: Dr Philip Roberts The State of the Nation 2016 Prison Privatisation in Australia: The State of the Nation Accountability, Costs, Performance and Efficiency Associate Professor Jane Andrew, Dr Max Baker and Dr Philip Roberts Contents Background 1 Purpose 2 Part 1: Prison Privatisation: The State of the Nation Findings 4 Limitations 5 Challenges for the Future 5 Part 2: Prison Privatisation: State-by-State Private Prisons in Queensland 8 Private Prisons in New South Wales 20 Private Prisons in South Australia 31 Private Prisons in Victoria 38 Private Prisons in Western Australia 49 Bibliography 60 Biographies 69 The project was partly funded by an industry partnership grant between The University of Sydney Business School and the Western Australian Prison Officers Union (WAPOU). The researchers independently determined the research design and analysis associated with this project. Neither funding body has had any influence on the findings of this report. Contact Associate Professor Jane Andrew [email protected] +61 2 90366277 Dr Max Baker [email protected] +61 2 90367084 Background Australia now imprisons more people than at any point in its history. As of June 2015, 36,134 people were incarcerated across eight states, and the national imprisonment rate stood at 196 prisoners per 100,000 people (ABS, 2015: Table 2). The total annual net cost of Australia’s prison system stands at $3.4 billion (Productivity Commission, 2014: Table 8A.12). As a result of the growth in prisoner numbers and a variety of pressures on the sector, state governments continue to look for new ways to deliver prison services that are thought to be both socially and fiscally responsible, including various forms of privatisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes from the Structural Trasnformation of the Public Sphere
    Communicating Courts: an Analysis of the Changing Interface Between the Courts and the Media Author Johnston, Jane Published 2005 Thesis Type Thesis (PhD Doctorate) School School of Arts, Media and Culture DOI https://doi.org/10.25904/1912/3332 Copyright Statement The author owns the copyright in this thesis, unless stated otherwise. Downloaded from http://hdl.handle.net/10072/367566 Griffith Research Online https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au Communicating courts: an analysis of the changing interface between the courts and the media Submitted by Jane Louise Johnston B Bus (Comm) MA School of Arts, Media and Culture Faculty of Arts Griffith University Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September 2004 Abstract This research investigates the changing relationship between the courts and the news media in Australia. While providing a broad historical context for this relationship, it focuses specifically on the past decade and the significant changes in communications practice within many Australian court jurisdictions. The study critically examines the role of public information officers (PIOs) in the Australian court system from 1993. It also investigates debates around experimentation with television cameras in Australian courts. It further critically examines other initiatives, undertaken by the courts through the PIO, including the development of court-media liaison committees, judgment summaries, websites and standardised request forms. This investigation brings together a range of perspectives about the court-media relationship. The findings are based on responses from 32 semi-structured interviews, conducted across seven jurisdictions in Australia over 28 months. Those interviewed include judges, PIOs, television reporters, news directors and newspaper reporters.
    [Show full text]
  • Questions Without Notice Friday,2 November
    Questions without Notice 2 November 1984 ASSEMBLY 1781 Friday,2 November 1984 COSTIGAN ROYAL COMMISSION REPORT The SPEAKER (the Hon. C. T. Edmunds) Mr ROSS-EDWARDS (Leader of the took the chair at 10.35 a.m. and read the National Party)-I refer the Premier to the prayer. many recommendations made by Mr Cos­ tigan in his report regarding legislative changes, which are necessary and urgent, QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE and the fact that ready acceptance of those recommendations was reached in principle by the Premier. In the light of those recom­ FEDERAL GOVERNMENT mendations, will the Premier give further PAMPHLET ON SCHOOLS consideration to this Parliament meeting in Mr JONA (Hawthorn)-On my last day's the first fortnight of December to bring sitting in Parliament, I raise with the Min­ about these legislative changes. I refer him ister of Education the 2015th issue I have to four particular areas where the need is raised in this Parliament, over the past 21 obvious: The Lotteries Gaming and Betting years. I ask the Minister whether he is aware Act, the Crimes Act, the Building Societies that the Federal Government pamphlet Act and the Bail Act. entitled "Improving Australian Schools" has Mr CAIN (Premier)-The Government been banned by the Western Australian responded quickly to the recommendations Labor Government for distribution within that were made. As I recollect, some 24 of Government schools in that State on the those recommendations affected Victoria ground that it is mere Federal election solely or in part, and the Government made propaganda, and that there have been moves decisions in respect of some eighteen of to ban the distribution of that booklet in them.
    [Show full text]
  • South Australia Juvenile Justice and Criminal Justice Research on Conferencing and Sentencing
    SAJJ-CJ South Australia Juvenile Justice and Criminal Justice Research on Conferencing and Sentencing Technical Report No. 3 3rd Edition Sexual Assault Archival Study (SAAS): An Archival Study of Sexual Offence Cases Disposed in Youth Court and by Conference and Formal Caution in South Australia by Kathleen Daly, Project Director Brigitte Bouhours Sarah Curtis-Fawley with the assistance of Leanne Weber Rita Scholl Revised, Expanded, and Updated July 2007 1 SAJJ-CJ Technical Report No. 3, 3rd Edition Preface to the Third Edition This third edition of Technical Report No. 3 updates the second edition published in September 2005 (Daly et al. 2005). It describes studies that has been carried out and completed since the second edition and gives up to date citations to recently published papers. Unlike the second edition, this edition does not introduce new results. In December 2003, we published the first edition of Technical Report No. 3 (Daly et al. 2003a), which described the materials gathered and how they were coded, and presented selected results from the Sexual Assault Archival Study (SAAS) in the Final Report (Daly et al. 2003b). During 2004, after further cleaning of the data, the dataset was revised. The revisions were prompted by an analysis of sentencing remarks for 55 finalised, judge-sentenced court cases. The remarks revealed some inaccuracies in the data we had received from the South Australia Justice Data Warehouse for cases that went to trial, and they filled some gaps in the court’s Certificates of Record and the Police Apprehension Reports. The changes made to the dataset had a negligible effect on the results presented in early publications (Daly 2005a; Daly and Curtis-Fawley 2005).
    [Show full text]
  • Cutting Costs and Reducing Reoffending Redesigning Private Prison Contracts for Better Results
    September 2019 CUTTING COSTS AND REDUCING REOFFENDING REDESIGNING PRIVATE PRISON CONTRACTS FOR BETTER RESULTS Institute of Public Aairs CRIMINALJUSTICE Project Andrew Bushnell, Research Fellow Contents Executive summary 3 Introduction 6 1. Key facts: private prisons in Australia 8 2. Incentive design 14 3. Competition 20 4. The case for the reform 26 Conclusion 32 References 33 2 Institute of Public Affairs www.ipa.org.au Executive summary Key messages Criminal justice reform is about making communities safer by reducing crime and reoffending, reforming punishment for nonviolent and low risk offenders, and eliminating waste. Focusing scarce resources on violent criminals and recidivists will improve community safety. Private prisons are responsible for almost one fifth of Australian prison capacity and therefore have a key role in breaking the cycle of offending. Governments can focus private prison operators on this task by tying their profits to their performance in reducing recidivism, measured in simple and absolute terms that are consistent across all prisons and reported publicly. The goal must be to make rehabilitation and cost reduction integral to the business model of prisons by moving from privatisation to marketisation, so that all prisons (private and public) are subject to competitive pressure regarding their performance in rehabilitating offenders. Narrative Australia has a growing prison population and incarceration rate. This has led to massive costs: $15 billion annually on criminal justice, including $4 billion on prisons alone. However, despite this expenditure, almost half of those incarcerated will return to prison within two years of their release. Recidivism is therefore a key driver of the trend towards mass incarceration.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Illicit Drug Policy Timeline
    The Australian (illicit) drug policy timeline: 1985-2019 The Australian (illicit) drug policy timeline provides a list of key events, policy and legislative changes that have occurred in Australia between 1985 and 31 December 2019. Events are listed by jurisdiction, at the federal and state/ territory level. The first table includes events at the federal level. Events in the state and territories are split into two parts. The second table includes events from the Australian Capital Territory, Queensland, New South Wales and the Northern Territory. Events from South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria and Western Australia are listed in the third table. The timeline will continue to be updated bi-annually. Please email through comments or suggested inclusions. Suggested citation: Hughes, Caitlin. (2020). The Australian (illicit) drug policy timeline: 1985-2019, Drug Policy Modelling Program, UNSW and Centre for Crime Policy and Research, Flinders University. Last updated 15 January 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.arts.unsw.edu.au/sprc/research/drug-policy-modelling-program/drug-policy-timeline Year Federal 2019 Large increase in peak bodies – including the Australian Medical Association, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, the Royal Australasian College of Physicians, the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine and the Ambulance Union State Council - formally endorsing a pill testing trial (Jan-Feb). QandA host a special episode on pill testing, drug law reform and drug policy. Panelists included Dr Marianne Jauncey, Dr David Caldicott, Acting Assistant Commissioner Stuart Smith, Former AFP Police Commissioner Mick Palmer and Kerryn Redpath (Feb 18). New report released: “Alcohol and other drug use in regional and remote Australia: consumption, harms and access to treatment” in the aim of identifying trends in alcohol and other drug use in Regional and remote Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • I0by20 Progress Report 2020 Update
    I0BY20 PROGRESS REPORT 2020 UPDATE 1 I0BY20 PROGRESS REPORT 2020 UPDATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF COUNTRY The State Government would like to preface this report with an Acknowledgement of Country. The State Government acknowledge the Kaurna people as the custodians of the Adelaide region and that their cultural and heritage beliefs are still as important to the living Kaurna people today. The State Government would also like to pay respects to the cultural authority of Aboriginal people from other areas of South Australia and Australia who have contributed to the development of the Report and who will be involved in, or impacted by, the ongoing delivery of its recommendations. CONTENTS Minister’s Foreword 4 The Six Strategic Directions 7 1. Successful Return to Community 8 2. Employment and Industry 10 3. Prioritising Target Cohorts 12 4. Strategy for Aboriginal Offenders 16 5. DCS Agency and Staff Response 18 6. Partnerships and Collaboration 20 Acronyms List 22 I0BY20 PROGRESS REPORT 2020 UPDATE 3 MINISTER’S FOREWORD The 10by20 Progress Report 2020 touches on the achievements undertaken by the Department for Correctional Services (DCS) and provides an overview of progress in 2019. It also lists upcoming actions for 2020 against the six strategic directions taken by DCS to improve rehabilitative and organisational outcomes. These directions are grouped under the headings of successful return to community; employment and industry; prioritising target cohorts; strategy for Aboriginal offenders; DCS agency and staff response; and partnerships and collaboration. Since the election of the Marshall Liberal Government, I am proud to say that more than $200 million has been invested in corrections.
    [Show full text]
  • Department for Correctional Services 2018-19 Annual Report
    Department for Correctional Services 2018-19 Annual Report Department for Correctional Services Level 2, 400 King William Street ADELAIDE SA 5000 www.corrections.sa.gov.au Contact phone number: +61 (08) 8226 9000 Contact email: [email protected] ISSN: 1834-0415 Date presented to Minister: 25 October 2019 Public – I2 – A1 2018-19 ANNUAL REPORT for the Department for Correctional Services 2 | P a g e 2018-19 ANNUAL REPORT for the Department for Correctional Services To: The Honourable Corey Wingard, MP Minister for Police, Emergency Services and Correctional Services Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing This annual report will be presented to Parliament to meet the statutory reporting requirements of the Public Sector Act 2009, the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987 and the Correctional Services Act 1982 and the requirements of Premier and Cabinet Circular PC013 Annual Reporting. This report is verified to be accurate for the purposes of annual reporting to the Parliament of South Australia. Submitted on behalf of the Department for Correctional Services by: David Brown Chief Executive Date 25 October 2019 Signature 3 | P a g e 2018-19 ANNUAL REPORT for the Department for Correctional Services From the Chief Executive I am pleased to provide this overview of the 2018-19 Department for Correctional Services Annual Report. The past year has been a challenging and exciting year for the Department with the progression of a number of new and existing projects. We have continued to deliver on public protection and reduced reoffending across all areas of our Agency while maintaining a strong strategic focus on future enhancement to the service we provide.
    [Show full text]
  • Inquiry Into Substance Abuse in Australian Communities
    South Australian Government Submission to Federal House of Representatives’ Standing Committee on Family and Community Affairs Inquiry into Substance Abuse in Australian Communities June 2000 CONTENTS Page 1. Executive Summary and Introduction 3 2. National Drug Strategy and South Australia’s response to Substance Abuse 3 2.1 National Drug Strategy 3 2.2 South Australia’s Response 4 3. Current Substance Use Statistics in South Australia 5 3.1 Alcohol Use 5 3.2 Tobacco Use 7 3.3 Illicit Drug Use 8 3.4 Use of Pharmaceutical Drugs 10 4. Social and Economic Costs of Substance Abuse 11 4.1 Crime 12 4.2 Family Relations 13 4.3 Cultural Issues 14 Aboriginal Communities Multicultural Youth and Communities 4.4 Workplace Safety 14 4.5 Road Safety 15 4.6 Sport 15 ATTACHMENTS A Bibliography & Useful Information References 17 B Examples of Current SA Programs and Services that Address Substance Abuse 20 1. Executive Summary and Introduction The South Australian Government welcomes the opportunity to provide a submission to the Federal Government’s Standing Committee on Family and Community Affairs on the social and economic costs of substance abuse in Australian communities. The terms of reference for the Standing Committee are very broad and cover a wide range of issues. As identified, there are widespread social, health and economic costs associated with substance abuse in our communities covering such areas as family breakdown, crime, violence and law enforcement, road trauma, workplace safety and productivity loss and health care costs. The South Australian Government places a high priority on addressing substance abuse, both licit and illicit, in our community.
    [Show full text]
  • Problem Gambling in the Criminal Justice System In
    FINAL REPORT Rethinking Problem Gambling in the South Australian Criminal Justice System A critical review of the literature on problem gambling and therapeutic justice Office for Problem Gambling Prepared by Oteng Karikari 1 Table of Content Abbreviations ………………………………………………………………………3 Executive Summary....................................................................................................4 PART 1 Introduction ..................................................................................... 6 1.1 Background ………………………...................................................................... 6 1.2 Scope …………………….................................................................................... 7 1.3 Outline …………………...................................................................................... 7 PART 2 Gambling and Problem Gambling ……………............................. 9 2.1 Introduction ………………………….................................................................. 9 2.2 Definition of Gambling and Problem Gambling .................................................. 9 2.3 An Overview of Gambling and Problem Gambling in Australia ….................... 11 2.4 Risk Factors and Comorbidity of Problem Gambling ………............................. 14 2.5 Gambling and Crime ……………………………………................................... 18 2.5 Problem Gambling: Disease or Vice …………………….................................. 21 PART 3 Therapeutic Justice ………………………..………….................. 25 3.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Australian Drug Policy Timeline
    The Australian (illicit) drug policy timeline: 1985-2012 The Australian (illicit) drug policy timeline provides a list of key events, policy and legislative changes that have occurred in Australia between 1985 and December 31 2011. Events are listed by jurisdiction, at the national and state/ territory level. The first table includes events at the federal level. Events in the state and territories are split into two parts. The second table includes events from the Australian Capital Territory, Queensland, New South Wales and the Northern Territory. Events from South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria and Western Australia are listed in the third table. All events added in the last six months are highlighted in yellow. DPMP will continue to update the timeline every June and December. Please feel free to email through any comments or suggested inclusions. Suggested citation: Hughes, Caitlin. (2012). The Australian (illicit) drug policy timeline: 1985-2012, Drug Policy Modelling Program. Last updated February 27 2012. Retrieved from: http://www.dpmp.unsw.edu.au/dpmpweb.nsf/page/Drug+Policy+Timeline. Year Federal 1985 NCADA – National Campaign Against Drug Abuse adopted at Special Premiers Conference. Campaign heralded a partnerships approach to illicit and licit drugs between federal and state and territory governments with the aim of minimizing harms caused by alcohol and others drugs. National Drug Strategy Committee (NDSC) established to lead policy development in conjunction with the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy (MCDS). Methadone endorsed as an appropriate treatment intervention and first guidelines approved by the Australian Health Ministers’ Conference. First national household survey on drugs conducted: “Social issues in Australia, 1985.” 1986 National “Drug Offensive” media campaign launched (Apr).
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to the Parliament of Australia House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs: Inqui
    Submission 103 68%0,66,2172 7+(3$5/,$0(172)$8675$/,$ +286(2)5(35(6(17$7,9(6 67$1',1*&200,77((21 /(*$/$1'&2167,787,21$/ $))$,56,148,5<,172 &5,0(,17+(&20081,7< -XVWLFH3RUIROLR 6RXWK$XVWUDOLD $XJXVW Introduction The nature and extent of crime in our community, and the way in which the criminal justice system responds to both perpetrators and victims of that crime, is a key concern of government. However, it is a very complex issue. Crime is, in many ways, a social construct. What is defined as ‘criminal’ varies not only from one culture to another but also from one time to another within the same culture. Some behaviours considered as criminal at one time in our history are later decriminalised (e.g. drunkenness). Conversely, other behaviours initially considered as acceptable at some later point become criminalised (e.g. drink driving, stalking). Measuring the extent of crime Because crime is a social construct, it is very difficult to measure. There are two main sources of information on the extent and nature of crime. The first source of information is the crime victimisation surveys conducted on a regular basis by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. A randomly selected sample of households and individuals are asked whether they have been victims of specific types of offending, such as vehicle theft, break-in or assault, in the past 12 months. Figures are then extrapolated to the population as a whole. These surveys count all crimes that victims believe they have experienced, irrespective of whether or not these crimes have come to the attention of police.
    [Show full text]