ASSAULTS ON EMERGENCY SERVICE WORKERS CONSULTATION PAPER NO 2 June 2012 About this Consultation Paper
The reference to the Sentencing Advisory Council for this project was one of four referrals made by the then Attorney-General, Lara Giddings when the Council commenced in October 2010.
This Consultation Paper addresses the capacity of How to respond Tasmania’s sentencing structure to deal with the sentencing of The Sentencing Advisory Council persons found guilty of assaults invites responses to the questions on emergency service workers in discussed in this Consultation Tasmania. It reviews the current Paper. The questions are both Tasmanian provisions applying summarised at the beginning of to assaults on emergency the paper and are also contained service workers and the in the relevant parts of the various measures taken in other paper so that the options can be jurisdictions in Australia and understood in context. overseas. It also reviews the nature and extent of assaults in You may choose to answer some The Sentencing Tasmania. or all of the questions and your Advisory Council answers may be referred to or The questions posed in this paper quoted in the final report. If you The Sentencing Advisory Council aim to inform the Council to do not wish your response to was established in June 2010 by enable it to make the appropriate be published or if you wish to the then Attorney-General, Lara recommendations to the remain anonymous please state Giddings. Attorney-General regarding the to that effect in your response. Acknowledgements suitability, or otherwise, of the After considering all responses, The Council was established, sentencing structure for assaults it is intended the final report will in part, as an advisory body to This Consultation Paper was on emergency service workers in contain recommendations and the Attorney-General. Its other prepared by Ms Lisa Gregg. Tasmania. advice to the Attorney-General functions are to bridge the gap Professor Kate Warner, a member and will be published. between the community, courts of the Council contributed to the This Consultation Paper is and Government by informing, content and editing of this paper. available on the Sentencing Responses should be made in educating and advising on The Council would like to thank Advisory Council Website at writing by Friday 3 August 2012. sentencing issues in Tasmania. The the Department of Justice for www.sentencingcouncil.tas.gov.au Council members consist of Mr access to their data, specifically or can be sent to you by mail or If possible they should be sent by Peter Tree SC (Chair,) Professor Mr Jonathon Rees for assistance email if you contact the Council email to [email protected], Kate Warner, Dr Jeremy Prichard, and sound advice. The Council by email at otherwise they can be mailed to Mr Norman Reaburn, Mr Phil would also like to thank, Tasmania [email protected], by letter the Sentencing Advisory Council, Wilkinson, Ms Kim Baumeler, Mr Police, WorkCover Tasmania and to GPO 825 Hobart 7001 or by GPO Box 825 Hobart 7001 or Chris Gunson, Mr Tony Jacobs Victims Support Service Tasmania phoning (03) 6233 4755. faxed to (03) 6233 3705. and Ms Liz Little. for their data.
ISBN: 978-0-9873492-0-0 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers – hard copy ISBN: 978-0-9873492-1-7 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers – e book (PDF) Copyright © State of Tasmania – Department of Justice This work is copyright, however material from this publication may be copied and published by State or Federal Government Agencies without permission of the Department on the condition that the meaning of the material is not altered and the Tasmanian Department of Justice is acknowledged as the source of the material. Any other persons or bodies wishing to use material must seek permission. Contents
About this Consultation Paper ii How to respond ii The Sentencing Advisory Council ii Acknowledgements ii List of questions posed in this Consultation Paper v
Chapter One: Introduction 1 1.1 Terms of Reference 1 1.2 Background 1 1.3 Outline of the Consultation Paper 2 1.4 The definition of emergency service worker 2 Chapter Two: Provisions for emergency service workers in Tasmania 4 2.1 Tasmanian Criminal Law 4 2.2 Legislation relating to assaults against police officers 4 2.3 Legislation relating to other workplace assaults 5 Chapter Three: Provisions for workplace assaults in other jurisdictions 7 3.1 Introduction 7 3.2 Specific offence provisions 7 3.3 Penalty enhancement provisions 10 3.4 Sentence aggravation provisions 12 3.5 Mandatory minimum sentences 12 Chapter Four: Sentencing in Tasmania 15 4.1 The power to impose sentence 15 4.2 Sentences for assaulting police officers 15 4.2.1 The charging process 16 4.2.2 The relevant factors in sentencing an offender 16 4.2.3 Sentences for adult offenders pursuant to s 114 of the Criminal Code 17 4.2.4 Sentences for adult offenders pursuant to the Police Offences Act 1935 18 4.2.5 Sentences for juvenile offenders pursuant to the Police Offences Act 1935 20 4.3 Sentences for other workplace assaults 21 Chapter Five: The need for reform 23 5.1 Introduction 23 5.2 Part A – Assaults against police officers 23 5.2.1 The seriousness of assaults 24 5.2.2 The number of assaults 25 5.2.3 Interpretation of the data 26 5.2.4 Mandatory minimum sentences in Western Australia 26 5.3 Part B – Assaults against emergency service workers 28 5.3.1 Workers compensation claims 28 5.3.2 Assualts on ambulance and emergency staff 29 5.3.3 Victims Support Services 30 Chapter Six: Options for reform 32 6.1 The definition of an emergency service worker 32 6.2 Option 1 – No change 32 6.2.1 Tasmania Police 33 6.2.2 Emergency service workers 33 6.3 Option 2 – A new criminal provision 34 6.4 Option 3 – Penalty enhancement provisions and graduation of penalties 35 6.5 Option 4 – Sentence aggravation provisions 36 6.6 Option 5 – Mandatory minimum penalties and sentences 37 6.6.1 Special penalties and mandatory minimum penalties for summary offences 37 6.6.2 Mandatory minimum sentences 38
Appendix A 40
Abbreviations
ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics ASCO Australian Standard Classification of Occupations DPP Director of Public Prosecutions GBH Grievous Bodily Harm POA Police Offences Act 1935 (Tas) SES State Emergency Service TFS Tasmania Fire Service VCS Victims of Crime Service VSS Victims Support Services
iv Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) Questions posed in this Consultation Paper
Definition: page 32 exceeding 3 years if the emergency service worker assaulted suffers harm? How should ‘emergency service worker’ be defined? d) Should s 35 be amended to provide that where an Question 1 page 34 assault is committed on an emergency service worker there be maximum penalty not exceeding 50 penalty Do the existing laws and current sentencing practices in units or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 Tasmania provide an adequate response to assaults on years? emergency service workers? e) Should s 35 have a graduation of penalties so that in Question 2 page 35 addition to a maximum penalty not exceeding 50 penalty Should Tasmania introduce further offences for an units or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 assault on an ‘emergency service worker’ in the Criminal years for assaulting an emergency service worker, there Code or the Police Offences Act 1935? be a maximum penalty not exceeding 75 penalty units or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years if the Question 3 page 35 emergency service worker assaulted suffers harm? a) Should s 34B(1) of the Police Offences Act 1935 Question 4 page 37 have a graduation of penalties so that in addition to a maximum penalty not exceeding 50 penalty units or Should a special sentence aggravation provision be to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years for inserted into the Sentencing Act 1997 to make an assault assaulting a police officer, there be a maximum penalty on an emergency service worker an aggravating factor in not exceeding 75 penalty units or to imprisonment for a sentencing? term not exceeding 3 years if the police officer assaulted Question 5 page 38 suffers harm? Should mandatory fines be considered in Tasmania for b) Should s 34B(2) be amended to provide that where a offenders who assault emergency service workers? public officer is an emergency service worker, there be a maximum penalty not exceeding 50 penalty units or to Question 6 page 38 imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years? Should any other type of mandatory penalty be c) Should s 34B(2) have a graduation of penalties so considered in Tasmania for offenders who assault that in addition to a maximum penalty not exceeding emergency service workers? 50 penalty units or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years for assaulting an emergency service Question 7 page 39 worker, there be a maximum penalty not exceeding Should mandatory minimum sentences be considered 75 penalty units or to imprisonment for a term not in Tasmania for offenders who assault emergency service workers? Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) v
1. Introduction 1.1 TERMS OF REFERENCE 1.2 BACKGROUND The then Attorney-General, Lara Giddings sought Police officers and emergency service workers work advice from the Sentencing Advisory Council (the tirelessly in the community with the aim of protecting Council) into assaults on emergency service workers. and making it a safer place. Unfortunately, the risk of The terms of reference for this advice were agreed being the victim of an assault is becoming inherent between the Council and the now Attorney-General, in the role of police officers, paramedics, ambulance Brian Wightman in September 2011 as follows: workers and hospital staff. The Drug and Crime Prevention Committee of the Victorian Parliament1 The Council is asked to research and advise on has published information showing that there is an the various measures taken in other jurisdictions increased risk of assault for people working in particular to address assaults on emergency service workers professions. Those at greater risk include taxi drivers, having regard to the general offences and laws on police officers, security staff, medical staff and people sentencing for assaults; the creation of targeted working late at night. It is also stated that as many as offences; sentencing criteria and any mandatory or ten per cent of victims attending Victorian emergency minimum sentences. departments for assault injuries are engaged in paid work at the time of assault.2 The research should encompass In Tasmania in March of 2010 the Opposition Leader, • the current Tasmanian provisions applying to Will Hodgman, announced as part of the Liberal Party assaults on emergency workers; ‘Tough on Crime’ election policy the intention to create • the relevant provisions introduced in other a new crime of Serious Assault committed by adult jurisdictions in Australia and relevant overseas offenders against police and emergency service workers. jurisdictions; The new crime was to have a minimum of 6 months imprisonment when the assault resulted in bodily harm • the findings of any assessments as to to the victim. This offence was to apply to victims who the effectiveness of provisions in other were police officers, ambulance officers, fire officers, jurisdictions which are aimed specifically at hospital workers, prison officers, child protection emergency workers (or similar target groups); workers, community corrections staff and youth justice and workers.3 The Police Association of Tasmania welcomed the minimum sentence announcement, stating that this Your advice should also cover whether there is a
need for reform in Tasmania with a summary of 1 Drugs and Crime Prevention Committee, Parliament of Victoria, Inquiry into the options for reform with arguments both for strategies to reduce assaults in Public Places in Victoria. (2010), 70. Retrieved July 2011 from
Presently in Tasmania there are some provisions in the Chapter Five considers the extent and severity of Criminal Code and the Police Offences Act 1935 (POA) assaults against police officers, and the extent and specifically aimed at the protection of people who are severity of assaults against other workers who are assaulted in their workplace. Many other acts have assaulted at their place of employment or engaged provisions to protect an employee from obstruction in the duties of their employment when the assault and/or an assault where they are inspectors or happened. The aim of this chapter is to inform the authorised officers. However, there are no provisions reader of the true extent of these assaults. The final which expressly cover assaults against emergency chapter – Options for Reform, presents a range of service workers. options available and the arguments for and against those options. In other Australian jurisdictions there are assault provisions specifically in respect of emergency service 1.4 THE DEFINITION OF workers, the scope includes ambulance and paramedic EMERGENCY SERVICE WORKER workers, people working in hospitals or otherwise providing medical care such as doctors, nurses and allied The terms of reference for this referral did not include health professionals. Some jurisdictions have further a definition for an emergency service worker. legislative provisions for occupational assaults other Some jurisdictions use a restricted definition which than emergency service workers, these include health covers, police, fire and ambulance officers. Other workers, teachers, community and child protection jurisdictions include all of those at the first point of workers. contact in an emergency, including volunteers in the The aim of this Consultation Paper is to inform the form of fire officers, ambulance officers and first aid question as to whether Tasmania’s sentencing structure workers. One Australian jurisdiction simply makes it an adequately covers assaults on emergency service offence to assault or hinder anyone providing rescue, workers and to present options for reform. resuscitation, medical treatment or first aid. This more general provision is an exception and in most instances 1.3 OUTLINE OF THE the provisions are not defined by a general description CONSULTATION PAPER of activity but by a specific category of worker. This Consultation Paper outlines in Chapter Two For the purposes of this Consultation Paper the Council the existing legislative provisions for assaults against has used the following definition for an emergency police officers and assaults against emergency service service worker: workers Tasmania. Chapter Three gives examples of the various provisions in other jurisdictions in Australia and ‘Any person engaged, whether for remuneration or overseas. These are explained and categorised by the voluntarily, in the Tasmania Police Service, the SES, different types of provisions available, whether they be TFS, Ambulance Tasmania, or any person providing in the offence or sentencing provisions. rescue, resuscitation or medical treatment including, but not exclusively, people employed in hospitals.’ Chapter Four will then consider at length the sentencing for these offences in Tasmania. The chapter first covers This definition provides the parameters of the assaults against police including the charging process discussion in this paper. If, following consultation, the Council recommends legislative change in the final report, the advice to the Attorney-General will include 4 Police Association of Tasmania, ‘PAT welcomes minimum sentence announcement’ (Media Release, 3 March 2010), Retrieved April 2011 an appropriate definition of an emergency service
Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 3 Provisions for emergency service workers in Tasmania 2.2.1 TASMANIAN CRIMINAL LAW general assault provisions that are currently available for other workplace assaults in Tasmania. Criminal offences are classified as indictable or summary offences. Indictable offences are generally more serious 2.2 LEGISLATION RELATING TO and are heard in the Supreme Court and, in cases of not guilty pleas, by a jury. The Criminal Code is the major ASSAULTS AGAINST POLICE source of indictable offences in Tasmania. All offences in OFFICERS the Criminal Code have the same maximum penalty of Assaulting, resisting or obstructing a police officer 21 years imprisonment with the exception of murder in the execution of his or her duty is an offence at and treason, which have a maximum penalty of life both a summary and indictable level in Tasmania. The imprisonment. difference between the offence of common assault and the specific offence of assaulting a police officer is the Summary offences are less serious offences and are requirement that the prosecution prove two additional heard in Magistrates Courts. The POA is a major elements, first that the person assaulted was a police source of summary offences but there are hundreds of officer and secondly that the officer was acting in the summary offences scattered throughout other legislative execution of his duty at the time of the assault. instruments in Tasmania. Summary offences have their own penalty provisions for each offence. Normally the Any person, who assaults, resists or obstructs a police penalty is the maximum penalty that can be imposed officer in the execution of his duty (or any other person for that offence.5 However, in some limited cases, such lawfully assisting him) is guilty of a crime pursuant to as drink driving offences, the penalty provision will s 114 of the Criminal Code. As with all offences in include a minimum penalty as well as a maximum. the Criminal Code, the maximum penalty is 21 years imprisonment.6 Some offences will have a summary version of an offence and an indictable version. For example, assault Section 34B(1)(a) of the POA provides a summary is both an indictable offence in s 184 of the Criminal offence for assaulting, resisting or obstructing a police Code and a summary offence in s 35 of the POA. officer or a person lawfully assisting a police officer Assaulting a police officer or public officer is also a in the execution of his duty. This offence attracts a crime pursuant to the Criminal Code and an offence maximum penalty of 50 penalty units7 or two years pursuant to the POA. Whether to charge a person imprisonment or both.8 Section 34B(1)(b) creates an with the indictable or summary version of the offence offence of threatening, intimidating, or using abusive is a matter for the discretion of the prosecution and is normally determined by the seriousness of the assault. 6 Criminal Code s 389(3). 7 A penalty unit is $120 and is calculated in accordance with a formula set out in s 4A of the Penalty Units and other Penalties Act 1987 (Tas). The remainder of this chapter details the specific 8 Section 37(5A) Acts Interpretation Act 1931 (Tas ) ‘Where in an Act a penalty legislation relating to police officers and describes the specified in respect of an offence against the Act or a provision of the Act is a fine or term of imprisonment, the offence is, unless the contrary is expressly provided, punishable by the fine, or by the term of imprisonment, or both.’ 5 Acts Interpretation Act 1931 (Tas) s 37. 4 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) language to any police officer. This offence also attracts abusive or insulting language to an officer or a person a maximum penalty of 50 penalty units or two years assisting that officer. Other examples are found in imprisonment. These penalties are double that for the s 76 of the Animal Health Act 1995 and s 45 of the offence of common assault pursuant to s 35 of the POA. Food Act 2003.12 Offences can also be found in specific legislation to protect certain workers exposed to risk The elements for assaulting a police officer in the in their line of work, for example s 7 of the Sex Industry Criminal Code and the POA are the same in that the Offences Act 2005 makes it an offence to intimidate victim was a police officer and was acting in the assault or threaten to assault a sex worker. due execution of his or her duty at the time of the assault. The determination whether to charge at a Pursuant to s 60 of the Emergency Management summary or indictable level is generally made by the Act 2006 it is an offence to assault, resist, impede or police prosecutor.9 Warner has noted that in practice obstruct an emergency management worker who is assaulting a police officer is ‘prosecuted summarily participating in emergency management or a rescue unless there are aggravating factors such as the use of a and retrieval operation. The penalty is a fine not lethal weapon or an unusual factor is present.’10 exceeding 100 penalty units or a term of imprisonment not exceeding three months. This Act provides for the 2.3 LEGISLATION RELATING TO protection of life, property and the environment in the OTHER WORKPLACE ASSUALTS event of an emergency. It provides for continuation Pursuant to s 34B(2) of the POA it is an offence to of the State Emergency Service, administrative assault, resist, intimidate, wilfully obstruct a public officer, arrangements for effective emergency management and or use abusive language to any such person in the the essential powers and the means to declare a state 13 execution of his duty. The penalty for this offence is a of emergency for major emergencies. An emergency fine not exceeding 25 penalty units or imprisonment is defined as an event that endangers, destroys or for a term not exceeding 12 months. This is similar in threatens to endanger or destroy human life, property penalty to common assault of a fine not exceeding 20 or the environment requiring a significant response penalty units or imprisonment for a term not exceeding from one or more of the statutory services. The State 14 12 months. In s 34B(2) a public officer is defined Controller may make an authorisation as to whether as any person acting ‘in good faith in the execution, or not a state of emergency has been declared. An or intended execution, of an Act or a public duty or ‘emergency management worker’ includes all who, in authority.’ At common law a public officer has been good faith, participates in emergency management or defined as ‘an officer who discharges any duty of which rescue and retrieval operations under the Act, including the public are interested, more clearly so if he is paid emergency services volunteers. Essentially this out of a fund provided by the public.’11 This section provision will only protect an emergency service worker presumably covers government employed ambulance from an assault in the event that a state of emergency and fire officers but excludes private ambulance has been declared. services (of which there are at least two in the State) There are no provisions that specifically name or, for example, a private security guard employed by a emergency service workers in the general criminal contract company. legislation in Tasmania. If a person is assaulted in the Most legislation that provides for inspectors or workplace when providing assistance in an emergency authorised officers has offences available if the inspector situation and they fall under the definition of a public or officer is obstructed or assaulted in the course of officer then s 34B(2) of thePOA is an offence provision their duties, whether in their own workplace or the available. As mentioned, the penalty for this offence business they are inspecting or visiting. For example is similar to that of common assault. Normally, if the s 43 of the Child Care Act 2001 makes it an offence person assaulted is a fire officer, ambulance officer or to resist, impede, obstruct, assault or use threatening 12 See���������������������� also s������������� 135 of the Gaming Control Act 1993 (Tas), s 203 of the Living Marine Resources Act 1995 (Tas), s 101 of the Monetary Penalties Enforcement Act 2005(Tas). 9 The charging process is explained in full in section 4.2.1. 13 Tasmanian���������������������� Parliament, Parliamentary Debates. Legislative Council. (14 June 10 Warner K, (2002) Sentencing in Tasmania. Federation Press. 292. 2006) (Mr Llewellyn MHA). 11 Per������������������ Lawrence J in R v Whitaker [1914] 3 KB 1283 at 1296. 14 As defineddefi ned in s 10 of theEmergency Management Act 2006 (Tas). Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 5 hospital worker, charges are laid pursuant to the general assault provisions in the POA or the Criminal Code.
Common assault and aggravated assault can be found in s 35 of the POA. This section has a maximum penalty of a fine not exceeding 20 penalty units or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months for a common assault. Pursuant to s 35(2) an aggravated offence increases the penalty to a fine not exceeding 50 penalty units or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. In Fletcher v Barrett15 Nettlefold J held that aggravated means aggravated in respect of violence or force. The occupational status of the victim was not mentioned.
For serious assaults, charges can be laid pursuant to the Criminal Code. Section 184 covers common assault and s 183 covers aggravated assault. Pursuant to s 183(a) assault is aggravated if the offender intended to commit a crime, or to resist or prevent lawful apprehension. Section 183(b) also provides for an aggravated assault if a person assaults, resists, or wilfully obstructs any person in the lawful execution of any process against any lands or goods, or in the making of any lawful distress, or with intent to rescue any goods taken under such process or distress. This section is rarely used and only covers an assault on a bailiff or similar.
Pursuant to s 170 of the Criminal Code a person is guilty of a crime if they do certain acts such as wounding or bodily harm with the intent to disfigure or disable. Pursuant to s172 a person is guilty of a crime if they cause grievous bodily harm (GBH) or they unlawfully wound another.
15 Fletcher v Barrett, Tasmanian Unreported Decision, Nettlefold J, 2 May 1975. 6 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) Provisions in other 3. jurisdictions 3.1 INTRODUCTION 3.2 SPECIFIC OFFENCE PROVISIONS In all jurisdictions in Australia it is an offence to assault A specific offence is where the legislation specifically a police officer in the execution of his or her duty. states that it is an offence to assault a person who is of There is a wide variation between jurisdictions as to a certain occupation or is a certain class of worker. All the legislative protection afforded to other classes of States in Australia have a specific offence for assaulting worker and the type of provision available. Following a police officer, some jurisdictions have specific offences is an explanation of some of these provisions and to cover other occupational groups. Examples of examples of how they are used in other jurisdictions. specific offences to cover assaults against police officers and assaults against other occupational groups are found in Tables 1 and 2 respectively. Table 1: Examples of specific offences in other jurisdictions for assaulting a police officer.
AUSTRALIA STATE SPECIFIC DEFINITION NATURE OF OFFENCE AND PENALTY PROVISION New South Crimes Act 1900 Constable, or other peace It is an offence to assault an officer in the execution of his/her duty. Wales (NSW) s 58 – officer, custom-house officer, The maximum penalty is 5 years imprisonment. Assault with intent prison officer sheriff’s officer, to commit a or bailiff, or any person in the serious indictable aid of such an officer. offence on certain officer
Crimes Act 1900 Police Officer N.B These offences range from assault, stalking and intimidation to (NSW) s 60 – recklessly wounding a police officer during a public disorder. The Assault and other details and associated penalties for these offences are included in actions against Table 3 -penalty enhancement provisions. Police Officers
Queensland Qld Criminal Code Police Officer Assault, resist or lawfully obstruct a police officer. Assault with intent s 340 – Serious to commit a crime, with intent to resist or prevent lawful arrest or assaults detention of himself or any other person.
The circumstances in which a person assaults a police officer include: but are not limited to, circumstances in which the person bites, spits on or throws a bodily fluid or faeces at a police officer is liable to imprisonment of up to 7 years. Northern Criminal Code Act Police Officer Unlawful assault a police officer in the execution of the officer’s Territory s 189A – Assaults duty. If found guilty of a crime is liable for imprisonment for 5 years on Police or upon being found guilty summarily to imprisonment for 2 years. Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 7 Victoria Crimes Act 1958 Member of the police force Assaults or threatens to assault, resist, or intentionally obstruct. (Vic) s 31 – or a protective services Liable to imprisonment of up to 5 years. Assaults officer or a person acting in aid of these officers OVERSEAS JURISDICTIONS COUNTRY LEGISLATION DEFINITION NATURE OF THE OFFENCE AND PENALTY New Zealand Summary Offences Any constable, any prison Imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months and a fine not Act 1981 s10 – officer, or any traffic officer exceeding $4,000 Assault on Police, acting in the execution of Prison or traffic his duty. officer The Crimes Act Any constable or any person Everyone who assaults another person with intent to commit or 1961 s 192 – acting in the aid of any facilitate the commission of any crime or to avoid or arrest or to Aggravated Assault constable, or any person in facilitate the flight if himself or any other person. Imprisonment for the lawful execution of any a term not exceeding 3 years process. United Kingdom Police Act 1996 s Constable or a person Liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not 89 – Assaults on assisting a constable in the exceeding six months or a fine. Constables execution of his duty.
Table 2: Specific offences for other occupational assaults.
AUSTRALIA STATE SPECIFIC CLASS OF WORKER NATURE OF OFFENCE PROVISION New South Crimes Act 1900 A ‘law enforcement officer’ is defined as a police N.B These offences range from assault, Wales (NSW) s60A – officer, the commissioner for the independent stalking and intimidation to recklessly Assault and other commission against corruption the commissioner wounding a law enforcement officer The actions against law or an officer for the police integrity commission, details and associated penalties for these enforcement officers commissioner or member of staff of the New offences are included in Table 3-penalty (other than police South Wales crime commission, the Commissioner enhancement provisions officers) of corrective services, governors of corrective services, correctional officers and probation and parole officers, an officer of the department of Juvenile Justice, a crown prosecutor or acting crown prosecutor, a legal practitioner employed as a member of staff of the Director of Public Prosecutors or a sheriffs officer.
Crimes Act 1900 Constable, or other peace officer, custom-house Any person with intent to commit a (NSW) s58 – Assault officer, prison officer, sheriffs officer or bailiff or any serious indictable offence or assaults, with intent to person acting in aid of such officer resists or wilfully obstructs any officer commit a serious while in the execution of his or her duty indictable offence on Shall be liable to imprisonment for 5 certain officers years Queensland Qld Criminal Code (2) Any prisoner who unlawfully assaults a working Liable to imprisonment for 7 years s 340 – Serious corrective services officer assaults (2AA) A person who unlawfully assaults, or resists or wilfully obstructs a public officer
‘Public Officer’ includes a: member officer or employee of a service established for a public purpose under any Act eg Ambulance Service Act 1991; a health service employee eg Health Services Act 1992: an authorised officer under theChild Protection Act 1999: a transit officer under the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994.
8 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) Northern Criminal Code Act Any person providing rescue, resuscitation, medical Unlawfully assaults, obstructs or hinders Territory (NT) 155A – Assault, treatment, first aid or succour of any kind to a third Liable to imprisonment for 5 years. If obstruction etc of person the person endangers the life of the persons providing third person then they are liable to rescue, medical imprisonment for 7 years. treatment or other aid Victoria Summary Offences Operational staff member within the meaning of the Assault, resist, obstruct, hinder or delay Act 1966 (Vic) Ambulance Service Act 1986. an 6 Months imprisonment s 51 – Obstructing operational staff members OVERSEAS JURISDICTIONS COUNTRY LEGISLATION CLASS OF WORKER NATURE OF OFFENCE New Zealand Crimes Act 1961 Any constable or any person acting in the aid of any Intentionally assaults or obstructs 3 years s 192 – Aggravated constable or any person in the lawful execution of imprisonment Assault any process. Crimes Act 1961 Any constable, any traffic officers or any prison Uses a firearm in any manner is liable to s 198A (1) officers acting in the course of his/her duty. imprisonment of 14 years.
Crimes Act 1961 Uses a firearm in any manner with intent s 198A (2) to resist lawful arrest or detention of himself or any other person is liable to imprisonment for 10 years United Kingdom Emergency Workers Emergency worker or person assisting an emergency obstructing or hindering an (Obstruction) Act worker. This definition also includes persons 2006 s 1 and 2: providing services for the transport of organs, the coastguard and any operating vessel for the purpose of providing rescue or resuscitation, medical treatment or first aid. The Criminal Justice Prison custody officer Act 1991 (c.53) s 90 The County Courts Act Officer of the court 1984 s 14 Offences against the Any person with intent to prevent or resist the A person can be guilty of a summary Person Act 1861 s 38 lawful apprehension of himself or any other person offence and be subject to imprisonment for an offence. This charge is available for assaults for a term not exceeding 6 months or on persons other than police officers, for example a and/or a fine or an indictable offence and security guard trying to apprehend a shop lifter. be subject to a term not two years and/ or a fine. Canada Canadian Criminal Public officer or peace officer or a person acting in A person can be guilty of an indictable Codes16 270(1) the aid of such an officer. offence and be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or a A ‘peace officer ‘ includes a member of the summary offence punishable on summary Correctional Service of Canada, an officer within the conviction meaning of the Customs Act, Immigration and Refugee Act, Costal Fisheries Protection Act, the Aeronautics Act and the National Defence Act 16
16 Full official title is ‘An Act respecting the criminal law’ (R.S.C. 1985, c C-46 as amended).
Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 9 3.3 PENALTY ENHANCEMENT provisions attached to it. An example is that of PROVISIONS assaulting a police officer pursuant to s 189ACriminal Code (NT) which has a more severe penalty if the A penalty enhancement provision imposes an additional assault causes harm and an even more severe penalty penalty for a specified pre-existing offence. An example if the harm is serious. South Australia has a provision of a penalty enhancement provision is found in the POA in the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) that where a common assault, s 35(1) is liable on summary is technically a sentence enhancement provision but conviction to a fine not exceeding 20 penalty units or it is set out differently within the Act. In this case, the to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, circumstances which make an offence aggravated are s 35(2) of the Act states that if the court considers not contained within each offence but are listed in Part the assault is of an aggravated nature the offender is 1 – Preliminary. Each offence contained in the Act has liable to a fine not exceeding 50 penalty units or to a maximum penalty prescribed for a basic offence and imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. a higher penalty for an aggravated offence. Examples of Rather than just one penalty enhancement provision, penalty enhancement provisions in other jurisdictions an offence may have a series of penalty enhancement are demonstrated in Table 3.
Table 3: Penalty enhancement provisions and graduation of penalties.
AUSTRALIA STATE LEGISLATION OFFENCE ENHANCEMENT PROVISION New South Wales Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Section 60 (1) A person who assaults, throws Liable to imprisonment for 5 years s 60-Assault and other missiles at, stalks, harasses or intimidates a actions against a police police officer while in the execution of the officer. officer’s duty although no actual bodily harm is occasioned to the officer
Section 60 (1A) during a public disorder Liable to imprisonment for 7 years
Section 60 (2) and the assault occasions actual Liable to imprisonment for 7 years bodily harm
Section 60 (2A) during a public disorder and Liable for imprisonment for 9 years the assault occasions actual bodily harm
Section 60 (3) a person who recklessly Liable for imprisonment for 12 years wounds a police officer or inflicts grievous bodily harm Liable for imprisonment for 14 years Section 60 (3A) during a public disorder and a person who recklessly wounds a police officer or inflicts grievous bodily harm Liable for imprisonment for 5 years Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Section 60 A(1) A person who assaults, throws s 60A – Assault on missiles at, stalks, harasses or intimidates a other actions against law law enforcement officer (other than a police enforcement officers officer) while in the execution of the officer’s (other than police duty although no actual bodily harm is officers) occasioned to the officer Liable to imprisonment for 7 years Section 60 A(2) and the assault occasions actual bodily harm Liable for imprisonment for 12 years Section 60A (3) a person who recklessly wounds or inflicts grievous bodily harm on a law enforcement officer( other than a police officer)
10 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) Northern Territory Criminal Code Act 1983 Section 189A(1) Any person who unlawfully Liable to imprisonment for 5 years, (NT) s 189A Assaults on assaults a police officer in the execution of the or, upon being found guilty summarily, Police officer’s duty to imprisonment for 2 years
Section 189A(2) If the police officer assaulted Liable to imprisonment for 7 years suffers harm or, upon being found guilty summarily, for imprisonment for 3 years Section 189A(3) If the police officer assaulted suffers serious harm Liable for imprisonment for 16 years South Australia Criminal Law Consolidation 5AA(1)(c) an offence is aggravated if it is Act 1935 – Aggravated committed against a police officer, prison Offences officer or other law enforcement officer
5AA(k)(i) the circumstances can be aggravated if the victim was of a particular vulnerability at the time of the offence because of the nature of his or her occupation or employment.
5AA(k)(ii) the circumstances can be aggravated if the victim, was at the time of the offence, engaged in a ‘prescribed occupation’ or employment and the offender knew that the victim was engaged in that occupation and the nature of that occupation. A prescribed occupation is defined as emergency work in the Criminal Law (General) Regulations of 2006 and includes; country and metropolitan fire service officers, State emergency service officers, ambulance and St John Ambulance officers, members of Surf Life Saving, a body or organisation that is a member of Volunteer Marine Rescue, and those who work in the accident and emergency department of a hospital. OVERSEAS JURISDICTIONS COUNTRY LEGISLATION OFFENCE ENHANCEMENT PROVISION Canada By s 270 of the Canadian 270 Assault a Public A person can be guilty of an indictable offence and be Criminal Code – Assault a officer or peace officer or liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years Peace Officer a person acting in the aid or a summary offence punishable for a term of 18 months of such an officer or a $5,000 fine.
270.01 if the person The punishment of this offence is increased to ten years committing the assault as an indictable offence and 18 months on summary carries, or threatens to conviction carry a weapon or causes bodily harm
270.02 if the victim The punishment of this offence is increased to 14 years, is wounded maimed, and is considered an indictable offence only disfigured or their life is endangered
Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 11 3.4 SENTENCE AGGRAVATION 3.5 MANDATORY MINIMUM PROVISIONS SENTENCES Sentence aggravation provisions are usually found in A mandatory minimum sentence is where a minimum the general sentencing legislation and specifically state sentence is set by the legislation and the court has no that if the victim is of a certain occupation that fact discretion (or very limited power) to reduce the penalty is taken into consideration as an aggravating factor below the prescribed penalty (see Table 5). by the sentencing court. As an example, s 21A(2) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), Western Australia has criminal legislation providing provides a list of certain occupations and states that mandatory minimum sentences for occupational assaults an assault on those contained in the list will constitute in prescribed circumstances. New South Wales has an aggravating factor to be taken into account when also enacted legislation for mandatory life sentences in determining the appropriate sentence (see Table 4). the event that a police officer is murdered whilst on Sentence aggravation differs from penalty enhancement duty. Technically, this is a fixed penalty rather than a in that the latter stipulates an increased maximum mandatory minimum penalty. penalty when the aggravating element is a proven part of the offence.
Table 4: Sentence aggravation provisions.
AUSTRALIA STATE LEGISLATION AGGRAVATING PROVISION New South Wales Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Section 21A (2) Aggravating factors to be taken into account in Act 1999 (NSW) s21A – determining the appropriate sentence for an offence are (a) if the victim Aggravating, mitigating and was police officer, emergency services worker, correctional officer, judicial other factors in sentencing officer, council law enforcement officer, health worker, teacher, community worker, or other public official exercising public or community functions and the offence arose because of the victim’s occupation or voluntary work.
12 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) Table 5. Mandatory minimum sentences.
AUSTRALIA STATE SPECIFIC VICTIM/DEFINITION NATURE OF OFFENCE AND PENALTY PROVISION Western Criminal Code If the victim of the offence is a public Any person who unlawfully does grievous bodily Australia 1913 s 297 (1) – officer,17 a person in charge of vehicle on harm to another is guilty of a crime, and is liable to Grievous bodily railway or ferry or passenger vehicle or the imprisonment for 10 years. harm victim is an member of the FESA Unit, SES Unit, VMRS Group, members of a private or 297 (4) If the victim of the offence is a pubic officer Criminal Code volunteer fire brigade, persons working in a who is performing a function of his office the offender is 1913 s 297 (5) – hospital, in the course of providing a health liable for imprisonment for 14 years. Grievous bodily service to the public or contract workers harm within the Court Security and Custodial If the offence is committed in ‘prescribed circumstances’ Services Act 1999 or the Prisons Act 1981. by a person who has reached 16 but not 18 years of Criminal Code age the court must sentence the offender either to a 1913 s 297 (7) – ‘Prescribed circumstances’ if the public term of imprisonment of at least 3 months or a term of Grievous bodily officer is a police officer, prisons officer or detention for at least three months as the court thinks harm a security officer, an ambulance officer or fit. contract workers within the Court Security Criminal Code and Custodial Services Act 1999 or the If the offence is committed by someone in ‘prescribed 1913 s 318 – Prisons Act 1981. circumstances’ by a person who has reached 18 years Serious Assault of age then the court must sentence the offender to a term of imprisonment of at least 12 months. Criminal Code 1913 s 318 (2)– An assault to any of these persons is guilty of a crime Serious Assault and liable to imprisonment for 7 years, on summary conviction 3 years and a fine of $36 000. Criminal Code 1913 s 318 (4) – If the offender is Serious Assault (a) armed with a dangerous or offensive weapon or in the (b) company of another person or persons
Liable to imprisonment for 10 years
If the offence is committed in ‘prescribed circumstances’ by a person who has reached 16 but not 18 years of age the court must sentence the offender either to a term of imprisonment of at least 3 months or a term of detention for at least three months as the court thinks fit
If the offence is committed by someone in ‘prescribed circumstances’ by a person who has reached 18 years of age then the court must sentence the offender to a term of imprisonment of at least 6 months,
If the offender is (a) armed or (b) in company with another person or persons
the court must sentence the offender to a term of at least 9 months.
Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 13 New South Crimes Act Police Officer A court is to impose a sentence of imprisonment for life Wales 1900 s 19B – for the murder of a police officer. A person sentenced Mandatory life to imprisonment for life under this section is to serve sentences for the sentence for the term of the person’s natural life. murder of police officers OVERSEAS JURISDICTIONS COUNTRY LEGISLATION DEFINITION NATURE OF THE OFFENCE AND PENALTY New Zealand Sentencing Act 104(f) if the deceased was a constable or a prison officer The court must make an order 2002 s 104 – acting in the course of his or her duty imposing a minimum period of Imposition of imprisonment of at least 17 years minimum of unless it is satisfied that it would be imprisonment of manifestly unjust 17 years or more
17
17 The term public officer means any of the following: a police officer, a Minister of the Crown, a Parliamentary Secretary, a member of the House of Parliament, a person exercising authority under a written law. A person authorised under a written law to execute or serve any process of a court or tribunal, a public service officer or employee within the meaning ofPublic Sector Management Act 1994, a person who holds a permit to do high level security work as defined in thePrisons Act 1981, a member, officer or employee of any authority, board, corporation, commission, local government, council or committee or similar body, established under a written law, any person holding office under, or employed by the State of Western Australia, whether for remuneration or not. 14 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) Sentencing in 4. Tasmania This Chapter overviews the actual sentences handed imprisonment is the sentence of last resort. In imposing down in Tasmania when offenders have assaulted police sentence the magistrate or judge is also required officers and other emergency service workers. It first to have regard to the range of sentences normally covers the general sentencing principles that apply to imposed for the particular offence – this knowledge can sentencing. It then presents the sentences handed be derived from personal experience or sources such down for assaulting police officers, this part also as sentencing data. includes the charging process and the relevant factors that have been taken into account when sentencing the Sentencing decisions are subject to appeal and this offender. The final part of the chapter considers how guides the exercise of sentencing discretion by providing the courts have dealt with other occupational assaults a review mechanism in individual cases. If the judge or given there are no specific provisions to protect these magistrate misapplies a sentencing principle or imposes workers in either the Criminal Code or the POA. a sentence which is ‘manifestly inadequate’ or ‘manifestly excessive’ having regard to the range of sentences 4.1 THE POWER TO IMPOSE imposed in the past, it may be successfully appealed. SENTENCE While many sentencing principles are derived from The task of imposing sentence in a particular case is case law, Parliament has the power to structure, restrict encumbent on the presiding magistrate or judge hearing and guide judicial discretion. It may restrict judicial the matter. The judge’s or magistrate’s sentencing discretion by enacting mandatory penalties and it may discretion is constrained by a legislative framework and guide it by providing penalty enhancement provisions or by common law principles. The legislative framework that certain factors should be aggravating or mitigating. includes the penalty provisions in the particular Parliament may also leave the range of penalties to the legislation which will specify the maximum penalty for courts to determine as it has done in Tasmania in the the offence and may also specify a minimum penalty. case of indictable offences. The general sentencing legislation, the Sentencing Act 1997 also lists the sentencing options available to the 4.2 SENTENCES FOR ASSAULTING court and the aims of sentencing. These aims are POLICE OFFICERS set out in s 3 and include punishment, deterrence, Once an assault has been investigated, the police decide prevention, denunciation and rehabilitation. which offence provision best suits the seriousness of the In Tasmania, the matters which are relevant to sentence alleged assault having regard to the evidence that has (aggravating and mitigating factors) are determined been assembled to prove it. The provision under which by the common law and the sentencing task is also the charge is laid will affect whether it is prosecuted constrained by common law sentencing principles by the police or the Director of Public Prosecutions such as the principle of proportionality (a sentence (DPP), and which court the charge will be heard. It must be proportionate to the harm and culpability is necessary to consider the charging process used by of the offender) and the principle that a sentence of Tasmania Police and the DPP in the event that a police Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 15 officer has been assaulted or harmed in the course of in the execution of his or her duty. In that instance his or her duty. The choice of the offence will also affect the decision will be made to prosecute for a general the possible sentence imposed on the offender. offence. This can also be the practice if there is doubt that the accused knew the person being assaulted was a 4.2.1 The charging process police officer. Indictable or summary The Council attempted to ascertain how often a police The determination whether to charge an assault against officer was assaulted and provisions other than s 114 a police officer at an indictable or summary level is of the Criminal Code or s 34B of the POA were used in made by Tasmania Police. If a charge is laid pursuant charging the offender. It was not possible from available to the Criminal Code the DPP evaluate the evidence data to determine how often police are assaulted and and determine whether it is appropriate to file an charges are laid for offences outside of the specific indictment. In some cases the DPP will send a file provision for assaulting a police officer pursuant to back to the police advising that a POA charge is more s 34B of the POA. The Magistrates Court does not appropriate than a Criminal Code indictment with a record the occupation of the victim in assault charges possible jury trial. In some cases the Tasmania Police nor do Tasmania Police. may send a file to the DPP for an assessment of the It was possible however, to determine how often appropriate offence for the charge. If an assault is a police are assaulted and charges are laid for offences serious one it can amount to the crime of causing GBH outside the specific provision or assaulting a police or the crime of wounding. The crime of assault is an officer pursuant to s 114 of theCriminal Code from alternative verdict available to a jury in each case if they the Supreme Court data base. The Council reviewed are not satisfied as to guilt on the more serious charge. the Supreme Court (Comments on Passing Sentence) If a person is charged with multiple offences the office database for the four year period from 2008-11. In that of the DPP advise they generally like to have all of the period there were a total of 10 convictions pursuant offences heard together. To that end it is likely they will to s 114 of the Criminal Code and three convictions choose to indict for relatively minor assaults if they are where charges had been laid under the general part of the associated events connected with another provisions and not pursuant to s 114. This review matter, or other matters, being indicted. Section 311(2) shows that for serious assaults Tasmania Police generally of the Criminal Code states that charges of more than use the specific provision for assaulting a police officer one crime can be joined in the same indictment, if those as opposed to the general offences such as GBH or charges arise substantially out of the same facts.18 wounding, for example. Most charges for assaulting a police officer are considered relatively minor and are heard in the 4.2.2 The relevant factors in sentencing an Magistrates Court. Very few cases are considered so offender serious that they should be indicted. The borderline This section summarises the factors the courts have decisions are normally made by the appropriate senior taken into account when an offender is sentenced Tasmania Police personnel. for assaulting a police officer. Before a court passes sentence both the prosecutor, and the defence may Assaulting a police officer or other charges address the court as to any aggravating or mitigating circumstances. The factors the court have taken into Tasmania Police advise they always prefer to charge account in sentencing an offender for assaulting a police with the specific provisions pursuant to s 114 of the officer have been summarised in Warner,19where it is Criminal Code and s 34B of the POA. The only time they stated that the nature of the attack is an important will use the general provisions is if there is doubt about consideration in the sentencing process. This includes: the ability to prove that the police officer was acting the level of injury sustained, provocation, intent, the use
18 Section��������������������������������������������������������������������������� 311(2) states: ‘Except as provided in section 125A(6), charges of of a weapon, whether the attack was spontaneous or more than one crime may be joined in the same indictment, if those charges arise substantially out of the same facts or closely related facts, or are, or form part of, a series of crimes of the same or similar character, In any other case an indictment shall charge one crime only’. 19 Warner K, (2002) Sentencing in Tasmania, Federation Press , 292-293. 16 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) premeditated, the place of the assault and the affront imposed for assaulting a police officer, their Honours to the dignity of police.20 Warner also noted that the stated: prior record of the offender is clearly relevant and prior • That it must be kept in mind that the form of convictions of a similar nature may tip the balance in assault involved was an assault by a threatening 21 favour of a prison sentence. Factors that have been gesture and no force was applied. At the time of taken into consideration in the sentencing process in the incident the officer was unaware that she had more recent cases are: been threatened. • A threat of violence, but no actual violence, lack of • That the discharge of a firearm is an extremely prior history and very early guilty plea.22 grave threat of violence, and one that is fraught • The need for personal deterrence for assaulting with danger. In this case, the danger was a female officer much smaller than the offender, compounded by a number of factors. The comment by the offender at the police station firearm was discharged from a moving vehicle after the event that the incident was funny.23 in the direction of Constable Dillon and in close proximity to her. The weapon was discharged on a • A lengthy record including prior convictions of public highway. Another police officer was present acts of violence, verbal threats and abuse done in and there were other vehicles and persons in the the presence of others indicating a strong need to vicinity. There was a real risk that the discharge of reinforce the authority of police.24 the firearm could have caused injury or death. The most recent decision in relation to assaulting a • That by interfering with the execution of police police officer was the Tasmania Court of Criminal duty the appellant assisted the driver to continue Appeal decision in Crosswell.25 In January 2010 Rodney to drive in a manner that constituted a very real Gene Crosswell was sentenced to a global sentence danger to the public and the occupants of the of 10 years and 6 months imprisonment26 for armed vehicle. robbery, assaulting a police officer and several other less serious offences.27 In this instance the appellant • That the crime was a very public and deliberate assaulted an officer acting in the due execution of her challenge to the authority of the police. duty by pointing and discharging a .410 calibre single barrel sawn-off shotgun in her direction. In January 4.2.3 Sentences for adult offenders pursuant to 2012 this sentence was subject to appeal on grounds s 114 of the Criminal Code that the sentence was manifestly excessive.28 The appeal In the last five year period from 2006 to 2011 there was allowed. have been 13 convictions finalised in the Supreme Court for offences pursuant to s 114 of the Criminal Their Honours considered the breakdown of the global Code. Of the 13 convictions all but two resulted sentence into the separate sentences imposed on the in a term of imprisonment being imposed on the appellant and reduced the sentence of 3 ½ years for offender. One of these sentences, not resulting in a assaulting a police officer to 2 ½ years. Included in their term of imprisonment, was that of Hadley.29 Hadley reasons for judgment, specifically to the sentence was sentenced to 90 hours community service and a probation order for 18 months with several special conditions for spitting a mouthful of blood and saliva
20 House v Johnson Serial No 93/1966, Lahey v Edwards Serial Number 46/1967. into a police officer’s face. In sentencing the offender 21 Gaynor v Leonard Serial No 70/1982, French v Marshall Serial No B42/1993, His Honour, Justice Blow stated that the defendant Pionsford v Wynwood [1999] TASSC 21, Martin v Manning Serial No 61/1973, would be dealt with leniently, mainly because of mental Milburn v Wynwood Serial No B36/1995, Derrico v McKenna Serial No 39/1980. 22 The State of Tasmania v Spinks, 11 March 2008, Tennent J (Sentence). health problems and that the crime would probably 23 The State of Tasmania v Gee, 1 October 2008, Tennent J (Sentence). not have been committed but for three things: 1) the 24 The State of Tasmania v Jones, 1 July 2009, Porter J (Sentence). mental health problems of the offender; 2) the fact that 25 Crosswell v Tasmania [2012] TASCCA 1. the offender had been drinking; and 3) the fact that 26 11 years 2 months less 8 months for totality and because of the sentence of 21 months’ imprisonment he was currently serving. the offender was suffering from a serious head injury. 27 The State of Tasmania v Crosswell, Wood J, 16 November 2010 (Sentence). 28 Crosswell v Tasmania [2012] TASCCA 1. 29 The State of Tasmania v Hadley , Blow J, 10 January 2011 (Sentence). Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 17 The special conditions attached to the probation order Court data in Tasmania (and most jurisdictions in included assessment and treatment for alcohol and Australia) is recorded by means of principal proven drug dependency, medical psychological and psychiatric offence and principal sentence.31 Principal proven assessment and treatment, and educational programs as offence is the most severe offence of which an offender directed by a probation officer. has been found guilty. For example, if a person is charged with rape, assaulting a police officer and driving From the remaining 11 convictions where the offenders whilst disqualified the sentence imposed is recorded as did receive a custodial sentence the length of sentences a sentence for rape as this is the most serious offence. have been summarised in the table below (see Table 6). One of the consequences of recording by means of This data has been separated by means of sentences principal proven offence is that some sentences can handed down for a single count of assaulting a police be excluded from certain classifications. Using the officer and global sentences handed down for sentences same example above, the charges of assaulting a police where the offender was sentenced for two or more officer and driving whist disqualified would not appear offences. In some instances the court will hand down in the sentencing data as these were not the most a global sentence covering a number of offences and serious offences for which the offender was charged. indicate within the sentence the amount handed down Also, if a person seriously assaulted a police officer to for a certain offence. If the individual amount for each the extent that the charge was attempted murder the sentence is not indicated in a global sentence it is not sentence would be recorded as attempted murder, not possible to accurately determine the specific sentence as assaulting a police officer, and would therefore not be for each crime. included in the assault data.
4.2.4 Sentences for adult offenders pursuant to the Aside from the general considerations mentioned Police Offences Act 1935 above, it must also be noted that s34B(1)(a)(i) of the The following section is concerned with the sentences POA states: ‘a person shall not assault, resist, or wilfully handed down in the Magistrates Court in the last obstruct a police officer in the execution of his duty.’ five years for offenders who have been found guilty The charges that apply to this section can include one of assaulting police officers pursuant to thePOA . For or all of these elements. For comparative reasons the comparative reasons this data will be presented data used for the purpose of this exercise has been alongside the sentences handed down for those found separated so that only those cases finalised where the guilty under the common assault provisions in the same charge for assault is included. Act. When making inferences from this data it is important To determine the sentencing range for offenders found to note that most of the sentences finalised for guilty of assaulting a police officer pursuant to s 34B(1) assaulting a police officer pursuant to s 34B(1)(i) and offenders found guilty of common assault pursuant are global sentences because two or more charges to s 35(1) of the POA data was obtained from the were finalised at the same time. Conversely, common Magistrates Court CRIMES database.30 assault pursuant to s 35(1) has more incidents where sentencing was for a single offence. The fact that there
Table 6: Assault Police Custodial Sentences (single count and global) 2006-2011.
SINGLE/GLOBAL NO LENGTH OF SENTENCE (MONTHS) 0 - 3 3 - 6 6 - 9 9 -12 12 > Single 5 0 3 1 1 Global 6 0 1 1 4
Source: Supreme Court Tasmania 31 Principal proven offences are classified by the Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification (ANZOC). ANZOC provides a uniform 30 For this project the data was checked for any inconsistencies or classificatory framework for classifying offences across Australia and New abnormalities and either a satisfactory explanation was obtained or the data Zealand. The National Offence Index (NOI) provides a hierarchical ranking of was discarded. offences based on seriousness. 18 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) were more global sentences handed down pursuant POA indicates that 9 per cent received an immediate to 34B(1)(i) has a bearing on the number of offenders custodial sentence. Of the offenders who received who received immediate custodial sentences. However, an immediate custodial sentence Table 7 also shows it is not possible to determine the extent to which this the minimum, maximum, mean and median of those is the case. sentences.
The sentencing outcomes32 for the five financial years The outcome of a statistical analysis on this data 2006-07 to 2010-11 for the principal proven offence indicates that when a person is charged with assaulting of assaulting a police officer pursuant to s 34B(1)(a) a police officer pursuant to s 34B(1)(a)(i) in the (i) of the POA indicates that 14 per cent received an Magistrates Court there is a significantly higher chance immediate custodial sentence. Of the offenders who that the defendant will be found guilty than if he or she received an immediate custodial sentence Table 7 shows were charged with common assault pursuant to s 35(1). the minimum and maximum sentences handed down, The analysis indicates that when an offender is found the mean sentence (the average) and the median guilty of assaulting a police officer in the Magistrates sentence, which is the middle value of the data. The Court there is a significantly higher chance that the median is useful to indicate the middle value of data as offender will receive an immediate custodial sentence. an extreme value will not affect the median the same When an offender receives an immediate custodial way as it will affect a mean. sentence for assaulting a police officer there is no significant difference in the length of custodial sentence 33 The sentencing outcomes for the five financial years he or she will receive than if the offender was convicted 2006-07 to 2010-11 for the principal proven offence of of committing a common assault. common assault pursuant to s 35 (1) of the
Table 7 : Outcomes in the Magistrates Court between 2006-07 to 2010-11 for the charge of assaulting a police officer and common assault pursuant to thePolice Offences Act 1935(Tas) .
NUMBER PER CENT TOTAL NUMBER IMMEDIATE IMMEDIATE LENGTH OF SENTENCE (MONTHS) OFFENCE NUMBER FOUND CUSTODIAL CUSTODIAL FINALISED GUILTY 35 SENTENCE SENTENCE 36 37 MIN MEAN 38 MED MAX Assault Police 889 780 107 14.1 0 .18 5.6 4 24 Officer*
Common 8212 5097 489 9.8 0 .25 4.9 4 36 Assault**
Source: Department of Justice * s34B(1)(a)(i) of the Police Offences Act 1935 ** s35(1) of the Police Offences Act 1935 34 35 36 37
34 The������������������������������������������������������������������������ difference in the proportions of offenders found guilty for the two types of offence was statistically significant, 2X (1, N = 9101) = 231.09, p < .001 although the size of this effect was small, Phi = .16. 35 The���������������������������������������������������������������� difference in the proportions of offenders found guilty who subsequently received an immediate custodial sentence for the two types of offence was statistically significant, X2 (1, N = 5771) = 13.64, p < .001 although the size of this effect was small, Phi = .05. 36 The sentencing outcomes for 106 of the guilty verdict cases could not be confirmed. Thus, the per cent with an immediate custodial sentence is based on 5014 guilty verdicts for Common Assault and 757 guilty verdicts for Assaulting a Police Officer. 37 The difference in mean length of sentence between those sentenced to 32 That could be determined. prison for Assaulting a Police Officer compared with Common Assault was not 33 That could be determined. statistically significant, t(594) = 1.28, p > .05. Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 19 4.2.5 Sentences for juvenile offenders pursuant to The outcome of a statistical analysis indicates that when the police offences act 1935 a juvenile is charged with assaulting a police officer in the Magistrates Court (Youth Justice Division) there The sentencing outcomes38 for the five financial years is a significantly higher chance that the defendant will 2006-07 to 2010-11 for the principal proven offence of be found guilty than if he or she were charged with assaulting a police officer pursuant to s 34B(1)(a)(i) of common assault. The analysis indicates that when a the POA indicates that 11 per cent received immediate juvenile is found guilty of assaulting a police officer detention. Of the juveniles who received immediate there is not a significantly higher chance that he or detention Table 8 indicates the minimum, maxim, mean she will receive immediate detention in comparison and median of those sentences. with a juvenile found guilty of committing a common The sentencing outcomes39 for the five financial years assault. The analysis shows that when a juvenile receives 2006-07 to 2010-11 for the principal proven offence immediate detention for assaulting a police officer there of common assault pursuant to s 35(1) of the POA is no significant difference in the length of detention he indicates that 9 per cent received immediate detention. or she will receive than if the juvenille was convicted of Of the juveniles who received detention Table 8 also committing a common assault. indicates the minimum, maximum, mean and median of those sentences.
Table 8 : Outcomes in the Magistrates Court (Youth Justice Division) between 2006-07 to 2010-11 for assaulting a police officer and common assault pursuant to thePolice Offences Act 1935(Tas) .
NUMBER PER CENT LENGTH OF SENTENCE (MONTHS) TOTAL NUMBER IMMEDIATE IMMEDIATE OFFENCE NUMBER FOUND CUSTODIAL CUSTODIAL FINALISED GUILTY 42 SENTENCE SENTENCE 43 44 MIN MEAN 45 MED MAX
Assault Police 249 217 23 11.0 1.0 6.6 6.0 20.0 Officer*
Common 1056 794 70 9.2 1.0 7.3 6.0 20.0 Assault**
Source: Department of Justice * s34B(1)(a)(i) of the Police Offences Act 1935 ** s35(1) of the Police Offences Act 1935
40 41 42 43
40 The������������������������������������������������������������������������ difference in the proportions of offenders found guilty for the two types of offence was statistically significant, 2X (1, N = 1305) = 16.51, p < .001 although the size of this effect was small, Phi = .11. 41 ����������������������������������������������������������������� The difference in the proportions of offenders found guilty who subsequently received an immediate custodial sentence for the two types of offence was not statistically significant, X2 (1, N = 972) = .64, p >.05. 42 Sentencing outcomes were known for 209 of the 249 defendants for Assaulting Public Officer and for 763 of the 794 defendants for Common Assault. Thus, the per cent with an immediate custodial sentence is based on 763 guilty verdicts for Common Assault and 209 guilty verdicts for Assaulting a Police Officer. 43 The difference in mean length of sentence between those sentenced to 38 That could be determined. prison for Assaulting Police Officer compared with Common Assault was not 39 That could be determined. statistically significant, t(50.73) = -.32, p > .05. 20 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 4.3 SENTENCES FOR OTHER During this period there were a total of sixteen assaults WORKPLACE ASSAULTS on victims who were in their place of employment, or engaged in the duties of their employment, at the As mentioned there are no specific offences in Tasmania time they were assaulted. There were no fire officers, for assaulting an emergency service worker whilst in ambulance officers or hospital workers in this group. the course of their employment, with the exception Those assaulted were police officers, prison officers, of assaulting a public officer. Nor are there specific crowd controllers, security officers and taxi drivers. sentence aggravation provisions in the Sentencing Act Of the sixteen cases, there were thirteen where the 1997 to explicitly direct the court to consider the fact occupation of the victim was specifically mentioned as the person assaulted was at their workplace, or engaged an aggravating factor in the sentence. There were seven in the duties of their employment, when the assault assaults on correctional officers, three on police officers, happened. However, the fact that a person is assaulted one security officer, one taxi driver and one crowd in the course of their employment can be regarded controller. The assaults where the occupation of the by the court as an aggravating factor in sentencing. victim was not specifically mentioned as an aggravating This aspect of the offence could be said to increase factor were for one prison officer, one crowd controller its seriousness in terms of both harm and culpability. and one taxi driver. In the case of the taxi driver the The need for an emphasis on general deterrence in court was concerned that racism was an aspect of such cases is also a recognised factor in the sentencing the motivation for the crime so it placed particular process of the court. The question that then follows is: significance on the need for general and specific Does the court consider the fact that the victim was at deterrence for a racially motivated offence. work at the time of the offence as an aggravating factor in the sentencing of an offender without a specific From the thirteen instances where the Court stated sentence aggravation provision? that the occupation of the victim was a relevant factor in the sentencing decision, examples of the comments In an attempt to answer this question the Council on passing sentence are as follows: first considered data collated from the Magistrate • “Police officers acting in the course of their duties Court. Given the Magistrates court generally deals should be entitled to act without fear of being with summary offences it is not practical in all cases to attacked… a deterrent sentence is required.”45 record the reasons sentences are imposed. As a result, it is not possible to determine if the occupation of the • “Correctional Officers have an unpleasant job to victim is considered an aggravating factor in imposing do, and the courts need to come down heavily on sentence on offenders who have been found guilty of people who assault them, and on people who try committing an assault in the Magistrates Court. to escape.”46 “Aggravating factors are that the assault occurred The Supreme Court (Comments on Passing Sentence) • in a public place, without warning, and against a data base does include the reasons for the sentence person responsible for public safety.”47 imposed. Therefore, it is possible to determine if the occupation of the victim is considered an aggravating • “His Honour recognised the need to deter prison factor in imposing sentence on offenders who have inmates from committing serious acts of defiance been found guilty of committing an assault in the within the prison environment and in particular Supreme Court. For the purpose of this exercise from attacking correctional officers who were the Council has considered all comments on passing often in vulnerable situations with groups of sentence from June 2008 to February 2012.44 All inmates. Again, those comments apply here, the sentences where an offender was found guilty and position of corrections officers should not be seen sentenced for the crime of assault, aggravated assault, to be undermined by these continuing attacks on wounding or GBH were considered. them, it should be seen that the courts are
45 � The State of Tasmania v Beeton, Tennant J, 29 September 2011, (Sentence).
44 From June 2008 that the Supreme Court has made Comments on Passing 46 The State of Tasmania v Enniss, Blow J, 10 December 2010, (Sentence). Sentence in a more easily accessible form. 47 The State of Tasmania v Comerford, Slicer J, 11 March 2009,(Sentence). Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 21 • penalising those who commit attacks of violence against them.”48
In summary, although working with a small sample size, this research indicates that if a person was at their place of employment when assaulted in Tasmania the Supreme Court does take this into consideration as an aggravating factor in sentencing the offender without a specific sentence aggravation provision.
48 The State of Tasmania v Goddard, Tennant J, 30 May 2011, (Sentence). 22 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 5. The need for reform 5.1 INTRODUCTION 5.2 PART A – ASSAULTS AGAINST The Drug and Crime Prevention Committee of the POLICE OFFICERS Victorian Parliament state: ‘Research has shown that In 2010 the Tasmanian Liberals went to the election media reporting tends to sensationalise the issue with a policy of introducing mandatory minimum of violent crime, generating fear among the general sentences for serious assaults against police and population that often does not match the actual level of emergency service workers – a policy they still stand 49 risk faced. by. 51 In a media statement on 3 March 2010 the Police Association of Tasmania welcomed the announcement The need for reform in Tasmania is contingent with the stating ‘from the evidence we have seen in other states, level of risk faced to emergency service workers in Tasmania. we anticipate that this measure will reduce the rate of It is therefore appropriate to assess the actual level of risk assaults.’ 52 that emergency service workers face in Tasmania. In an interview with the Police Association of Tasmania Given there is already the offence of assaulting a it was stated that the evidence referred to in the media police officer there is no requirement to show that statement on 3 March 2010 was that found in Western there is a substantial level of risk that necessitates the Australia after the introduction of mandatory minimum need for a specific offence to afford protection to this sentences for a serious assault on police and other class of emergency service worker. It appears that officers.53Given these sentences have been proposed the community concern in relation to assaults against by the Tasmanian Liberals, and endorsed by the Police police is due to a perceived increase in the incidence Association of Tasmania, it is appropriate to analyse all and severity of assaults and a perceived leniency in the aspects of the mandatory provisions in WA including sentences imposed on those who assault them.50 There the purpose and effect. have also been calls for the introduction of mandatory sentences of imprisonment for offenders who have This section first considers data obtained from seriously assaulted police due to an increase in these WorkCover Tasmania and Victims Support Service assaults in Tasmania. Tasmania to ascertain if there has been an increase in the seriousness of assaults against police in Tasmania. Due to the separate issues discussed, this chapter has This will be followed with data obtained from Tasmania been presented in two parts. Part A will concentrate exclusively on assaults against police officers and Part B 51 Elise����������������� Archer MP, New Police Assault Figures Highlight the need for mandatory will consider assaults against other emergency service sentencing, Tasmanian Liberals (Friday December 16 2011) Retrieved workers. December 2011 from
80 meant that a claim had to be approved by the Police Commissioner’s Office, as a result the number of claims 70 68 57 64 decreased significantly. 60 63 62
50 51 50 44 40 42 40 39 36 35 30
20 NUMBER OF ASSUALTS CLAIMS ASSUALTS NUMBER OF 10
0
201120102009200820072006200520042003200220012000
Source: WorkCover Tasmania REPORT YEAR
Victims Support Services
Data from Victims Support Services (VSS) can also be used to indicate the seriousness of assaults against police officers over time. The Victims of Crime Service (VCS), a service located within VSS, supports people to deal with personal and practical problems associated 55 Department of Justice, Victims of Crime Service (3 February 2011). Retrieved March 2012 from < http://www.justice.tas.gov.au/victims/services/ victimsofcrime#contact>. 56 The amendments to the Act in 2005 also incorporated a name change from the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1976 to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1976. 54 Please refer to 5.3.2 for details on collation and classification of data from 57 I�����������������������������������������������������������������������nterviewview with Debra Rabe, Manager of Victims Support Services (10 Workcover Tasmania. November 2011). 24 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) Table 9: Victim of Crime claims made by police officers in Tasmania from 2000-01 to 2010-11.
PERIOD FEMALE MALE TOTAL 1 July 2000-30 June 2001 12 29 41 1 July 2001-30 June 2002 5 25 30 1 July 2002-30 June 2003 9 28 37 1 July 2003-30 June 2004 9 23 32 1 July 2004-30 June 2005 7 15 22 1 July 2005-30 June 2006 0 12 12 1 July 2006-30 June 2007 5 11 16 1 July 2007-30 June 2008 3 10 13 1 July 2008-30 June 2009 4 5 9 1 July 2009-30 June 2010 0 3 3 1 July 2010-30 June 2011 2 3 5
Source: Victims of Crime 5.2.2 The number of assaults Figure 2: Charges for assaulting a police officer in Tasmania for the financial years 2006-07 to 2010-11. Raw data was provided to the Council by Tasmania
Police indicating the number of charges for assaulting a Section 114 Criminal Code Act police officer for the financial years 2006-07 to 2010- Section 34B(1) Police Offences 1935 (Tas) 350 11. This data shows a decline in charges for assaulting a 344 321 police officer over the last five years (see Figure 2). A 300 313 288 closer examination indicates a steady decline in the four 250 year period from 2006-07 to 2009-10 followed by a 200 206 substantial decline in the number of charges for the last financial year of 2010-11. 150
NUMBER OF ASSUALTS 100 Tasmania Police advise that they cannot explain the 50 substantial decline in charges found at both an indictable 14 6 8 9 5 and a summary level for the financial year of 2010-11. 0
Tasmania Police recognise there are many factors that 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 could contribute to this, including operational changes, REPORT YEAR changes in policing practices or a rise in other offences Source: Tasmania Police against police, i.e. resist or obstruct. Further, specific attention was drawn to the recent general decline in all Figure 3: Charges for public place assaults areas of crime in Tasmania and Australia. inTasmania for the financial years 2006-07 to 2010-11. The figures indicating the consistent decline in assaults 1500 against police also correlate with figures from Tasmania
Police for assaults in public places in Tasmania. Both sets 1200 1231 1195 1218 of data indicate a decline in the four year period the 1110 financial years 2006-07 to 2009-10 and a substantial 900 981 decline in assaults for the 2010-11 financial year (see 600 Figures 2 and 3). NUMBER OF ASSUALTS 300
0
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
REPORT YEAR Source: Tasmania Police Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 25 5.2.3 Interpretation of the data Table 10: Offences against police as taken from the It has been claimed that the ‘shocking new police assault Tasmanian Police Corporate Performance Report of figures in the Tasmania Police Corporate Performance November 2011.
Report for November 2011 showing a 25 per cent LAST OFFENCE CURRENT CHANGE rise in police assaults highlights the need for mandatory YEAR 58 sentencing in Tasmania.’ To use this 25 per cent rise Assault 97 122 +25 +25.8% for assaults against police officers in isolation does not necessarily present a true indication of the level of Resist 149 139 -10 -6.7% assaults for the following reasons: Obstruct 54 32 -22 -40.7%
Threaten /Abuse 154 139 -15 -9.7% First, Tasmania Police advise that it is not uncommon Intimidate for one offence against police to decrease while at the Criminal Code 3 9 +6 +200% same time another will increase to offset the decrease. Offence For example, an increase in charges for obstructing a police officer will often result in a decrease in Source: Tasmania Police assault, resist or threaten and abuse. In this instance, Table 11: Offences against police as taken from the an examination of the Tasmania Police Corporate Tasmanian Police Annual Corporate Performance Performance Report for November 201159 does Report of 2010-11. indicate a 25 per cent increase in assaulting a police officer but there was also a 40 per cent decrease in LAST OFFENCE CURRENT CHANGE obstructing a police officer (see Table 10). YEAR Assault 288 206 -82 -28.5% The report did show a spike in the number of assaults for the five months from the beginning of the financial Resist 370 321 -49 -13.2% year to November compared to the same period Obstruct 121 121 0 0.0% in 2010. However, the figures for the entire 2010-11 Threaten /Abuse 382 344 -38 -9.9% financial year showed an unexplained substantial drop Intimidate in assaults against police. In fact, for that year there was Criminal Code 14 5 -9 -64.3% an unexplained decrease in all offences against police Offence including resist, obstruct, threaten, abuse and intimidate (see Table 11 and Figure 2). Source: Tasmania Police
If the November 2011 report had been compared 5.2.4 Mandatory minimum sentences in Western against the same time period in the 2009-10, 2008- Australia 09, or 2007-08 financial years it would have shown a Purpose decline in assaults against police. In other words, by only comparing with the 2010-2011 financial year figures The mandatory sentencing legislation for assaults to that date, a year in which the overall total assaults on emergency service workers was one of the on police had decreased by 28.5 per cent (refer to commitments of the Liberal Party in Western Australia Table 11), the increase appears substantial, but when in the 2008 election. Their ‘Protecting Our Police’ Policy compared against the five year trend it is not found to called for mandatory sentences for assaulting police be the case. and public officers and tougher sentences for grievous bodily harm and serious assaults. This was backed by the assertion there had been a significant rise in these crimes in Western Australia. In March 2009 a rally was organised by the police union in Western Australia to
58 Elise��������������������������������������������������������������������������� Archer MP, Tasmanian Liberals. ‘New Police Assault Figures Highlight support laws for mandatory sentencing for offenders the need for mandatory sentencing,’ (16 December 2011). Retrieved who assault police and other public officers. The rally December 2011 from
Western Australia Police illustrate the annualised 0 number of reported assaults against police officers 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 from June 2006 to December 2010 (see Appendix A). REPORT YEAR These records show a trend in offences that appears to Source: Western Australia Police indicate a substantial decline in the number of assaults since the introduction of mandatory sentencing in As indicated earlier, data obtained from Tasmania September 2009. Additional records from the same Police showed that assaults against Police in Tasmania office illustrate the monthly number of reported decreased by 28 per cent in the 2010-11 financial assaults against police officers from July 2005 to January year. Tasmania Police recognised that there were many 2011 (see Appendix A). These records indicate that factors that could have contributed to this decrease. It the decline in reported assaults began prior to the should be noted, that this decrease occurred without introduction of mandatory sentencing in September of the introduction of mandatory minimum sentences 2009. in Tasmania (see Table 11). The Tasmanian data also indicated a substantial decrease in public place assaults This decline, prior to the introduction of mandatory in the 2010-11 financial year consistent with the sentencing, was explained by the Business Intelligence decrease in assaults against police officers. Office, as follows: ‘The introduction of the mandatory sentencing bill and the public protest in March 2009 Just prior to the implementation of the mandatory in support of the legislation and subsequent debate in sentencing legislation the WA police changed their Parliament may have influenced community behaviour policy in relation to single officer patrols. In April 2008, prior to the commencement of the legislation in by Commissioners instruction, it became policy that September 2009.’62 members of the police service were not to be rostered, directed or encouraged to patrol alone. In order to 60 See�������������������������������������������� section 3.5 for detailed explanation of ‘prescribed��������������������������� circumstances’. consider the true impact of abolishing single officer 61 Government of Western Australia, ‘Reported assaults against police continue to decline’ (Ministerial Media Statement, 23 June 2011). Retrieved 1 October 2012
64 � �Glenn Cordingley, ‘Offi‘Officer cer bitten by the law’The Sunday Times, December 66 Emily Moulton, ‘Top Judge backs stance on mandatory sentencing’ 2011. Retrieved Jan 2012
68 A mechanism of injury identifies the overall action, exposure or event that best describes the circumstances that resulted in the most serious injury or Source: Department Health and Human Services disease. As defined in the Type of Occurrence Classification System (TOOCS3). 69 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Australian Standard Classification of Occupations (ASCO) Second Edition, 1997 < http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/66f306f 503e529a5ca25697e0017661f/5c244fd9d252cfc8ca25697e00184d35!OpenD 70 Including mental health nurses. ocument>. 71 Including residential care assistants and aged or disabled carers. Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 29 Table 13: Department of Health and Human information regarding the occupation of victims is not Services workers compensation claims for aggressive recorded on their computer system so it would require incidents from 1 Nov 2010 to 31 Oct 2011. manual intervention to extract data on all claimants in the agency. However, in an interview with the Manager AREA NUMBER of VSS, who has had over ten years within the service, Ambulance Tasmania 1 it was advised that there are predominately two classes Children and Youth Services 6 of worker who consistently make genuine claims. These Disability and Community Services 2 are custodial officers and nurses in psychiatric wards. In Northern Area Health Service (NAHS) 1 addition, it was stated that there are minimal claims for Southern Tasmania Area Health Service (STAHS) 3 fire officers, ambulance officers and doctors or nurses 73 State wide & Mental Health Services 12 in emergency wards. GRAND TOTAL 25
Source: Department Health and Human Services
The Royal Hobart Hospital was contacted in an attempt to obtain anecdotal evidence as to the number of assaults in accident and emergency areas that could possibly go unreported. It was advised that verbal abuse is common and happens as an every- day occurrence but this is often unreported as most hospital staff consider it is part of the job. Physical abuse is not common and happens rarely in accident and emergency. Physical assaults are more common in obstetric and paediatric units as these units are more likely to be affected by custody and child protection issues. Apart from the problems experienced in the obstetric and paediatric units the main causes for abuse are: drugs and alcohol, aggressive psychiatric patients and those suffering from dementia.72
In conclusion, it has been shown that although there have been a substantial number of aggressive incidents directed at health care staff within DHHS, ambulance and emergency staff are subject to verbal abuse but very rarely to physical workplace assaults.
5.3.3 Victims Support Services VSS figures indicating the number and profession of workers who have been assaulted in the workplace resulting in Victims of Crime Assistance awards can also indicate the number of occupational assaults that are serious and the occupations that are at a higher at risk of assault.
Although VSS were able to supply data in relation to claims for assistance awards by police officers,
72 Interview with Don Burton, Nurse Unit Manager, Emergency Department 73 Interview with Debra Rabe, Manager, Victims Support Services, Department Nursing, Royal Hobart Hospital (January 2011). of Justice (December 2011). 30 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) Figure 5: The number of Worker’s Compensation claims in Tasmania for the record years 2000/11.
NUMBER OF ASSUALT CLAIMS 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0
AMBULANCE OFFICERS AND PARAMEDICS
FIRE FIGHTERS
POLICE OFFICERS
PRISON OFFICERS 2000 2006
GUARDS AND SECURITY OFFICERS 2001 2007 BAR ATTENDANTS OCCUPATION
BUS AND TRAM DRIVERS 2002 2008
CHILDREN'S CARE WORKERS 2003 2009
CLEANERS
TEACHERS AND TEACHERS AIDES 2004 2010
NURSES AND NURSES AIDES 2005 2011
SALES ASSISTANTS
SPECIAL CARE WORKERS
WELFARE ASSOCIATE PROFESSIONALS
Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 31 Options for 6. reform This section considers the options available for change in good faith in the execution, or intended execution, in Tasmania. It assesses the benefits and disadvantages of an act or public duty or authority. In Queensland, of each option and poses the questions as to which the definition of a public officer includes a member would be the most appropriate in Tasmania. It is officer or employee of a service established for a important however, that before proceeding to the public purpose under any act, for example Ambulance following options an appropriate definition of an Service Act 1991, the Health Services Act 1992, the emergency service worker is developed. Child Protection Act 1999, or the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994 (see Table 2). The 6.1 THE DEFINITION OF AN Northern Territory has a summary offence whereby it EMERGENCY SERVICE WORKER is an ‘offence to assault, obstruct or hinder any person providing rescue, resuscitation, medical treatment, first An emergency service worker by the strict definition aid or succour of any kind to a third person. includes police officers, State Emergency Service (SES) workers, fire officers and ambulance officers. The use If it is decided there is a need for provisions in Tasmania of the strict definition does not include volunteer fire for emergency service workers then an appropriate officers and volunteer ambulance officers. A wider definition will be essential. Consideration will need definition of an emergency service worker includes to be given as to whether the definition should be by those at first point of contact in an emergency; this general description, by specific categories of worker or definition includes emergency hospital staff and both. If by specific categories then the definition will volunteers. need to contain a list of the occupations to be included in the title. The Council has adopted the meaning of emergency service workers in this Consultation Paper as those at first point of contact in an emergency and used the The definition: following definition of an emergency service worker: How should ‘emergency service worker’ be ‘Any person engaged, whether for remuneration or defined? voluntarily, in the Tasmania Police Service, the SES, TFS, Ambulance Tasmania, or any person providing rescue, resuscitation or medical treatment including, 6.2 OPTION 1 – NO CHANGE but not exclusively, people employed in hospitals.’ The first option, is to make no changes to the current As mentioned, Tasmania does have a provision in laws or sentencing options that operate in Tasmania. section 34B(2)(a) of the POA which makes it is an Under this option, recourse for an assault on an offence to assault, resist, intimidate or wilfully obstruct emergency service worker will remain the same and the a ‘public officer’ in the execution of his duty. In this existing legislative provisions (as explained in Chapter section a public officer is defined as any person acting Two) will be available. 32 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 6.2.1 Tasmanian Police a police officer has prior convictions than an offender charged with common assault. A common assault is Raw data from Tasmania Police indicated that assaults more likely to be a one off incident where the offender against police have declined in Tasmania over the last has no prior convictions, whereas this is rarely the case five years. The data also indicated that public place with an offender charged with assaulting a police officer. assaults have declined over same five year period. Data from WorkCover Tasmania has indicated that 6.2.2 Emergency service workers the number of assaults against police serious enough to warrant workers compensation claims for medical The findings by the Sentencing Advisory Council attention and/or time off work has declined over the for other workplace assaults in Tasmania have been last five years. Data from Victims Support Service outlined in Chapter Five. As noted, the data obtained indicated a substantial decline in claims for Victims of from WorkCover Tasmania indicates very few workers Crime Assistance awards for workplace assaults on compensation claims for fire officers and ambulance police officers. Data used in this paper shows that officers proportionate to the amount of employees claims indicating a recent increase in assaults against in these occupations. The data indicated that, police officers has been taken out of context and the proportionate to the population, it is police officers, figures for the period highlighted does not reflect a true correctional service officers, teachers, special care indication of the decline in assaults against police over workers and nursing staff that are more likely to be recent years. assaulted in the workplace. Figures from DHHS in relation to aggressive incidents on health care staff and Notwithstanding the decline in assaults against police discussion with the Royal Hobart Hospital indicated that in Tasmania there is still the view by some members these aggressive incidents do not translate into assaults of the community that these assaults are not treated on ambulance and emergency staff. Victims Support as seriously as they should be. As a result, this Council Service also report minimal Victims of Crime Assistance obtained data on the sentences handed down in the awards fire officers, ambulance officers and emergency Magistrates Court and the Magistrates Court Youth staff. Justice Division in Tasmania for assaulting a police officer and compared this with the sentences handed down for In summary, this Consultation Paper has revealed that common assault over the five year period from 2006- fire officers, ambulance officers and hospital emergency 11. The data was then analysed, the results indicated staff are not in the category of the occupational that if an adult offender is found guilty of assaulting professions who are at the highest risk of being a police officer he or she is more likely to receive a assaulted in the workplace. As a result the community custodial sentence than if he or she was found guilty of perception of those at risk is different to those who are common assault but there is no significant difference in statistically at risk of being assaulted in the workplace. the length of sentence that he or she would receive. There are arguably a number of advantages of not For juvenile offenders there is no significant difference introducing new provisions into the criminal law and in the likelihood of receiving detention for assaulting a retaining the current law For example, it could be police officer as opposed to common assault and the argued that introducing new laws will merely add to length of any detention for assaulting a police officer is the complexity of the current legal system without not significantly different to the length of detention for a providing any real deterrence or further protection to common assault. emergency service workers in our community. There may be other avenues to protect these professions Tasmania Police have made comment on the results of from workplace assaults by concentrating more on these findings, they would like it noted that, in their view, crime prevention methods as opposed to concentrating it is more likely that an offender charged with assaulting on how to punish an offender after an assault has
Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 33 occurred.74 acknowledges the community’s abhorrence toward this type of behaviour and also acts to educate members The disadvantage of not introducing new provisions into of the public about certain behaviours that are not the current criminal law in Tasmania is that it represents acceptable. a failure of the Government to specifically acknowledge or to expressly condemn an assault on individual classes The Tasmanian Law Reform Institute addressed the of worker. In addition, it could be seen as not treating symbolic function of Criminal Law in its recent report assaults on these workers with the seriousness they on Racial Vilification and Racially motivated offences.75 deserve. The issues paper posed the question as to whether the symbolic function of a law was a sufficient justification for its introduction. The submissions in response to Consultation Question 1 the issues paper expressed arguments for and against the creation of laws purely as a symbolic function. Do the existing laws and current sentencing In support of an offence being created for symbolic practices in Tasmania provide an adequate reasons alone it was submitted that they can send a response to assaults on emergency service strong public statement of society’s condemnation of workers? certain behaviours and the symbolic function of a law can be ‘absolutely without question sufficient justification for its introduction’.76 Opposing submissions argued that 6.3 OPTION 2 – A NEW it was not a ‘useful or necessary exercise of Parliament’s CRIMINAL PROVISION power over citizens to enact criminal laws to serve a symbolic function’ and ‘for any additional restrictions A second option is to create a new offence in on individual or collective freedom to be justified, their the Criminal Code or the POA for an assault on an actual rather than their emotive, speculative or symbolic emergency service worker. Criminal provisions for benefits must be demonstrated.’77 assaults on emergency workers already exist in most other jurisdictions in Australia. However, there is a There is also the practical component of affording wide variation in the type of provision afforded and the legislative protection to emergency service workers. If definition of the class of worker and professions that are these workers are assaulted or obstructed to the extent contained therein. they cannot administer aid then they cannot get on with their job. This is the purpose of creating an offence of As shown, fire officers, ambulance officers, and hospital obstructing or assaulting workers in many legislative emergency staff are not in the occupational groups instruments in Tasmania. For example, s 45 of the Food found to be at the higher risk of workplace assault Act 2003 makes it an offence to threaten, intimidate in Tasmania. However, this does not discount an or assault an authorised officer in the exercise of the expectation that this class of worker should be afforded authorised officer’s functions under the Act. One of the protection in the event that an assault may happen in purposes of this Act is to ‘ensure the provision of food the future. It can be argued that the symbolic nature that is safe and fit for human consumption.’ The reason of a separate provision for emergency service worker for creating an offence for obstructing or assaulting an is an important argument in support of its introduction. authorised officer pursuant to theFood Act 2003 is The creation of a separate offence for this purpose not specifically to protect the worker from an assault
74 For example, in the United Kingdom, specific legislation has been introduced but more so to allow the worker to carry out their which intends to prevent the escalation of behaviour that leads to more serious job without undue interference. A similar provision offences. Part 8 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 (c.4) deals with anti-social behaviour, s 120 of that Act provides power to a constable or an is also found in s 60 Emergency Management Act 2006 authorised member of National Health Service (NHS) staff to remove a person creating an offence to assault, resist, impede or obstruct suspected of causing a nuisance or a disturbance of NHS hospital premises. This enables the NHS to tackle (i.e. without having to wait for the police) low-level an emergency management worker. The same section disturbance behaviour (intimidation, swearing, blocking of staff from performing their duties) and help to prevent the escalation of such behaviour to more 75 Tasmanian Law Reform Institute (April 2011). Racial Vilification and Racially serious offences such as assault on NHS staff. For further information refer Motivated Offences. Final Report No 14. to: Health and Safety Executive. (2010) Preventing workplace harassment and violence. Great Britain. Retrieved February 2012 from
exceeding 50 penalty units or to imprisonment (b) must take into account the results of any for a term not exceeding 2 years for assaulting an rehabilitation program assessment undertaken emergency service worker, there be a maximum in respect of the offender and placed before penalty not exceeding 75 penalty units or to the court or judge. imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years The absence of an express provision making the if the emergency service worker assaulted suffers occupational status of the victim an aggravating factor harm? does not, prevent the prosecution from relying upon such a factor in the prosecutor’s sentencing address. Nor does it prevent the court from taking it into 36 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) account as an aggravating factor in imposing sentence. sentence generally refers to a mandatory minimum The Council investigated whether the courts consider term of imprisonment or detention. the occupational status of the victim as an aggravating factor when sentencing an offender. Despite the small 6.6.1 Special penalties and mandatory minimum sample size the research indicated that the occupation penalties for summary offences of a variety of victims such as police officers, prison The most commonly recognised mandatory penalties officers et cetera have been seen as relevant factors in found in Tasmania are those for drink driving and sentencing decisions. fisheries offences. A common mandatory penalty is a ‘special penalty.’ A special penalty is ‘generally a fine One argument against including specific aggravating that relates to the subject matter of the offence that provisions in the Sentencing Act 1997 (Tas) is that the can be or must be imposed in addition to a general inclusion of a list of occupations that should be afforded penalty.’81 Examples of special penalties are for fish greater protection by the law will unintentionally come illegally obtained or for each unit of excess weight when to be considered exclusive by those applying the law. a vehicle is overloaded. The consequence of this exclusivity is that those groups who are not explicitly mentioned will not be considered Mandatory licence disqualification is a common as worthy of protection. penalty for drink driving offences. In this instance the mandatory requirement for disqualification is for the Sentence aggravation provisions, can play a symbolic charge of driving with excessive concentration of breath function in the law, showing the community that assaults or blood alcohol pursuant to Road Safety (Alcohol and on vulnerable workers are not tolerated by society. Drugs) Act 1970 (Tas). The issue is whether, on a policy basis, the Government believes it is appropriate to isolate one type of Mandatory minimum fines are also common for offending and provide a specific provision to afford a regulatory offences. An example of a regulatory heavier sentence for an assault to only that particular offence is an on-the-spot fine for littering. This can be group of victims. imposed by an infringement notice, as an alternative to prosecution in court. It can be argued that these Consultation Question 4 are not technically mandatory penalties as they can be challenged in court. Should a special sentence aggravation provision The criticisms that have been aimed at fixed penalties be inserted into the Sentencing Act 1997 to make and mandatory minimum fines are that they may be an assault on an emergency service worker an disproportionately harsh and unfair to a person of aggravating factor in sentencing? limited means. A default may leave the person liable to a term of imprisonment unless there are alternatives available to the court enforcing payment. Mandatory 6.6 OPTION 5 – MANDATORY licence disqualification was also subject to considerable MINIMUM PENALTIES AND criticism when it was first introduced on the grounds SENTENCES of fairness. It was asserted that the person whose livelihood depended on their licence should be treated Technically, a mandatory sentence is a sentence where differently than the person who drives a car for leisure the sentencing court only has one option and the purposes. These criticisms have been tempered by the 80 sentence is fixed. Mandatory sentences can take provision in Tasmania for the courts to grant a restricted various forms, however the term mandatory sentence licence in appropriate cases. is generally understood to cover the situation where Parliament sets a minimum penalty but leaves the court Notwithstanding the criticisms against these provisions with discretion to impose a harsher sentence where it has been found that ‘these offences are more it considers it appropriate. A mandatory minimum susceptible to general deterrence than most’ and the
80 Warner K (2007b). ‘Mandatory sentencing and the role of the academic’. 81 Ibid��������� 326. Criminal Law Forum, vol. 18, no. 3-4 p 321-47. Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 37 ‘interests protected, public safety on the roads or the preventing known offenders from continuing their preservation of scarce natural resources overrides criminal behaviour.’ The same author concluded that considerations of fairness.’82 ‘incapacitating offenders who continue to commit crimes at high rates’ is ‘effective in reducing crime.’87
Consultation Question 5 Deterrence is also seen as ‘one of the central aims of mandatory sentencing.’88 As mentioned, when a person Should mandatory fines be considered in has been found guilty of an offence the judge or the Tasmania for offenders who assault emergency magistrate is guided by the aims or the purposes of service workers? sentencing. In Tasmania these aims are set out in s 3 of the Sentencing Act 1996. Section 3(e)(i) specifically states that the purpose of the Act is to help prevent crime and promote respect for the law by allowing Consultation Question 6 courts to impose sentences aimed at deterring offenders and other persons from committing offences. Should any other type of mandatory penalty be Proponents of mandatory sentencing argue that it aims considered in Tasmania for offenders who assault to prevent crime through deterring offenders from emergency service workers? continuing to commit crimes once they are released (specific deterrence), and deterring other members of the community from committing crime (general 6.6.2 Mandatory minimum sentences deterrence).89
A mandatory minimum term of imprisonment or a Another purpose put forward for mandatory mandatory minimum sentence refers to Parliament sentencing is to eliminate inconsistency in sentencing. setting a fixed minimum term of imprisonment as the In this respect ‘mandatory sentencing is based on the sentence for the commission of a particular criminal principle that discretion is the enemy of consistency.’90 offence. They are often the product of ‘tough on crime’ It is asserted that when judges have discretion as to initiatives prescribing severe mandatory minimum the sentence they impose there is the possibility of penalties for specific offences.83 Proponents of unequal treatment of offenders who have done equal mandatory minimum sentences argue that legislation wrong.91 It is argued that legislation intervening in intervening in judicial sentencing discretion will ‘appease judicial sentencing discretion attempts to eliminate this public concern about crime and punishment’.84 They are inconsistency. said to be an appropriate and proportionate response to the worst case offender.85 Opponents of mandatory sentences challenge the argument that the elimination of judicial discretion It is argued that mandatory sentencing deals with the will create consistency in sentencing. When there are concern of leniency in sentencing and prevents crime different circumstances to a crime, it is argued that through incapacitation and deterrence. Sherman86 in the interests of justice, the offenders should also has stated that the incapacitation component be treated differently. For the offender who is at the prevents offenders by continuing to offend as ‘past lower end of the scale in terms of seriousness there behaviour is the best predictor or future behaviour will be an unjust sentencing outcome as the factors that … it is reasonable to attempt to prevent crime by differentiate the case in terms of culpability cannot be
82 Ibid��������� 326. taken into consideration. 83 Sentencing Advisory Council����������. ���������(2008). Sentencing Matters: Mandatory Sentencing. Melbourne: Sentencing Advisory Council.
84 Australian��������������������������������������������� Institute of Criminology. (1999), Mandatory Sentencing. Trends and 87 Ibid.������ Issues: No 138. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. 88 Australian�������������������������������������������������������� Institute of Criminology. (1999). above n 84. 85 Commonwealth. Parliamentary Debates, Senate, 13 March 2000, 12642, (Faulkner). 89 Australian����������������������������������������������������������� Institute of Criminology. (1999). above n 84, 4. 86 Sherman������������������������������������������������������������������� L, Gottfredson D, MacKenzie D, Eck J, Reuter P and Bushway 90 Ibid�������� 4. S.(1998). Preventing crime; What works, what doesn’t, what’s promising. A report to 91 Braithwaite������������������������������������ J and Pettit P. (1990). Not Just Deserts: A Republican Theory the United States Congress. Cited in Australian Institute of Criminology. (1999). of Criminal Justice, Clarendon Press, Oxford. Cited in Australian Institute of above n 84. Criminology. (1999). above n 84, 4. 38 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) As mentioned, judicial discretion is guided by legislation guilty, thus there are more contested hearings. The and common law principles of sentencing. One of issue of avoiding a trial also means the discretion of these sentencing principles was that of the principle of the judges is displaced into the less transparent parts ‘proportionality’. Proportionality is a limiting principle of the legal system. Lawyers tend to then negotiate which requires that the punishment imposed on an with the prosecutor for a less serious offence to be offender be proportionate to the offending behaviour.92 pursued to avoid a trial and the prosecutor then has to The principle of proportionality is sometimes decide whether to withdraw more serious charges. As expressed in terms of just deserts, this is a modern a result the sentence moves into hands of prosecutors form of retributive theory can be traced back to the and lawyers rather than the judges and magistrates. Old Testament idea of lex talionis - an eye for an eye. The consequence is that the penalty imposed on Minimum mandatory sentencing runs counter to the the defendant is determined by a means that is principles that underpin retributive theory and have the neither transparent nor consistent, nor are there any potential to lead to the imposition of sentences which mechanisms to review it. are disproportionate to the specific circumstances of a given offence.93 Consultation Question 7 Opponents of mandatory sentences argue against deterrence as a sentencing principle for offences that Should mandatory minimum sentences be are committed in the heat of the moment. Deterrence considered in Tasmania for offenders who assault comes from rational choice theory and assumes that emergency service workers? a person can weigh up benefits and costs in any given situation and make a rational choice that will maximise personal advantage. Proponents of mandatory sentencing consider that the gravity and the certainty of mandatory penalties will ensure that a rational person will understand that the costs of getting caught will outweigh the benefits of the crime. Opponents argue that in some cases it is ineffective as it assumes that all offenders make a choice based on rational calculations and consider the possible consequences of an offence prior to committing it. This may be the case in some instances, but for offences committed in the heat of the moment, when a person is suffering from a disorder or mental illness, or when they are under the influence of alcohol or drugs, it is likely that the offender has not made a rational cost-benefit calculation prior to committing the offence.
Lastly, it is argued that mandatory terms of imprisonment increase the resources of the police, legal aid and the courts. If a defendant is guilty it is in the public interest that he or she plead as such because it saves the community the significant costs of a trial and witnesses the pressure of having to give evidence in court. If there is a mandatory minimum sentence attached the offender is less likely to plead
92 Veen (No 1) (1979) 143 CLR 458: Veen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465, Hoare (1989) 167 CLR 348 93 For further reading see Australian Law Reform Commission (2006), Sentencing Advisory Council (2008). Warner (2007b) Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 39 Appendix A
Copy of the annualised number of reported assaults against police officers in Western Australia from June 2006 to December 2010 from the Business Intelligence Office, Western Australia Police.
Source: Western Australia Police
Copy of the monthly number of reported assaults against police officers in Western Australia from July 2005 to January 2011 from the Business Intelligence Office, Western Australia Police.
Source: Western Australia Police
40 Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) References
Australian Institute of Criminology. (1999). Mandatory Sentencing. Trends and Issues: No 138. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
Australian Law Reform Commission. (2006). Same crime, same time: Sentencing of federal offenders. Report 103, Australian Law reform Commission, Sydney.
Braithwaite J and Pettit P. (1990). Not Just Deserts: A Republican Theory of Criminal Justice, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Department of Justice. (2001). Department of Justice Annual Report 2010-2011. Hobart: Government Printer.
Prichard J. (2010). Net-Widening and the Diversion of Young People From Court: A Longitudinal Analysis With Implications for Restorative Justice, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 43 (1), 112-129.
Sentencing Advisory Council. (2008). Sentencing Matters: Mandatory Sentencing. Melbourne: Sentencing Advisory Council.
Sherman L, Gottfredson D, MacKenzie D, Eck J, Reuter P and Bushway S.(1998) Preventing crime; What works, what doesn’t, what’s promising. A report to the United States Congress. Retrieved May 2012 from < https://www.ncjrs. gov/works/>.
Warner K. (2002). Sentencing in Tasmania. Federation Press.
Warner K. (2007b). Mandatory sentencing and the role of the academic’. Criminal Law Forum, 18 (3-4), 321-47.
Assaults on Emergency Service Workers - Consultation Paper No 2 (June 2012) 41