Australia's Broken Jurisprudence System...

[SYZ]

For some years now, I've believed that our laws and court
systems are letting us—and specifically victims and their
families—down.  This has led to a noticeable and concerning
increase of crimes against the person.  With too many of those
crimes receiving manifestly unjust sentencing.

    This is a classic case of such a broken judiciary.

In short: Kerrie Lee Catling has been sentenced to NINE years
behind bars for the manslaughter of her husband, Chris Catling
who was 51 when he died in hospital after he was stabbed in the
chest in Rockhampton in March, 2021.

Catling will be eligible for parole in August this year.  What the fuck?

And the obvious miscarriage of justice? Catling will be released after
serving only a little over THREE years.  I'd consider even a nine-year
sentence lightweight for what—in any real world—amounted to murder
in the 1st degree.  I note that Catling, was originally charged with murder
in August 2021.     Why was it downgraded?

     Thoughts?

[epronovost]

Why was it downgraded?

Usually a charge is downgraded as part of a deal to avoid the cost of trial, especially in cases where it's difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty. I guess the woman in question was a first offender, expressed remorse, the procecution had little proof of intent for a 1st degree conviction so went to a 2nd degree and then decided to save time and money to present a plea for manslaughter. 

When it comes down to punishment I think she escaped way too easily, but when it comes to the security of the community, I don't think this woman represent a danger to society, her children or the community in general. Had she served the full nine years, I think it would have appeared as more reasonable.

[Minimalist]

One need not look far for outrageous sentencing.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethan_Couch

Ethan Anthony Couch (born April 11, 1997) killed four people at the age of 16 while driving under the influence on June 15, 2013, in Burleson, Texas. Couch, while intoxicated and under the influence of drugs, was driving on a restricted license and speeding in a residential area when he lost control of his vehicle, colliding with a group of people assisting another driver with a disabled SUV. Four people were killed in the collision, and nine people were injured.[5] Two passengers in Couch's pickup truck suffered serious injuries, with one passenger suffering complete paralysis.

Couch was indicted on four counts of intoxication manslaughter for recklessly driving under the influence. In December 2013, Judge Jean Hudson Boyd sentenced Couch to ten years of probation, subsequently ordering him to undergo therapy at a long term inpatient facility.[6] Before sentencing, Couch's attorneys had argued that Couch had "affluenza" and needed rehabilitation instead of prison, arguing that Couch had no understanding of boundaries as his affluent parents had never given him any.[7] Couch's sentence, judged by many as outrageously lenient, set off what The New York Times called "an emotional, angry debate that has stretched far beyond the North Texas suburbs".[8]

But it must be pointed out that the opposite extreme is also well-represented here.

https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/what-...90845.html

"What is the sentence for robbery first degree in alabama? is probation possible?

Person had someone to enter a private residence, rob them at gunpoint. Gun was held to head but no physical injury was done. Stole vehicle and drove it about two blocks down the street and abandoned it. This person was waiting in another car for the robbery to take place. Arrested and bail was set for $75,000."

The answer, as posted:

"Under the scenario you described the minimum punishment would be 20 years.

This is because Robbery I is a class A felony punishable by a sentence of 10 years to life. However, there is an enhancement due to the use of a firearm, making the minimum sentence 20 years and the maximum punishment life in prison.
Traditionally, Alabama law prohibited probation for anyone sentenced to more than 15 years. However, since the Soles decision there is the possibility for probation on a 20 year sentence, but not on any sentence over 20. "

One could be forgiven for thinking that the concept of "justice" needs some serious work. 

[brewerb]

Everybody knows that women are less guilty, less evil..................

.....other than Eve, Jezebel, Delilah.

 

[airportkid]

Thoughts?

There is no information in the OP about the circumstances, which could have been mitigating (abusive spouse, self defense), or aggravating (she's having an affair), so to make any judgement about the appropriateness of sentence without a lot more context would be premature.

Personally I find popular sentiments about sentence lengths to be wholly arbitrary, even when more facts are known.  Mary Jane considers anything less than 20 years criminally lenient while Alex looks at 6 months for the same crime as too harsh.  There's zero science that I'm aware of that objectively determines incarceration lengths in proportion to the offense severity, and there's always the dilemma of what's being punished - the severity of the outcome or the severity of the intent, which usually vary widely in each offense.

I would offer that the only people with some qualification to opine about sentence length are those who have been incarcerated, and can speak from direct experience.

I had to dig a bit on Google to find context for this murder, which is quite sparse.  There are conflicting accounts as to the degree of abuse that might have been happening, also it appears she had a reputation for manipulating people and deceit, and that a pinball machine she purchased was made with illicitly obtained funds and was about to be exposed.  But that's awfully thin to make a reasoned judgement from.

[pattylt]

Everybody knows that women are less guilty, less evil..................

.....other than Eve, Jezebel, Delilah.

 

I’d say that fewer woman are evil than men but, when a woman is evil, she can put men to shame.

[epronovost]

Everybody knows that women are less guilty, less evil..................

.....other than Eve, Jezebel, Delilah.

 

I’d say that fewer woman are evil than men but, when a woman is evil, she can put men to shame.

#girlboss?

[airportkid]

... when a woman is evil, she can put men to shame ...

Probably because women are generally more bright than men, with superior planning capabilities, and plenty of empathy to feel her victim's pain of her revenge satisfyingly deeply 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Thread turned south mos' skosh.

[Cavebear]

Sentences for serious crimes vary wildly here in the US (and I sort of assume elsewhere). The degree of harm of some crimes just don't seem to match to sentences. Possession of a mild drug gets more time than actually killing someone sometimes. And it seems that if you just injure someone in a car crash, you would have been better off killing them.

I'm not saying that is standard, but some examples just get weird by the imbalance.

[SYZ]

And here's another somewhat similar case of manifestly unjust
sentencing, in my opinion.

From ABC Australia news today...

A 38 year-old man who struck and killed two motorbike riders in
December 2021, while driving with methamphetamine in his system
has been jailed.

Father-of-two Ashley McDonald was sentenced to a maximum term
of three-and-a-half years in jail in the County Court in Wangaratta
yesterday, having earlier pleaded guilty to two counts of dangerous
driving causing death.  He'll serve two years in prison before being
eligible for parole.

This absurdly light sentence for—effectively—a double manslaughter
must be appealed by the Victorian DPP as a matter of due course.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-24/d.../103759760

The judge said; "From what I have read, you're a decent family man
and are devoted to your family...  and are genuinely remorseful".

Yeah... well... most killers say that in court don't they?  I'm really sick
of these soft-cock judges and magistrates handing down these absurdly
short sentences for crimes involving killing innocent members of the
public.

In my—admittedly unqualified—legal opinion, this sentence should've
been more in the order of 10- to 12-years imprisonment with parole at
maybe eight years.

[SYZ]

And so the miscarriages of justice continue unabated and unopposed:

Damon James Turnbull-Fielding was distracted while driving when he
collided with 68-year-old Steve Jelfs in 2021. He was watching a YouTube
video on his phone was been sentenced to two-and-a-half years jail.

Steve Jelfs, the father and husband of 41 years, suffered catastrophic
head injuries and died at the scene.

Turnbull-Fielding will be eligible for parole in May 2025 due to time
already served.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-24/d.../103762438

But... this is despite the judge saying;  "The facts clearly disclose very
serious criminality and, by watching a video, it demonstrated a complete
disregard for all other road users...  his driving was properly described
as grossly irresponsible".

So yet again, we have a sentence failing to recognise the seriousness of a
criminal act causing death.  And worse, another limp-dick judge.

For the Australian criminal justice system to work as it should, not only do the
laws of the land actually be working as legislated, they must be seen to work
by the wider public who appointed the lawmakers and the judiciary.

   This is not happening.       

[rocinantexyz]

I'm of the radical opinion that justice is a dangerous myth. The notion of standardized sentences seems like a sick joke to me.

[Minimalist]

I'm not saying that is standard, but some examples just get weird by the imbalance.

Some people like to pretend that justice is color blind, too.

[SYZ]

And again, today...

A mother found guilty of manslaughter over the drowning
deaths of her two "defenceless and vulnerable" young sons
has been sentenced to eight years' jail.

The Supreme Court in Townsville QLD was told Aboriginal
Leeanne Eatts's unsupervised 5-year-old and 3-year-old
sons drowned in a Townsville river in 2019.

But...

The 53-year-old mother will be eligible for parole after
serving only 3½ years in jail.  In all Australian jurisdictions,
manslaughter sentences range from 25 years to life imprisonment.
Call me cynical, but did the fact that a single, unemployed,
Indigenous woman was the defendant skew this manifestly
unjust sentence?

[Rhythmcs]

So, mom wasn't watching, kids drowned. What did you want to happen to her. What do you think would have been the proper way to punish her?

[SYZ]

So, mom wasn't watching, kids drowned.  What did you want to happen to her.  What do you think would have been the proper way to punish her?

Okay.  The mother was unaware of her kids' whereabouts
for nearly two hours, and had no idea that they were
playing on the riverbank until a passerby reported them to
the police.

And the court found her guilty of manslaughter, due to
criminal neglect of children in her care in not providing
adequate supervision.   They were 3 and 5 years FFS!

In the case of criminal neglect of a child, (as a minimum
charge) the mandatory sentence is imprisonment for up
to ten years.  This woman obviously received a very light
sentence for the more serious crime of manslaughter.

A ten-year sentence (say) would've been more appropriate.

Unless of course you're suggesting that she should've been
allowed to just walk away, or that the 3½ years was too long?

[Rhythmcs]

You'd have preferred the maximum sentence, then? IDK. There are more egregious ways to commit manslaughter than neglect - it stands to reason those things should have some sentencing leeway above neglect.

If by walking away you mean serving no prison time...sure, I think that should be an option in manslaughter cases. Here in the us alot of manslaughter charges result in 2-4 years. Ideally, prisons are a place where we put people because they will harm others (or themselves) otherwise. Do you reckon she's got more kids to kill that they haven't already taken? Will she not have learned a lesson in 3 1/2 years?

[Rhythmcs]

-as for the other thing...I wouldn't know how sensitive australian courts are to the appearance of racial bias. Is the australian court system generally deferent to indigenous people or females. Do they receive lighter than average sentences..and for what types of crimes? Are they charged with or acquitted of more or less crimes in general than other cohorts?

[SYZ]

You'd have preferred the maximum sentence, then?  IDK.  There are more egregious ways to commit manslaughter than neglect - it stands to reason those things should have some sentencing leeway above neglect.  

If by walking away you mean serving no prison time...sure, I think that should be an option in manslaughter cases.  Here in the us alot of manslaughter charges result in 2-4 years.  Ideally, prisons are a place where we put people because they will harm others (or themselves) otherwise.  Do you reckon she's got more kids to kill that they haven't already taken?  Will she not have learned a lesson in 3 1/2 years?

Not necessarily the maximum sentence (which is
20-25 years) but definitely more than 3½ years,
which is veritable a slap on the wrist only.

    For a perspective...

In Australia, shoplifting is considered a criminal offence
under section 117 of the Crimes Act. If the goods taken
are worth more than AU$2,000, a person can face up
to 10 years of imprisonment. However, if the value of
the goods is under AU$2,000, the maximum penalty is
two years imprisonment.  

In some states, the value of the goods taken is immaterial,
and the penalty can be 5 years imprisonment.

...as for the other thing...I wouldn't know how sensitive Australian courts are to the appearance of racial bias. Is the Australian court system generally deferent to indigenous people or females. Do they receive lighter than average sentences...and for what types of crimes? Are they charged with or acquitted of more or less crimes in general than other cohorts?

There's a funny legal dichotomy with indigenous people in Australia.
At one end of the scale, they're treated more lightly by the courts
(as per the above case), but at the other end they're charged more
frequently for "social" crimes than the non-indigenous population.

Once criminals get to court though, our laws are generally colour blind
in respect to sentencing and penalties—although some people claim
otherwise for the indigenous—usually, unsurprisingly, other indigenes.

[Rhythmcs]

A quick google dive tells me that you're bullshitting me, lol.

The average manslaughter sentence in australia is 7 years, largely drunk drivers who mow people over - and your legal system is impressively biased. The worst in the world, in fact.

[epronovost]

 and your legal system is impressively biased.  The worst in the world, in fact.

Really? That's a tough competition, what was your source?

[Rhythmcs]

3% of the population, 30% of the prisoners..and growing.

[Rhythmcs]

9x the incarceration rate of apartheid south africa. 20x the incarceration rate of women and children, specifically, compared to us mass incarceration.

[SYZ]

A quick google dive tells me that you're bullshitting me, lol.  

The average manslaughter sentence in Australia is 7 years, largely drunk drivers who mow people over - and your legal system is impressively biased.  The worst in the world, in fact.

Sorry mate, but these are silly, unfounded claim.    

The World Justice Project defines the rule of law system as
one in which the following four universal principles are upheld:

   •  The government and its officials and agents are accountable under the law.
   •  The laws are clear, publicized, stable and fair, and protect fundamental rights, including the security of persons and property.
   •  The process by which the laws are enacted, administered, and enforced is accessible, efficient, and fair.
   •  Justice is delivered by competent, ethical, and independent representatives and neutrals who are of sufficient number, have
      adequate resources, and reflect the makeup of the communities they serve.

   Australia ranks at #13 and the US at #26 with Denmark at #1 and Malta at #30.

World Justice Project.