Drug users claim lighter jail terms

[Tom]

Drug users claim lighter jail terms

 

* 3000% increase in drug users claiming mental impairment

* Top laywer says system is being rorted

 

DRUG users are taking advantage of South Australia's mental impairment defence laws to gain lighter sentences.

 

The head of the South Australian Parole Board Frances Nelson QC today said the definition of mental impairment was too wide under 10-year-old reforms by the SA Government and many criminals were escaping with lenient jail terms.

 

Ms Nelson said she was concerned at a stark increase in the number of drug users who used a defence of mental impairment for murder and lesser crimes such as graffiti vandalism and growing cannabis.

 

She said most were addicted to amphetamines and marijuana, and were not mentally ill.

 

"People who have drug-induced psychosis and who kill people are likely to be out in the community in a very short period of time, like two years, and are very often just as dangerous," she said.

 

"They should be dealt with as someone with a drug problem not as someone who is unable to accept responsibility for a crime."

 

Independent MP Nick Xenophon said government statistics released under freedom of information showed the number of people using mental impairment as a defence had jumped more then 3000 per cent since the laws were reformed.

 

From 1986 to 1995, only 11 cases used the defence successfully in SA courts, but that increased to 308 cases between 1996 and 2006, he said.

 

In 1995, law reforms transferred the power to set release conditions for people claiming mental impairment from the parole board to the courts.

 

Ms Nelson, who first questioned the reforms in 1992, said the parole board was powerless to keep people deemed mentally incompetent in jail longer or to monitor those people after release.

 

"People wave a piece of paper and say: 'You can't deal with me because the judge says I am mentally impaired'," Ms Nelson said. "That happens very often."

 

Mr Xenophon said he would introduce an amendment next month to toughen the laws and include a minimum six-month stay in a mental health facility for people who claimed the defence.

 

"Some people are treating the laws as a joke," he said. "I believe in some cases they are being rorted.

 

"There is something seriously wrong with the law and the way it is being used."

 

A spokesman for SA Attorney-General Michael Atkinson said the Government would consider Mr Xenophon's amendment but disagreed the law was being flouted.

 

The spokesman said the same mental impairment legislation was used across Australia.

 

Author: Todd Cardy

Date: April 04, 2007

Source: The Australian

Copyright: AAP

 

The spokesman said the same mental impairment legislation was used across Australia.

Something for us all to remember.

 

[bongonaussie]

thanks Tom, interesting read..

 

Mr Xenophon said he would introduce an amendment next month to toughen the laws and include a minimum six-month stay in a mental health facility for people who claimed the defence.

 

kinda reminds me of this..

[Jess Stone]

Hmm,the trouble with using this as a rort is exactly the photo and sentiment expressed by Bongonaussie, to end up like McMurphy(?) would be your worst nightmare and not a path I would choose lightly,however isn't this a case of, on the Prohibitionists part ,"having your cake and eating it to !", just blatant hypocrisy(yet again,yawn) If canna causes , ,then its a legit defense and not a rort.

 

"Your Honour,I plead Insanity,the marijuana plants talked to me,they said 'we love you,and if you really love us you'll keep growing us' ,and 'if you don't we'll die' ,so I couldn't say no to beautiful ladies as I'm crazy about these girls"

[Tom]

"Your Honour,I plead Insanity,the marijuana plants talked to me,they said 'we love you,and if you really love us you'll keep growing us' ,and 'if you don't we'll die' ,so I couldn't say no to beautiful ladies as I'm crazy about these girls"

That's just crazy enough to be taken seriously.

 

Mr Xenophon said he would introduce an amendment next month to toughen the laws and include a minimum six-month stay in a mental health facility for people who claimed the defence.

The mental health systems of this country are already overwhelmed with people that are in need of their services for the governments to ever do any more than send it to a committee, there may even be a few pointed comments from mental health workers about the stupidity of his proposed amendment over the next few days.

 

[jabez]

The only problem with claiming mental impairment is that you probably end up getting used us a statistic to prove that cannabis gives you a mental illness.

Think about it how many people go to court for using/growing/selling weed and claim they have a mental illness or where so addicted to it that they couldn't control themselves, I'm sure the government would be using these statistics somewhere to prove cannabis is dangerous!

[WantDaChronic]

The only problem with claiming mental impairment is that you probably end up getting used us a statistic to prove that cannabis gives you a mental illness.

Think about it how many people go to court for using/growing/selling weed and claim they have a mental illness or where so addicted to it that they couldn't control themselves, I'm sure the government would be using these statistics somewhere to prove cannabis is dangerous!

 

that was pretty much what i was going to say, but i was also going to add that if i had the choice between a few years in prison or 6 months in a mental health place and all i had to do to get the 6 months was say im canna crazy, i would have to atleast consider it. sure it would be a bad thing to do considering im not crazy, but i know for a fact i could handle myself for 6 months around nut cases a hell of alot better than i could a few years in a prison with my arse pressed against a wall the entire time

[Shithappens]

but in the mental help place the big bald guy called bubba sharing your room could be more unstable and wierd!!!

[RobbieGanjaSeed]

Jabez is thinkin along the same lines I am, except the other way around.

 

Why is it we're all supposed to fall over and worship the ground of "experts" for saving us from ourselves, when they say if we use drugs we'll all go crazy, and yet when we try to agre, and say "the drugs made me shcitzo", the lawyer says "this is a rort"

 

What way do they want to play it?

 

rob

[Budman2012]

Bribing a judge , Paying a high priced lawyer , pleading insanity .. or goin to visit bubba in the Bighouse ...

 

Thats just how the law works isn't it?

 

 

(P.s. , sorry , It's too late too say much of importance I'll get back to ya ... ...... .

 

They just don't seem able to be able to relate any of these "problems" .. with the Fucked up "societies" we happen to find ourselves almost forced to be a part of ..

Oh .. and not to mention their silly statistics

 

[mull]

"There is something seriously wrong with the law and the way it is being used."

 

 

Something about this article I just couldn't figure out

 

I wonder does the QC Frances get paid less if she loses a case to a mental impairment defence?

Also the above statement is true Frances! There is something wrong with the law on cannabis prohibition and the way it is used to persecute peaceful gardeners and herb lovers