Walker brothers and friend jailed

[Elmer_Judd]

Thought so. So people could just sneak in sans membership really.

I believe they now have facial recognition technology at the footy at major venues like the G and Marvel, and I believe it's been quite successful in recognizing banned supporters at the gate

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I feel like breaking into song.

Yeah but they arent sorry.

 

[AuntyBlindEye]

I believe they now have facial recognition technology at the footy at major venues like the G and Marvel, and I believe it's been quite successful in recognizing banned supporters at the gate

Good to hear

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Have their MCC memberships been revoked?

 

[Wayne Swan]

Facial recognition technology?

Can we fix up score reviews first please

 

[craigvn123]

With their connections I expected them to get off.

 

[LifeSpan-Void]

You've hit the nail on the head with the linkage to anti-violence campaigns. There is a certain bizarre groupthink among people in the legal community where they believe that they are the enlightened ones for wanting to maintain the status quo. Anyone who is disturbed by the leniency of sentences like these is considered some ill-informed, Herald Sun-reading simpleton that's been whipped into a moral panic frenzy and is baying for 'tough on crime' blood. I am very liberal and support full decriminalization of all drugs and improving prison infrastructure and practices to improve prisoner welfare - which will definitely help reduce recidivism - so I am hardly in that boat.

It's rightly understood now that prison is usually a bad option for those likely to be rehabilitated, as it simply increases their chances of graduating from 'crime university' and puts even more burden on the system. But the problem is that these perspectives often go too far in ignoring the importance of general deterrence. For a highly publicized, extremely violent incident like this, the risk of societal harm by being seen to treat it as a minor offence far outweighs the need to consider the personal character and chances for rehabilitation of the offenders. Countries like Norway - the gold standard for reducing recidivism - don't suffer near the level of alcohol and drug-fueled street violence that we do and yet are still seen as perfectly suitable best practice guides. In reality, the evidence is more mixed as sometimes 'tough on crime' approaches have worked, dependent on specific circumstances. It's simply not logical that we can reduce the number of minor assaults by treating serious assaults as if they are minor themselves, because it undermines the messaging about the consequences.

It’s basically a game of mandatory sentencing vs “my client has a long standing history of undiagnosed mental illness” and trying to convince a magistrate which path is more credible. The number of people now hiding behind mental illness to avoid a jail sentence means that antisocial behaviour frequently gets pushed into the healthcare system as opposed to the forensic system where it belongs, but magistrates are beholden to psychological and psychiatric assessments no matter how flimsy they read.

 

[Chief]

It’s not really. These guys have a jail term on their record. It’s a massive stain that will go with them. Stops you doing a fair few things.

If you’re poor, yes.

But not if your dad is well connected.

 

[LightTower4]

Can we fix up score reviews first please

Well, yes but what relevance has score reviews got to do with keeping unwanted spectators being recognised at turnstiles?

 

[Grin]

If you’re poor, yes.

But not if your dad is well connected.

Medicine, law, teaching are out for a start. Careers in commerce/economics would be limited to non leadership roles. One could argue that their future prospects would be much more limited than a poor uneducated person or a manual labourer or tradie.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Medicine, law, teaching are out for a start. Careers in commerce/economics would be limited to non leadership roles. One could argue that their future prospects would be much more limited than a poor uneducated person or a manual labourer or tradie.

There’s always politics.

 

[Chief]

Medicine, law, teaching are out for a start. Careers in commerce/economics would be limited to non leadership roles. One could argue that their future prospects would be much more limited than a poor uneducated person or a manual labourer or tradie.

No law is fine as long as you write a nice letter and say the right things before a panel. Don’t know about the others.

 

[WanderingWolf]

12 months on paper but in reality he'll be out in 6 or less and they others less as well.

It's not possible to get parole for a 12-month sentence or less. You don't qualify.

They also got 2-year CBOs after their jail time, and a ban on entering licensed premises - so it's effectively a three year hybrid sentence of jail time, and then community-work and restrictions. Then there's all the other flow-on effects that a conviction will affect - jobs, joining a board, working with children, travel and visas, loans... etc. It may seem like a short sentence but this will have a big impact on their lives.

 

[citizen-erased]

You've hit the nail on the head with the linkage to anti-violence campaigns. There is a certain bizarre groupthink among people in the legal community where they believe that they are the enlightened ones for wanting to maintain the status quo. Anyone who is disturbed by the leniency of sentences like these is considered some ill-informed, Herald Sun-reading simpleton that's been whipped into a moral panic frenzy and is baying for 'tough on crime' blood. I am very liberal and support full decriminalization of all drugs and improving prison infrastructure and practices to improve prisoner welfare - which will definitely help reduce recidivism - so I am hardly in that boat.

It's rightly understood now that prison is usually a bad option for those likely to be rehabilitated, as it simply increases their chances of graduating from 'crime university' and puts even more burden on the system. But the problem is that these perspectives often go too far in ignoring the importance of general deterrence. For a highly publicized, extremely violent incident like this, the risk of societal harm by being seen to treat it as a minor offence far outweighs the need to consider the personal character and chances for rehabilitation of the offenders. Countries like Norway - the gold standard for reducing recidivism - don't suffer near the level of alcohol and drug-fueled street violence that we do and yet are still seen as perfectly suitable best practice guides. In reality, the evidence is more mixed as sometimes 'tough on crime' approaches have worked, dependent on specific circumstances. It's simply not logical that we can reduce the number of minor assaults by treating serious assaults as if they are minor themselves, because it undermines the messaging about the consequences.

Tend to agree that jail is not the best option in these circumstances
Fine them heavily and garnish it off their salary as a constant reminder of their actions.

 

[rumply]

Realistically those sentences were about the best that could be hoped for given the charges filed. Wonder if those advising them will suggest appealing the severity...

 

[Slartibartfast]

Let’s hope the sentences are not reduced on appeal.

 

[MightyHawks]

Let’s hope the sentences are not reduced on appeal.

The three of them could have tryouts to see if any of them want a reduced sentence

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Were they wearing a hat?

 

[Truckosaurus]

They can still consider themselves fortunate that no one died.

 

[Atomboy]

A prison record comes up at every turn for the rest of your life

Travelling overseas

Trying to get a loan or mortgage

Trying to get a job

Trying to get things like working with children’s checks (required for everything these days)

Trying to start a business

Trying to get any sort of license or accreditation in many industries

A lot of things. On top of the time served, this will follow them forever.

Perfectly well suited to a career in Banking/Finance then thanks to Daddy’s old school connections.

 

[kranky al]

You've hit the nail on the head with the linkage to anti-violence campaigns. There is a certain bizarre groupthink among people in the legal community where they believe that they are the enlightened ones for wanting to maintain the status quo. Anyone who is disturbed by the leniency of sentences like these is considered some ill-informed, Herald Sun-reading simpleton that's been whipped into a moral panic frenzy and is baying for 'tough on crime' blood. I am very liberal and support full decriminalization of all drugs and improving prison infrastructure and practices to improve prisoner welfare - which will definitely help reduce recidivism - so I am hardly in that boat.

It's rightly understood now that prison is usually a bad option for those likely to be rehabilitated, as it simply increases their chances of graduating from 'crime university' and puts even more burden on the system. But the problem is that these perspectives often go too far in ignoring the importance of general deterrence. For a highly publicized, extremely violent incident like this, the risk of societal harm by being seen to treat it as a minor offence far outweighs the need to consider the personal character and chances for rehabilitation of the offenders. Countries like Norway - the gold standard for reducing recidivism - don't suffer near the level of alcohol and drug-fueled street violence that we do and yet are still seen as perfectly suitable best practice guides. In reality, the evidence is more mixed as sometimes 'tough on crime' approaches have worked, dependent on specific circumstances. It's simply not logical that we can reduce the number of minor assaults by treating serious assaults as if they are minor themselves, because it undermines the messaging about the consequences.

Really need two tier prisons - separate those who we think we have a chance of working on and those who are life criminals

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Really need two tier prisons - separate those who we think we have a chance of working on and those who are life criminals

There are different tiers already. Ranging from prison farm to maximum security.

 

[kranky al]

There are different tiers already. Ranging from prison farm to maximum security.

Yeah but that isnt separating recidivists and (hopefully) one term prisoners

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Yeah but that isnt separating recidivists and (hopefully) one term prisoners

Low risk vs high risk.

You will probably find it's mainly drug/white collar/property type criminals on the farms, and violent/sexual criminals in maximum security.

 

[kranky al]

Low risk vs high risk.

You will probably find it's mainly drug/white collar/property type criminals on the farms, and violent/sexual criminals in maximum security.

We live in different states so there will be differences in systems