Julie-Anne Kincade KC: Law Association Vice President on the Government's introduction of new sentences for coward punches

The Government's introduction of new sentences for coward punches is being described as merely cosmetic. 

It's announced specific offences for striking a distracted victim - which could carry a sentence of life imprisonment, if fatal. 

But Law Association Vice President Julie-Anne Kincade told Ryan Bridge she understands people have been looking for reform in this area. 

She doesn't think it will make a huge impact, as the changes will add one year to the maximum penalty of offences which already exist.

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
The government here on a bit of a role with
law and order announcements. Cowd punches will now be made
a specific offense punishment eight years or fifteen years if
you intend grievous bodily harm. If a victim dies following
an attack, the maximum penalty is life, and new offenses
will be added to the three strikes legislation the regime.

(00:22):
Juliane Kincaid is a case c Vice president of the
Law Association. With me this morning, Jullian, Good morning, Good
morning Ryan, Thanks for being with me. Do you think
these changes will make a difference.

Speaker 2 (00:35):
I think that they are cosmetic. I understand there has
been a lot of discussion looking for a form in
this area, but in effect, what these changes will do
is add one year to the maximum penalty of offenses
which already exist. So I don't think that in reality
they will have huge impact on any particular case.

Speaker 1 (00:57):
Is that because judges will use their discus.

Speaker 2 (01:02):
Look Sentencing in any case is always very complex, and
when we look at assault charges in particular, we look
first of all at the harm that was caused, the
grievous fully harm or was it an injury, and then
we look at the intent behind it, which helps us
to choose which one of the myriad of assault charges
there are. There's at least over thirteen already in the

(01:23):
Crimes Act. This is adding another two. The fact that
they're also putting these onto the three strikes legislation isn't
the difference because of the offenses that already exist are
strike offenses as well. And also the fact that the
maximum penalty in a culpable homicide in a case of
this nature is one of life imprisonment is not a
change and that's already the case, right, So I think

(01:45):
it's quite cosmetic, Okay.

Speaker 1 (01:49):
Do those who perperpetrate these types of attacks think about
the sentence when they're doing it?

Speaker 2 (01:55):
Typically, well, no, of course not often that type of
offense who cars at night when people are perhaps have
had a few drinks and so on. I don't think
it would stop anyone in that particular situation. It doors
allow for advertising, however, as it's happened in Australia, and
this is a law that does exist in some states

(02:16):
in Australia, there's no comparable legislation in England. I would
like to add one thing round that an attack to
the head is already an aggravating feature for assault cases.
Whether it's one punch or several, it's already a factor
which is very much taken into account and sentencing.

Speaker 1 (02:34):
This is different, though, isn't it. This is a punch
you had no warning about, you didn't see coming. You
can't brace yourself, you can't defend yourself.

Speaker 2 (02:43):
Yes, look thankfully that these cases do exist. Of course
they do. And there was one widely publicized case where
people were concerned with the sentencing, which led to a
lot of discussion on this, and I'm lawyers are always
very cautious about any legislation that arises out of one
particular case. There are as a long line of authorities

(03:07):
for situations where this type of one punch has occurred,
and judges have been sentencing in this category for a
very long time and most of the time it doesn't
cause anyone any concern at all. Appreciate now, and again
there can be some cases which day so we shouldn't
legislates on the basis of those one or two situations.

Speaker 1 (03:27):
But why not, because that's one or two families who
don't feel they've had justice, some guy who's come up
behind their son, their brother, their husband, while they's out
having a good time, punched them from the back of
the heat.

Speaker 2 (03:39):
I mean, who key.

Speaker 1 (03:41):
Is what's wrong with their dislading for one or two cases,
because it's.

Speaker 2 (03:44):
Very difficult to take all of the factors in that
one case and then apply them right across the board
for everyone. There's so many different factors that apply in
all sorts of cases, including assault cases, and in my
respectful opinion, they're all be very much covered in all
of the legislations. But often families are very unhappy with

(04:05):
outcoming cases, But it doesn't mean that the legislation that
sits behind them is in fact wrong or not working properly. Julian,
that's a different feature. I appreciate.

Speaker 1 (04:15):
I appreciate your time this morning, Julian kink Casey, vice
President of the Law Association.

Speaker 2 (04:20):
With for more from Early Edition with Ryan Bridge.

Speaker 1 (04:23):
Listen live to news Talks.

Speaker 2 (04:25):
It'd be from five am weekdays, or follow the podcast
on iHeartRadio.