Steve Cullen: criminal lawyer on the Government's proposal for new infringement offence for shoplifting

A Government proposal for a new infringement offence for shoplifting would mean the burden of proof would fall on the suspect to prove their innocence.

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says this change strikes the right 'balance' between public safety and an individual’s rights, despite concerns from experts.

Criminal lawyer Steve Cullen says these changes make sense, given the wave of shoplifting impacting the country.

"It's simply regulating people's behaviour. You have a defence of saying - no, it's not true, for example. But also, you have a defence of saying - I took all positive steps to avoid it."

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Ninety two. Ninety two is the text number. Standard text
fees apply.

Speaker 2 (00:03):
Now.

Speaker 1 (00:03):
The government wants to turn the burden of proof on
its head when it comes to new shoplifting fines. Suspects
would have to prove their innocence rather than be assumed
innocent until proven guilty. The Justice Minister, Paul Goldsmith wants
to introduce a five hundred dollars infringement fee, doubling to
one thousand dollars if the value of the stolen goods
is more than five hundred. Steve Cullen is a criminal
lawyer and with us now hi, Steve, hi here, how

(00:24):
do you feel about this?

Speaker 2 (00:26):
It's not as surprising as you might think. These are
common in what are called regulatory offenses that have happened
and occurred and applied for many a year. And that's
particularly in the situation of speeding BIA security. I think
traffic violations. Would people just get what are really infringement?
Notice is you can get off them by proving total

(00:48):
absence of fault. But it just makes perfect sense. We've
got a way that if not an epidemic of shoplifting occurring,
and this gives some protection to the public and some
incentive to people to perhaps can instead of what they're
doing and stopped doing it.

Speaker 1 (01:01):
Okay, So do you think that because of the circumstances
we find ourselves in, it's totally fine to flip the
innocent until proven guilty on its head.

Speaker 2 (01:10):
Well, it's not really flipping it in that sense. It's
what's called a strict liability offense. It's they've applied in
the law for a considerable period of time. It's simply
regulating people's behavior. You have a defense of saying no,
it's not true, for example, But also you have a
defense of saying I took all positive steps to avoid it.
And you can think of situations where child puts something

(01:33):
in the shopping basket, or some stranger places some product
into your carriage. But in ordinary and it's going to
be very difficult for me to be alleged to have
been stealing things unless there is a serious foundation for
that allegation.

Speaker 1 (01:48):
All right, because I freaked out about it, because Steve,
I reckon mum's You know, new mums are quite vulnerable
to this kind of thing, because first of all, to
being busted for being accused of not of having done
it when we have because First of all, we have
the baby brain, so we're likely to forget that we've
come in with, you know, a bottle of milk from
the dairy down the road. But then we've also got
the means by which to transport it, which is the pram.

(02:11):
So if I walk in with a bottle of milk
at the bottom of the pram and get accused of shoplifting,
the accusation by itself is not sufficient.

Speaker 2 (02:20):
Well, one would think you would make an explanation, and.

Speaker 1 (02:22):
That's the I'm a geriatric mother. Yes, they're going to
look at me and nonsense. You've actually come in here
with the pram to nick it, then what happens.

Speaker 2 (02:33):
You don't look like somebody be going into fence bottles
of milk, ever, and I'm sure most people don't. They're
going to use some sort of discretion to determine with
there's a reasonable set of circumstances around the situation, too,
warrant finding that you've stolen.

Speaker 1 (02:47):
Will they not have to have some I mean I
was going to say, would they not have to have
some CCTV of you doing something?

Speaker 2 (02:53):
But presumably not exactly what. Yes, that crossed my mind.
They're going to have video surveillance and a lot of
the shops. I don't think part it's going to legislate
to say you're in totally get access to it in
every circumstance, or it's just going to be an inevitable
delay when those people last yealing are going to rely
on that to some of there try and avoid responsibility.

Speaker 1 (03:11):
Okay, well, listen, thank you. I appreciate your explanation on that. Steve.
It's maybe feel a whole bunch better. Steve Cullen, criminal lawyer,
and look, I tend to I don't love people being
accused of things without the proof, but then the shoplifting
is quite bad, isn't it. For more from Heather Duplessy
Allen Drive, listen live to news talks. It'd be from
four pm weekdays, or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio