Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Now the government on something else, wants to reduce the
number of jury trials, basically to be able to get
through the backlock in the court system. Government's proposing to
increase the offense threshold at which are defendant is able
to have a jury trial. Currently, you have to be
charged with a crime that carries a maximum penalty of
two years or more in prison than you can elect
for a jury trial. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Is with us. Now, Hey, Paul, good ay, how are.
Speaker 1 (00:23):
You going well? Thank you? So your alternatives to two
years are three years, five years and seven years. What's
your preference?
Speaker 2 (00:30):
I actually don't have a preference at this stage. My
main concern is that too many people are having their
lives put on a hold for years, waiting for an
outcome of a court case or for a civil case,
you know, waiting for a resolution to their problems. That
the times have blown out. COVID obviously had a role,
but it's been you know, it's been too slow for
too long, and so I've got a real focus on
(00:52):
trying to speed up processes of the courts and we're
pulling many leavers, trying many different things. One of the
things that has driven the out in times has been
more people electing for jury trials, and so we're just
asking the question going out for consultration to say, well,
it's said at two years currently, what do people think
(01:13):
about three years, five years, or seven years.
Speaker 1 (01:15):
Yeah. I'm surprised actually at the two years thing, because
that's some pretty low level crimes that basically qualify you
for a jury.
Speaker 2 (01:22):
Right, that's right. I mean, obviously it takes a lot
long cost. So I mean, it'll just give you an idea.
The average duration of the case has gone from three
hundred and fifty days, so nearly a year, to nearly
five hundred days.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
Weldom that's not like, that's not the duration of the trial.
That's right from first appearance all the way through to
the conclusion, right.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
Yes, yeah, yeah, yeah, but I mean it's a long
drawn out process. So yeah, I mean, I think it's
a reasonable question to ask there will be arguments around
three years, five years or seven years. Seven years would
be a big change, and it would certainly have a
huge impact on the overall efficiency of the court. But
of course you've got to balance that against you know,
the ancient right, and so I think, you know, I
(02:05):
don't it'll be an interesting discussion. I certainly I think
we should lift it. It's just a question of how far.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
What kind of a crime are we talking about that
carry seven years in jail?
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Well, things like tax evasion yeah, and as in assault yeares,
and so five years for thinking of things like aggravated assault,
and three years it would be things like you know,
driving well disqualified with the excess breath alcohol.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
So you should go for a jury if you've just
been pin boozing behind the web.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
Yeah, so if you if you lift it to three years,
you're excluding bose and so yeah, I think that's a
very reasonable starting point. And the further you go on.
Speaker 1 (02:48):
Didn't you just say didn't you just say? Though boozing
being disqualified is three years in the slammer.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
If we lifted it to three years, it's a maximum
of two years. If we lifted it to three years,
they would be excluded and you wouldn't have the opportunity
for a jury trial.
Speaker 1 (03:02):
Yeah too, right, all right. Now, your other problem though,
is if we go okay, we're not going to have jurism.
We need judges. We're short on judges, aren't we.
Speaker 2 (03:11):
Well, well, you still need to judge for a jury trial,
it's a much more drawn out brea.
Speaker 1 (03:15):
Well, that's true, that is true. You just you're basically
double parts there, aren't you with a jury and a judge.
But you're still going to get some judge. You're going
to need some judges, aren't you.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
Yes, yep, yep, yep. But yeah, just just just for context.
You know, my three priorities as Justice Minister is about
dealing with reducing the number of victims of violent crime,
dealing with that small group of serious youth of things.
And then the third one is the broader systemic challenge
of spitting up the processes of thoughts now and that's
the family brought to the coroners of everything where you know,
too many and being held up. So you know, that's
(03:47):
the priorities. And a billion other things I could be doing,
could be, you know, reducing the voting age of sixteen
and doing all sorts of ney things like the previous
government did. I'm not. I'm focused on these core things
because I think the other things that really matter.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
How are you going with your gang patch band?
Speaker 2 (04:00):
Well, just part of it's just passing it right now,
so it will be in law and it will take
effect from November, and so police will be able to
have some more tools in their kit to handle the
gangs that are coursing so much mayhem And how can.
Speaker 1 (04:16):
You you're still got that bit in there where we're
going to crack down on them in the house.
Speaker 2 (04:19):
Yeah, yeah, well that's right. And so that's just for gangs.
If you've got a gang patch and you've been convicted
three times more than five years for flouting the van,
then you're facing escalating consequences and that's pretty uncomfortable, but
we think it's appropriate.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
Paul, thank you, appreciate your time. Man, look after yourself.
That's Paul Goldsmith, who is the Justice Minister. Raises announced
his new squad and I'll tell you what he's chopping
and changing all over the shop. So we'll talk to
Darcy Waldgrave about that very shortly. Are you going to
see some new official vehicles on the road? Love me
an official vehicle? Hey, don't you pothole vans? Actually this
feels this feels like efficiency. I feel like this is efficiency.
(04:57):
Simeon's rolling out five pothole vans. Now, what they're going
to do is they're going to drive around the country
filming to see the wear and tear on the roads
and which bits of the road needs to be patched
up and stuff. Now you've got to say that that's
a smarter idea than having punters just drive around in
the car going, let me see with my own little eyes. Yeah,
oh there's one. Hold on, let's get out and let's
have a look at that prod that a little bit,
you know, you can see that a pothole van is
(05:18):
going to is just this is This is technology and action.
There'll be five of them. One's going to be in
Auckland and Northland. One's going to cover the central North Island.
One's going to be in the lower North Island also
top of the South is and we're catching a ferry
a fair But the fourth one's going to do the
rest of the South and South Island. And then they're
going to have a backup van as well. And every road,
every sealed road has to be inspected at least once
every two years, and every high maintenance roads in like
(05:40):
a high class road they call it high class. That's
going to have to be done every year. I'm on
board with this, whatever it takes to get the old
potholes fixed. I love it quarter past
Speaker 2 (05:49):
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