Margot Giblin
…”I don’t have a license. Who cares?” The police did. So did the magistrate. It was hoped that the defendant would also start to care. The magistrate referred to the increased severity of penalties for people with prior convictions, one of which she was about to receive. The bravado on display by the defendant when initially pulled up by police was not in evidence in court. Her reply when asked by the magistrate if she had anything she would like to tell him was a simple ‘no’. She was ordered to pay an amount covering a fine for the driving charges, costs and a Victims of Crime levy. Some defendants coming to the magistrates court seem subdued by the event and surroundings. Others regard it as a provocative affront which they would like to address, loudly.
Magistrates Court of Tasmania
Why do they do it?
As case after case of drink driving is brought before Tasmanian magistrates the question of why the defendant was driving when over the legal limit is asked. The answer is often first given to police who took the initial breathalyzer reading.
‘Stupidity’ was one middle aged man’s response. In court it was revealed that the defendant was well aware of his problems in relation to alcohol. Combined with depression it had caused him problems all his adult life. Prior convictions on similar drink driving offences attested to this. The fact that he had sought professional help in the past showed his awareness, concern and desire for change. This level of responsibility for his own actions and his insight into his problems were commented on by the magistrate.
Considering this, and with the report of a clinical psychologist at hand, the magistrate imposed a period of disqualification from driving as well as community work orders, a supervised probation order and a Victims of Crime levy.
A long list of prior appearances and convictions for drink driving offences had made no dent in another man’s view of road safety laws. It was clear from his demeanour and comments that he didn’t see himself as being at fault. He apparently felt that the court had got it wrong.
After years of being caught and found guilty and despite the opportunities afforded by earlier suspended sentences nothing had changed for this defendant in relation to drink driving. Nor had he demonstrated any intention to change his pattern. It was now the court that changed tack.
At the end of what had been, overall, a very long process, the magistrate’s carefully considered decision was reached. There was an unavoidable sense of abruptness, however, in this defendant making his way across the floor of the court to the holding cells and jail rather than to the door leading to the street.
A young woman charged with driving without a license had also given false particulars of her identity. When the police asked her why, she asked them in return, ‘Why wouldn’t I? I’ll only get a rap on the knuckles, so why not? I don’t have a license. Who cares?’
The police did. So did the magistrate.
It was hoped that the defendant would also start to care. The magistrate referred to the increased severity of penalties for people with prior convictions, one of which she was about to receive.
The bravado on display by the defendant when initially pulled up by police was not in evidence in court. Her reply when asked by the magistrate if she had anything she would like to tell him was a simple ‘no’. She was ordered to pay an amount covering a fine for the driving charges, costs and a Victims of Crime levy.
Some defendants coming to the magistrates court seem subdued by the event and surroundings. Others regard it as a provocative affront which they would like to address, loudly.
Lists of defendants, their assigned courtroom number and the name of the presiding magistrate are on notice boards outside the courtrooms. Defendants are called by the court clerk to come from the area of public seating either inside or outside the court room where they have been waiting. If a defendant has legal representation she/he can sit with them at a large table below the magistrate’s dais while their case is being heard.
Unrepresented defendants are asked to stand in no particular spot near the same table at the end furthest from the magistrate and facing him. The relative looseness of this arrangement, which some may find reassuringly informal, seemed a bit unnerving to others.
If a defendant is on remand she/he is brought in through a doorway to stand in a clearly defined dock.
The nature of the business being conducted is likely to make people nervous. However it seemed that within the dictates of necessity and some surviving traditional touches (such as bowing to the magistrate) the atmosphere in the magistrate’s court was humane and reassuring rather than intimidatory.
