สำเนาบทสนทนา 🔗
00:00:01
S1: I think a lot of people are pretty shocked today. That teenager convicted of the murder of Brisbane mother Emma Lovell had his sentence reduced by nearly 18 months on appeal. It's a decision which has understandably sparked some outrage from the state's attorney general. That's her job to be outraged at these things. And Deb Frecklington has vowed to mull a to null a or actually to mull and null a High Court challenge to the ruling, saying the outcome is unacceptable and will devastate Emma's family and the wider community. Absolutely. Now, the Queensland Government doesn't control the High Court. The High Court controls the High Court, but the Court of Appeal found the teen's original 14 year sentence, which required him to serve 70% of the time, was manifestly excessive. I got to tell you, I am often very colorful about things. I try to be polite because I understand that children can be in the car. But this is just BS total BS. And the decision comes despite the teen's crime being a central focus. Of course why the government changed the policies here in Queensland, the adult crime, adult time, all these laws. And now Deb Frecklington says the outcome is an example of why the government's making Queensland safer. Laws were essential to ensure sentences reflected community expectations. But just how bad is it? I mean, manifestly excessive. Now remember, this all happened in and around the Christmas period. This was a family violated in the most awful way. This woman, Emma Lovell, was killed, skewered by somebody I can't name. I don't know who it is because they were young, but old enough to go around and kill somebody. And apparently a 14 year sentence for the murder of a bright young mother. The devastation to the kids, the husband, the family, the broader community, the lack of trust that we all now have. Apparently, it was manifestly excessive. Who the hell are these bloody judges? I mean, in the end, that's the problem. And Deb Frecklington, I've been saying to you all year, you need to bring in a change to the key performance indicators for judges. You've got to say to judges that unless you ramp up the penalty and then face the prospect of your judgement being appealed, then you're letting the side down. Currently it works like this. They don't ramp it up, they actually tone it down. They go off the examples of earlier cases and judge the sentence as a result from there. And their key performance indicator is that they have fewer appeals then they get promotions as judges. And this is just an insanity, a complete insanity. And until we actually tell and most of these judges that have been appointed right through the Queensland Criminal Code criminal system, understand, understand as you do that with Labour having been in power for over 35 years, with a couple of bursts from Borbidge and then later Newman, and the last almost 12 months with with David Crisafulli, labor has actually had control of judicial appointments for 35 years. That's more than a generation of judges. And they are soft. They're just soft. I don't think Queenslanders will be very happy. Deb Frecklington, unless you don't use the slogan, don't use the PR pitch, don't use the Making Queensland Safer laws and adult crime adult time justification for this. Do the work. Fix up the key performance indicators that aspect of the way the judges work. I've had judges who quietly had a chat to me and said, unless we are rewarded for going tough, the current system will provide. In other words, they get rewarded for going soft. 14 year sentence for killing this bright, beautiful woman, mother, family, devastated, community lacking trust and then the whole judicial system, the juvenile justice system changed off the back of the community. Sentiment about all of this need a bit more work done from you, Attorney-General. That's what we need. I think I'm unfair. I'm happy to take a contrary view. One 3882.