JUSTICE REINVESTMENT - PORT ADELAIDE PROJECT - JUSTICE SYSTEM REVIEW 2018

Page created by Travis Contreras
 
CONTINUE READING
JUSTICE REINVESTMENT - PORT ADELAIDE PROJECT - JUSTICE SYSTEM REVIEW 2018
JUSTICE REINVESTMENT –
PORT ADELAIDE PROJECT

JUSTICE SYSTEM REVIEW
Understanding the underlying factors which contribute to offending
pathways and potential solutions

                                                           2018
JUSTICE REINVESTMENT - PORT ADELAIDE PROJECT - JUSTICE SYSTEM REVIEW 2018
Contents
1.      PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT ........................................................................................................ 3
2.      INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 4
     Adult corrections system, SA ....................................................................................................... 5
     Youth justice system, SA .............................................................................................................. 9
3.      PORT ADELAIDE COURTS ............................................................................................................... 16
4.      SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF CRIME – AN AUSTRALIAN PERSPECTIVE ............................................. 27
     A: Involvement with the child protection system .................................................................... 27
     B. Intergenerational incarceration ........................................................................................... 31
     C: Drug and alcohol misuse ...................................................................................................... 33
     D: Unemployment, low income and poverty ........................................................................... 37
     E: Low educational attainment ................................................................................................ 39
     F: Homelessness ....................................................................................................................... 40
     G: Cognitive disability and mental-ill health ............................................................................ 41
5.      JUSTICE SYSTEM REFORM .............................................................................................................. 43
     Justice related legislation and policy, SA ................................................................................... 43
     Courts and problem-solving Justice ........................................................................................... 47
     Policing practices and over-policing .......................................................................................... 49
     Overcoming barriers to rehabilitation, employment and successful return to community ..... 51
6.      BASELINE INDICATORS .................................................................................................................. 52
7.      APPENDIX 1: FLOWS THROUGH THE ADULT AND YOUTH JUSTICE SYSTEMS .................................. 54
8.      APPENDIX 2: SA OFFENDER AND FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES ....................................................... 56
9.      APPENDIX 3: CASE STUDIES ........................................................................................................... 59
10.     APPENDIX 4: HOW DOES SENTENCING FOR YOUNG OFFENDERS WORK IN SA? ............................ 67
11.     APPENDIX 5: JUSTICE CAMPAIGNS IN AUSTRALIA ......................................................................... 70
12.     APPENDIX 6: POTENTIAL DATA INDICATORS FOR YOUTH AT RISK OF OFFENDING ........................ 72
13.     APPENDIX 7: REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 74

                          This resource is for Justice Reinvestment-Port Adelaide project purposes only                                             2
JUSTICE REINVESTMENT - PORT ADELAIDE PROJECT - JUSTICE SYSTEM REVIEW 2018
1.     Purpose of this document
     This resource has been compiled to provide Justice Reinvestment SA (JRSA)
     members and the Port Adelaide Justice Reinvestment Aboriginal Leadership
     Group with background information about aspects of the justice system, justice
     system reform opportunities and the factors which contribute to criminogenic
     behaviours.

     This resource is not intended to be a definitive source of all aspects of the justice
     system. It is hoped that the resource will provide some pointers and stimulate
     discussion about the justice system, areas of policy reform and legislation and
     underlying causes of crime to support further planning and implementation of a
     community-led justice reinvestment approach in Port Adelaide.

     Wherever possible, snapshots of information and data specific to Port Adelaide
     or South Australia have been included. Where localised data is not readily
     available, Australian data is provided as a broad indicator of rates or trends. In
     some cases, questions for further consideration and/or data gaps are identified.

     More comprehensive data to support the Port Adelaide justice reinvestment
     project is available in the Port Adelaide Enfield, Population and Justice Profile
     and the Port Adelaide Enfield: Young Offenders (10-17) Data Analysis which
     have also been developed by the project.

     The project will continue to build on information provided in these documents in
     the form of summary, infographic or other resources as requested by JRSA and
     the Port Adelaide Justice Reinvestment Aboriginal Leadership Group.

                                                                                             3
JUSTICE REINVESTMENT - PORT ADELAIDE PROJECT - JUSTICE SYSTEM REVIEW 2018
2.     Introduction

In order to improve justice outcomes for the community, we need not only to look at the prison
system, but also the range of connected systems such as courts, policing and community
corrections, and the underlying causal factors and social determinants which underpin an
increase in prison numbers.

It is important to acknowledge the complexities of the justice system when considering the
need and implications of ‘doing justice differently’ or justice systems reform. Crime rates in
South Australia are not growing and yet incarceration rates are increasing. At the same time
there are indications that the public confidence in the justice system is declining and the
perception that the community needs to be ‘tough on crime’ is increasing (Australian Red Cross,
2017).

The social risk factors that contribute to a person’s likelihood of entering the justice system
need to be considered, alongside opportunities for effective community based services which
a) prevent people from entering the justice system, and b) improve outcomes for people
already in contact with the justice system from their first point of contact, while they are in
custody, and when they leave prison and re-enter community and family life.

There is an established link between criminal activity and social and economic factors such as
poverty, substance abuse, unemployment and low levels of social and community cohesion.
There is also a direct link between the demand on justice services and changes in legislative and
policy environments introduced in response to public concerns about the levels of crime and
fear of crime. It is often those experiencing disadvantage who are most impacted by these
changes, leading to the criminalisation of poverty in Australia’s most vulnerable communities.
This has significant financial and social costs for the community.

Data on its own does not give an accurate account of the issues for those in the system. For this
reason it is essential to consider individuals’ personal narratives and the impact of policy and
legislation on their interactions with the justice system. For example, high rates of reoffending
may indicate increasing rates of crime and antisocial behaviours. However this data alone does
not provide details of the nature of the re-offence. For example, a return to prison for a traffic
offence is counted in the same manner as a return for a more serious offence such as homicide.

It is well understood that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander1 people at all ages are
substantially over-represented within the justice system. Although the majority of Aboriginal
people do not have contact with justice systems over the course of their lives, for those who do,
the justice system can perpetuate a complex cycle of incarceration. The overrepresentation of
Aboriginal people in the justice system is a result of a complex interplay of disadvantage,
institutional bias, inflexible justice system and sentencing options, systemic racism, history of
dispossession and family and intergenerational trauma (Snowball and Weatherburn 2007).

1
 For the purposes of this paper, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people may be referred to as Aboriginal
people

                   This resource is for Justice Reinvestment-Port Adelaide project purposes only            4
JUSTICE REINVESTMENT - PORT ADELAIDE PROJECT - JUSTICE SYSTEM REVIEW 2018
It is also well documented that particular areas and communities carry a greater financial
burden as a result of higher numbers of chronic offenders living in those locations; and these
communities will receive the most benefit from improved justice system and service responses,
including redirected savings from reduced prison numbers, particularly when redirected into
early intervention initiatives.

Justice reinvestment aims to work with communities to reduce the cost of crime and
victimisation through prevention and protection measures proven to strengthen public safety
and social cohesion over the long term for future generations. Justice reinvestment is a
transformative approach that addresses the root causes of crime based on the knowledge that a
significant proportion of prisoners and offenders come from, and return to, a small number of
communities. In Australia, justice reinvestment has been advocated as an approach for
addressing the over-representation of Aboriginal people in the criminal justice system.

Advocacy for the benefits of a justice reinvestment approach in Australia gained momentum
with the release of the Social Justice Report (2009) in which the Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Social Justice Commissioner recommended justice reinvestment as a priority including
implementation of pilot projects in targeted communities. In 2013, the Senate Inquiry into the
’Value of a justice reinvestment approach to the criminal justice system in Australia’ was
undertaken resulting in nine core recommendations. Similarly, the Australian Human Rights
Commission has recognised in several Social Justice reports the potential of justice reinvestment
in addressing the over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders in the criminal
justice system, given its emphasis on community-led approaches. Justice reinvestment offers a
strong approach for rethinking and transforming Australia’s justice systems.

   In the Social Justice and Native Title Report (2014), Mick Gooda states:
   ‘There are persuasive arguments for trialing a justice reinvestment approach in Aboriginal
   and Torres Strait Islander contexts given the high levels of over-representation and
   disadvantage faced by these communities. The principles of a justice reinvestment approach
   include localism, community control and better cooperation between local services. These
   also align with what we know about human rights-based practice in Aboriginal and Torres
   Strait Islander service delivery’ (AHRC, 2014).

Adult corrections system, SA
Over the past decade, South Australia has experienced growth in prison numbers by almost
81%. As of 30 June 2017, the number of adult prisoners in SA prisons was 3,032, an increase of
3% (84 prisoners) since 2016 (ABS, 2017b). This is the second highest growth rate in Australia
over the same period (behind the Northern Territory). This prolonged growth has resulted in the
SA correctional system operating at 157 per cent of its designed capacity. At the current rate, it
is estimated that this will continue to grow to 250 per cent of its capacity by 2025 (Productivity
Commission, 2018a).

In SA, it costs approximately $105,033 annually, inclusive of capital costs, to keep an adult in
prison and approximately $6,333 in community corrections (approximately 6% of the cost of

                                                                                                   5
JUSTICE REINVESTMENT - PORT ADELAIDE PROJECT - JUSTICE SYSTEM REVIEW 2018
prison). SA has 8 Government and 1 privately operated prisons (Productivity Commission,
2018a).

In 2016-17, the number of adult prisoners on an average day in SA was 2,998 and of these,
699 (23%) identified as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander. 93% were male. During the same
period, adults serving community corrections orders was 6,374 on an average day and 1,076
(17%) identified as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander. 82% were male.

In 2016-17 in SA, 36% of adults who had been released from prison, returned to prison or
corrective services with a new sentence within 2 years. 45% returned to corrective services with
a new correctional sanction within two years.

In SA, 11% of adults discharged from community corrections orders in 2014-15, returned to
community corrections within 2 years. 21% returned to a prison sentence or community
corrections order within 2 years (Productivity Commission, 2018a). .

Table 1 provides a comparison between the SA and Australian populations who are in custody,
unsentenced, sentenced, under community-based orders and Indigenous status at September
2017 (ABS, 2017a).

        Table 1: Baseline for adult prison population and adults on community-based orders, SA
                                            Sept quarter 2017

                                                                                            Aust. (rate per
                                                   SA (Average    SA (rate per 100,000
 Indicator                Demographic                                                         100,000
                                                  daily number)       population)
                                                                                             population)
 Adult prison        All – in full time custody       3020                 222                    216
 population
 (18 years and       Males – in full time
                                                      2811                 422                    405
 over)               custody
                     Females – in full time
                                                      208                  31                     34
                     custody
                     Indigenous – in full time
                                                      698                 2651                    2424
                     custody
                     Unsentenced                      1120                 83                     68
                     Sentenced                        1919                 142                    148
                     Community-based
                                                      5399                 403                    363
                     corrections

Source: ABS, 2017a

                  This resource is for Justice Reinvestment-Port Adelaide project purposes only               6
JUSTICE REINVESTMENT - PORT ADELAIDE PROJECT - JUSTICE SYSTEM REVIEW 2018
Table 2 provides a snapshot of the characteristics of adults who entered the prison system in SA
(and Australia) in 2015.

         Table 2: Characteristics of adults in full-time custody in South Australia and Australia

         Characteristics                                                     SA         Aust
         Prisoner number (ABS, 2017b)                                      3,032       41,202
         Male (%)                                                            95           92
         Aboriginal (%)                                                      25           24
         Median age (years)                                                  30           32
         Age range (years)                                                 19-76        18-76
         Been in juvenile detention (%)                                      24           21
         Been in prison before (%)                                           69           66
         Been in prison in previous 12 months (%)                            40           40
         Currently on remand (%)                                             83           56
         Length of most recent prison stay less than 3 months
                                                                             49           36
         (% by discharged prisoner)
         Length of most recent prison stay more than 2 years
                                                                              7           9
         (% by discharged prisoner)
         Unsentenced (%) (ABS, 2017b)                                        38           31
         Median time on remand for unsentenced prisoners
                                                                             2.4         3.3
         (Months) (ABS, 2017b)

          Source: AIHW, 2015a and ABS, 2017b

                                                                                                    7
JUSTICE REINVESTMENT - PORT ADELAIDE PROJECT - JUSTICE SYSTEM REVIEW 2018
PORT ADELAIDE - ADULT CORRECTIONS

       During 2015-17, 92 individual adult offenders from the Port Adelaide Enfield
        (PAE) area received a prison sentence.

       In the decade to 2017, 2671 adult offenders from PAE received a prison sentence
        on a minimum of one occasion. 23% identified as Aboriginal and Torres Strait
        Islander.

       Of the 2671 adult offenders discharged from prison during 2007-17,
        83% had served 1-2 periods in prison, 15%, 3-5 periods and
        2%, more than 6 periods.

       Of all offenders discharged from prison during 2007-17, one-quarter had served
        a total period of 30 days or less, one-half had served a total period of more than
        one year.

       The most common ‘offence descriptions’ served included; ‘offences against
        justice procedures’ (26%) ‘assaults’ (18%), ‘deal or traffic drugs’ (13%), ‘break
        and enter’ (8%), and ‘fraud’ (8%).

       Reasons for discharge from prison for offenders discharged during 2007-17
        comprised one-third (32%) paroled, one-quarter (28%) to bail, one-fifth (19%)
        released off court and one-fifth (18%) released with sentence served.

       Offences recorded by Police are higher in the PAE region across all offence types
        when compared with metropolitan SA. In 2013, the Port Adelaide Enfield rate
        per 1,000 population was 157 (for total offences), compared with 110 for
        metropolitan SA.

       Source: Department for Correctional Services (localised data extracted for the project, 2017)
       and Office of Crime Statistics and Research

                This resource is for Justice Reinvestment-Port Adelaide project purposes only          8
Youth justice system, SA
The set of processes and practices for managing children and young people who have
committed, or allegedly committed, an offence is known as the youth justice system. Young
people can be charged with a criminal offence if they are aged 10 and older. The upper age limit
for treatment as a young person is 17 although some young people aged 18 and older are also
involved in the youth justice system. This may be due to the offence being committed when the
young person was aged 17 or younger, the continuation of supervision once they turn 18, or in
some cases because of vulnerability or immaturity.

Young people generally first make contact with the youth justice system when police investigate
an alleged crime. Legal action by police may include court actions (the laying of charges to be
answered in court) and non-court actions (such as cautions, conferencing, counselling or
infringement notices). A court may decide to dismiss the charge, divert the young person from
further involvement in the system (for example by referral to mainstream services), or transfer
them to specialist courts or programs. If the matter proceeds and the charge is proven, the
court may hand down any of a number of orders, either supervised or unsupervised
(AIHW, 2017c).

A major feature of the youth justice system is the supervision of young people on legal orders.
They may be supervised in the community or within secure detention facilities. Young people
may be supervised while they are ‘unsentenced’- when they have been charged with an offence
and are awaiting the outcome of their court matter, or when they have been found or have
pleaded guilty and are awaiting sentencing. However, most of those under supervision are
‘sentenced’ - they have been proven guilty in court and sentenced.

Young people may be supervised in the community, or in detention, on both sentenced and
unsentenced legal orders. Unsentenced community-based supervision results from legal orders,
such as supervised or conditional bail (which may include conditions such as curfew or a
monetary bond) and home detention bail. Young people may be in sentenced community-based
supervision if they have been found guilty in a court and have received a sentenced order; this
may include probation and similar (where regular reporting to the youth justice agency and
participation in treatment programs may be required), suspended detention (where the young
person must meet certain conditions or not re-offend within a specified time period), and
parole or supervised release (supervision that follows a period of detention).

Young people in contact with youth justice systems, SA
In SA, the Adelaide Youth Training Centre (AYTC) detention facility, is housed on two campuses
in Cavan. One campus caters for female residents, younger male residents and young people in
overnight remand. The other campus houses older male residents.

In 2016-17, there were 887 total admissions for 388 individual young people of whom half or
more were in remand awaiting trial. Of the 388 young people admitted, at the time of first
admission:
     23% were young women
     22% were under guardianship orders

                                                                                                 9
       49% were from Aboriginal backgrounds
              (Guardian for Children and Young People, 2017)

Figure 1 demonstrates the age distribution of young people ages 10-20 years at the time of
admission to detention during 2016-17.

                Figure 1: The age distribution of young people at the time of admission (2016-17)

                                 Source: Guardian for Children and Young People, 2017

Table 3 provides baseline data relating to young people 10- 17. Young people 17-18 are not
included due to inconsistency across Australia, with young people in this age range being
treated as either an adult or youth for the purpose of sentencing. Data is based on a rate of per
10,000 of the youth population.

               Table 3: Baseline for youth in custody, community based order and all supervision,
                                            SA and Australia, 2015-16

                                                                          SA                                        Aust
                                                  Number (all ages)             Rate aged 10-17 years      Rate aged 10-17 years
                                                                                    (# per 10,000)             (# per 10,000)
                                               Average       During the        Average       During the   Average          During the
                                                 day           year              day           year         day              year

Community       All                             253              580             14              31         18                37
                Aboriginal                      119              259            150             329        148                313
                Aboriginal /
                                                                                 20
                Non-Indigenous rate ratio
Detention       All                              56              436             3               26         3                 19
                Aboriginal                       32              207             45             284         37                180
                Aboriginal /
                                                                                 30
                Non-Indigenous rate ratio
All             All                             307              751             17              41         21                41
supervision
                Aboriginal                      150              335            195             434        191                351
                Aboriginal /
                                                                                 22
                Non-Indigenous rate ratio

Source: AIHW, 2017c

                       This resource is for Justice Reinvestment-Port Adelaide project purposes only                10
When all the time spent under supervision during 2015–16 is considered (including periods that
were not completed), young people in SA who were supervised during the year spent a total
average of 149 days (5 months) under supervision.

It costs approximately $1800 per day to provide detention-based supervision, $113 per day for
community-based supervision and $1165 for a (concluded) group conference. In 2016-17, SA
government expenditure on youth justice services (including detention, community and group
conferencing) was more than $45.7M (Productivity Commission, 2018b).

Aboriginal young people
Aboriginal young people in SA comprise 5 per cent the total population aged 10-17 years, but
make up approximately 57 per cent of young people in detention on an average day. In 2015-16,
104 Aboriginal young people received community-based supervision and 32 Aboriginal young
people were in detention on an average day (Productivity Commission, 2018b).

Aboriginal young people in SA are 30 times more likely to be in detention than non-Aboriginal
young people. This level of over-representation is higher for young people than for the adult
population (Aboriginal adults are 17 times more likely to be imprisoned than non-Aboriginal
adults) (AIHW, 2017c).

SA has the 2nd highest rate of Aboriginal young people in detention among all states and
territories (459 per 100,000 behind WA at 610 per 100,000 young people), and is well over the
national average (373 per 100,000). In 2015-16, 72% of Aboriginal young people on community-
based orders (and 81% of non-Aboriginal young people) completed them successfully
(Productivity Commission, 2018b).

On average, Aboriginal young people have been shown to have more contacts with the juvenile
system, progress onto more serious contacts (for example onto sentenced detention) and have
a wider variety of pathways through the system than non-Aboriginal young people (AIHW
2017b).

Reoffending
There is evidence that punitive measures such as detention may worsen rates of youth
recidivism. Specifically, the experience of incarceration can create institutionalisation or
dependency, can encourage criminal activity and can leave young people with no knowledge of
basic life skills for reintegration into society. These outcomes may be a result of a lack of
adequate living standards in juvenile detention centres, a lack of case management, limited
family and community contact and a lack of education and training programs (Australian Law
Reform Commission, 1997).

Using Australia-wide data, the majority of young people do not return to sentenced supervision.
Of those aged 10–17 years who were under sentenced youth justice supervision from 2000–01
to 2015–16, 61% received 1 supervised sentence before turning 18. Young people who served
shorter initial sentences were more likely to return to sentenced supervision than those who
served longer initial sentences, regardless of whether their first sentence was community based

                                                                                                11
or detention. Young Aboriginal people were 1.7 times as likely as their non-Indigenous
counterparts to return to sentenced supervision before the age of 18 (AIHW, 2017b).

Figure 2 provides a summary of the rate of return - presented as the proportion of young people
who returned, out of all young people who could have returned to sentenced youth justice
supervision.

              Figure 2: Return to sentenced youth justice supervision, Australia 2014-15

         Source: AIHW, 2017b

Youth rehabilitation and treatment programs
A range of rehabilitation and support programs are offered to young people in SA who are
under the supervision of youth justice in either the community or custody. Examples of
rehabilitation programs currently offered include PLUS+, Changing Habits and Reaching Targets
(CHART) and counselling by the Drug and Alcohol Services South Australia (DASSA) (AIHW,
2017a).

The primary objective of the PLUS+ program is to help young people acquire, develop and apply
a series of social problem-solving, interpersonal, and self-control skills that will enable them to
better manage potential difficulties in their lives, and to avoid future reoffending. Currently, the
program is available to young people serving either remand or detention orders at AYTC, who
are assessed as moderate or high risk of re-offending. CHART uses a skills-oriented approach to
challenge offending behaviour for young people who require a moderate to high level of
intervention to reduce their risk of re-offending. DASSA provide individual counselling for young
people in custody with alcohol and other drug misuse issues.

A range of developmental, health and social integration programs are also available including
Ignition, Step Out and D-Stress. The Ignition program is coordinated by Service to Youth Council
- Helping Young People Achieve (HYPA), and is designed to improve the social and independent

                This resource is for Justice Reinvestment-Port Adelaide project purposes only     12
living skills of young people. This program can also be a pathway to the Integrated Housing Exits
Program which provides young people with independent accommodation for 12 months with
support from workers from HYPA. Step Out is a mentoring program provided by Red Cross
which aims to support young people who are currently, or who have previously been in custody
to reconnect with their community and to pursue positive lifestyles and personal goals that
minimise future risk of reoffending. Young people involved in the program commence working
with mentors while in custody and continue into the community for up to 12 months.

The D-Stress program is a brief, six session psycho-educational group program designed to assist
young people to improve their ability to manage stressful experiences. It is currently delivered
three times per year during mid-term school holidays, with the girls and young boys units at
AYTC. The Youth Justice Program Review Panel reviews all programs delivered.

Youth Justice Psychology Services (YJPS) provide assessment and rehabilitation for young
offenders, integrated with case management services and supporting training centre
operations. YJPS provides clinical psychological assessments to assist case planning and case
management. YJPS prioritises young people who are at high risk of re-offending, and who have
been convicted of serious offences.

Aboriginal young people and their families are provided with access to a range of cultural
support services. The Circles of Trust engagement tool assists case managers to gather
information about Aboriginal clients, their family, cultural group and community supports.
Metropolitan Aboriginal Youth and Family Services (MAYFS) provide a culturally specific service
and provides community outreach programs, within the community. The Child and Adolescent
Mental Health Service (CAMHS) Journey Home program helps young Aboriginal people and their
families create pathways out of the justice system. The program aims to strengthen the young
person's connection to culture and community, and to connect to local support services in their
community.

Education programs for young people at AYTC and in the community emphasise literacy and
numeracy as base skills, and include a curriculum (from within the Australian Curriculum)
offering life skills, work skills, health, physical education, science, arts, woodwork and
metalwork, accredited by the South Australian Certificate of Education. Accredited vocational
courses are offered and include hospitality/ kitchen operations, building and construction,
horticulture, dry wall construction, automotive (small engines) and music. Case-managed
Innovative Community Action Networks courses and programs are offered to young people
released from AYTC to foster engagement and pathways to employment.

The information in this section has been sourced primarily from AIHW:
https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/youth-justice/youth-justice-in-australia-2015-
16/contents/south-australia).

                                                                                                13
PORT ADELAIDE – YOUTH JUSTICE

      In 2016, the rate of Police apprehension reports involving young people in the
       Port Adelaide Enfield (PAE) area was 238 per 10,000 population, compared with
       144 per 10,000 population in metropolitan SA.

      Of all Police apprehension reports involving young people during this period,
       36% involved Aboriginal young people (compared with 32% in metropolitan SA).

      Of all apprehension reports involving Aboriginal young people, the most serious
       single offence type for individuals throughout the year was ‘breach of bail’
       (31%), followed by ‘unlawful entry with intent/burglary/break and enter’ (8%),
       ‘serious assault not resulting in injury’ (7%), ‘property damage’ (7%), ‘possession
       of illicit drugs’ (6%), and ‘common assault’ (5%).

      Of the 182 young people between the ages 10-17 years apprehended in PAE in
       2016, 28% were 17 years, 40% were 15-16 years, 22% were 13-14 years and
       3% were 10-12 years.

      Of the 182 young people apprehended, 20% (37 individuals) identified as
       Aboriginal, and 81% were male.

      Of all young people apprehended in PAE in 2016, 48% were arrested and 52%
       were reported. Of the Aboriginal people apprehended, 57% were arrested and
       43% were reported.

      Of the Aboriginal young people apprehended in the PAE area in 2016, 27% had
       reported one offence during the year, 14%, 2 offences; 24%, 3 offences; 19%, 4
       offences and 16%, 5 offences (a similar pattern was shown among Aboriginal
       young people apprehended in metropolitan Adelaide).

      The most common offence type (by most serious single offence by individual
       Aboriginal young offenders during 2016) was ‘serious assault not resulting in
       injury’ (19%), ‘unlawful entry with intent/burglary/break and enter’ (11%),
       ‘Theft except motor vehicle’ (11%), ‘aggravated sexual assault’ (11%), ‘common
       assault’ (8%).

      58% of Aboriginal young offenders apprehended in 2016, identified a suburb in
       PAE as their home address. 11% identified the Salisbury local government area,
       8% identified the Playford area and 8% the West Torrens area.

      Of all Aboriginal young people apprehended in 2016, 46% attended Court, 24%
       attended a family conference, 22% received a formal caution and in 3% of cases
       the charge was withdrawn.

   Source: Office of Crime Statistics and Research (localised data extracted for the project), 2018.
      NOTE: This data is confidential for project purposes only and not for public distribution.

             This resource is for Justice Reinvestment-Port Adelaide project purposes only             14
QUESTIONS FOR PORT ADELAIDE
 ?   How can we improve our understanding (community narratives) about what
     factors influence patterns of offending and positive life choices, from the
     perspectives of young people in direct contact with youth justice services
     (in detention and community supervision).

 ? Is there research / evidence about the outcomes of rehabilitation, education
     and treatment programs by young people in detention, to better prepare
     them for positive lives in the community.

 ?   How can the project align with the justice reinvestment action identified in
     SAPOL’s Reconciliation Action Plan 2017-2020, such as increased use of
     Police discretionary powers.

 ?   How can we improve our understanding of Port Adelaide and Youth Court
     processes and outcomes for Aboriginal people and their families including
     the role of Alternative Sentencing options, Nunga Court, Family Conferencing
     and use of 9C.

                                                                                    15
3.       Port Adelaide Courts
The Port Adelaide Court provides access to the following courts and services:
    Magistrates Court, Criminal and Civil
    Nunga Court (Aboriginal Sentencing Court)
    Youth Court
    Diversion Court
    Family Violence Court.

Other services also operating from the Port Adelaide Court (registry) include:
    Aboriginal Legal Rights Movement (ALRM) – provides legal services for Aboriginal clients
      on civil, family and criminal law matters. In criminal law matters, ALRM represents clients
      from committal stage to appeal. ALRM also plays a role in lobbying for law reform.
        Legal Services Commission – focuses on proving legal assistance on criminal law issues to
         people without other means of legal support. A review conducted in 2014 indicated that
         there have been an increasing number of Aboriginal defendants accessing legal aid
         services provided through the Commission (13 per cent of all legal aid matters provided
         to Aboriginal people) (Attorney-General’s Department, 2015a).
        Aboriginal Justice Officers – refer below
        Justice of the Peace
        Uni SA Legal Advice Clinic (Fridays)
        Taking payments on behalf of the Fines Enforcement and Recovery Unit.

The Magistrates Court has a criminal and civil jurisdiction. In its criminal jurisdiction, the
Magistrates Court deals with summary offences, which may be dealt with by a fine,
imprisonment of up to two years, community service or a good behaviour bond. In its civil
jurisdiction, it hears matters seeking damages of up to $100,000 for general claims and minor
civil claims which are up to $25,000. Magistrates Courts in SA handle the greatest proportion of
litigation in the State. All criminal matters begin in the Magistrates Court and the civil
jurisdiction hears approximately 90% of all disputes within the State. In 2016-17, there were
approximately 45,000 criminal cases finalised in magistrates courts (excluding youth courts) and
3,000 cases finalised in youth courts in SA. The proportion of criminal court finalisations
involving Aboriginal people in SA magistrates courts (excluding youth courts) was 13% and in
youth courts was 37% (Productivity Commission, 2018a).

The Nunga (Aboriginal Sentencing) Court was first established in the Port Adelaide Magistrates
Court in South Australia in 1993 and currently operates fortnightly on a Tuesday. Additional
Nunga Courts have also been established across the state. These courts are a special case court
specifically available for people of Aboriginal descent. Defendants will need to be assessed by an
Aboriginal Justice Officer (AJO) to determine if the person meets assessment criteria and they
are of Aboriginal descent (in accordance of the Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988 (SA)). The
defendant will need to have pleaded guilty, or found to be guilty of a crime which can only be
heard and decided by a magistrate in the magistrates court (summary offence). In general,
summary offences are less serious than indictable offences and the penalties are not as great.
The defendant will need to elect to have the sentence heard at the Nunga Court. Nunga Court is
only accessible if the offence happened in the geographical area covered by that court.

                  This resource is for Justice Reinvestment-Port Adelaide project purposes only   16
The Youth Court of SA was established under the Youth Court Act (SA) 1993. The current Youth
Court is a specialist court which deals with young offenders from the ages of 10 to 17. All major
indictable trials, for example, aggravated serious criminal trespass, endangering life, etc, must
be presided over by a judge. Minor indictable offences, for example; non-aggravated serious
criminal trespass, damage property, graffiti etc are presided over by a magistrate. Youth court
hearings are held at the Port Adelaide Magistrates Court (and Elizabeth, Christies Beach and
regional courts). Similar to matters heard for adults, youth court is only accessible if the offence
happened in the geographical area covered by that court.

If a young person pleads guilty to an offence, they may receive a formal caution or be referred
to family conferencing. These options are dependent on the crime and / or the situation of the
offender. If the offender denies the allegations, then they will likely have their case taken to the
youth court.

Aboriginal Legal Rights Movement (ALRM) legal officers are notified if a young person identifies
as Aboriginal. An Aboriginal Field Officer can assist at the time of interview including
coordination with family members and/or other Departments in contact with the young person
(such as Child Protection, DCSI Youth Justice, and Education). ALRM or Legal Services
Commission may provide legal representation.

The court may ask for a report to aid them in sentencing or to provide information about a
young person’s progress while on the court order. Youth Justice (Department for Communities
and Social Inclusion (DCSI)), is responsible for completing: Section 32 (S32) pre-sentence
background reports in addition to bail, home detention, progress, psychological and Training
Centre Review Board progress reports. Youth Justice will complete the report using direct
information from the young person, their parents, guardians or caregivers, other support people
and previous youth justice history.

Aboriginal Justice Officers (AJOs) provide support to young people and adults attending court.
There are 2 AJOs located specifically at the Port Adelaide Court. Should a young person require
attendance at the Adelaide Youth Court, Aboriginal Youth Justice Officers will provide direct
support to the young person.

The role of AJOs include:
      assisting with Aboriginal sentencing courts/conferences
      providing advice to Aboriginal court users re procedures, fines, payment options and
       Justice of the Peace services
      providing advice to Judicial Officers re Aboriginal culture and communities
      recruiting, training and supporting Elders
      assisting with family conferences for young people. The AJOs located at Port Adelaide
       court support families in the Western and Northern areas.

The Diversion Court Program provides an opportunity for eligible individuals who have been
charged with minor indictable or summary offences to voluntarily address their mental health
and/or disability needs and offending behaviours, while legal proceedings are adjourned for

                                                                                                  17
approximately 6 months. During this time the program staff link the individual to relevant
services in the community and monitors their progress. By facilitating the involvement of
community based service providers in addressing the behaviours arising from impaired
intellectual or mental functioning. The person’s involvement and progress is reported back to
the court and the magistrate, police and lawyers may use this information in dealing further
with the case. The magistrate reviews the individual every two months to reinforce and reward
compliance with treatment programs and lifestyle changes and to take alternative action if the
interventions are not working. At the final hearing, the magistrate makes a determination taking
into account the participant’s involvement in the program. Depending on the nature of the
offences, the magistrate may dismiss the matter or convict without penalty.

The Youth Court Treatment Intervention Program commenced at the end of 2011 and replaced
the Youth Court Assessment and Referral Drug Scheme (Youth CARDS) and the Youth Court
Diversion Program (YCDP). The program integrates assessment and treatment of young
offenders with mental impairment and/or substance dependence. The approach has been
adopted because the incidence of mental illness co-occurring with substance dependence is
high and better outcomes can be achieved if these issues are addressed in an integrated way.
The program targets youth who may not be eligible for a referral for a family conference due to
the nature of their offending. Treatment is accessed from private psychologists.

Defendants appearing in the Port Adelaide Nunga Court who have underlying illicit substance
abuse problems are offered the option of deferring sentencing for 6 months so they can
participate in the Port Adelaide Nunga Court Treatment Program. This is a voluntary program
under the provisions of the Bail Act. When a defendant agrees to participate in the program
they are linked in with counselling and relapse prevention groups and are required to submit to
random drug testing twice a week. Table 4 provides an overview of participants in the Port
Adelaide Nunga Court Treatment Program between 2015-17.

    Table 4: All participants in the Port Adelaide Nunga Court Treatment Program accepted between
                                            01/01/15 – 31/07/17
                  Acceptances                  Completions                   Removals                     Active
  Age        M         F        Total     M          F       Total      M         F       Total      M      F        Total
  18-25      3         2          5       0          0        0         3         2         5        0      0         0
  26-30      5         3          8       3          2        5         1         0         1        1      1         2
  31-35      4         1          5       2          0        2         2         1         3        0      0         0
  36-40      3         0          3       1          0        1         1         0         1        1      0         1
  41-45      2         1          3       2          1        3         0         0         0        0      0         0
  46-50      3         1          4       2          0        2         1         1         2        0      0         0
    50+      1         4          5       1          4        5         0         0         0        0      0         0
   Total     21        12        33       11         7        18        8         4        12        2      1         3
Source: Courts Administration Authority – Port Adelaide Magistrates Court data provided for the project

The Family Violence Court (FVC) is a special list where matters related to intervention order
applications and related criminal charges are heard. The intervention program that operates in
the Family Violence Court is called the Abuse Prevention Program. This program was established
for male defendants who have been issued with an intervention order and who are facing
charges for domestic violence related offences. Men can also be referred to the program under

                   This resource is for Justice Reinvestment-Port Adelaide project purposes only                18
the Bail Act as an alternative to the court making participation a condition of the Intervention
Order. A defendant has to agree to a referral under the Bail Act.

The Abuse Prevention Program provides the assessment, referral, supervision and monitoring
components for the FVC and the actual treatment/behaviour change programs are delivered by
non-government organisations including OARS-Community Transitions and Kornar Winmil Yunti
(KWY), under contract to the Courts Administration Authority. There are approximately 110 to
120 men participating in a DV Prevention Program at any time in SA.

Section 9C Sentencing of Aboriginal defendants (Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988)
Section 9C outlines alternative options for Aboriginal defendants. A Sentencing Conference can
be organised by magistrate and youth courts with assistance from an AJO. The defendant will
need to give consent for the sentencing conference to take place. To be eligible for Section 9C
sentencing, the person will need to be assessed to determine if they are of Aboriginal descent.

The sentencing conference must comprise of:
       The defendant (and if the defendant is a child, the defendant’s parent or guardian)
       The defendant’s legal representative
       The prosecutor
       The victim (if they choose to be present and if they are a child, the victim’s parent or
        guardian).

The sentencing conference may also include an Aboriginal Elder and/or a person that is qualified
to provide cultural advice that is relevant to the sentence. Others allowed to be involved in the
proceedings are a member of the family, a person who has provided counselling or support and
any other person as requested by the defendant. The legislation outlines that if the defendant is
a child their parent or guardian can be present, therefore this section of the legislation indicates
that it is also available to Aboriginal youth.

Figure 3 provides a summary of the flow through the Port Adelaide Magistrates Court system for
adult defendants.

For more information refer to:
Appendix 1: Flows through the adult and youth justice systems
(indicative only and not specific to the South Australian or Port Adelaide Magistrates Courts).
Appendix 2: SA offender and family support programs available for Aboriginal families
in the Port Adelaide Enfield area, including the emphasis of the program from prevention
through to post-release support.

                                                                                                   19
NOTES

Figure 3: Flow through the Port Adelaide Magistrates                              a) Police notifies Aboriginal Legal Rights
Court system (adult)                                                              Movement (ALRM) at the time of arrest of
                                                                                  Aboriginal offenders.

                                                                                  b) Police officer in charge sets bail conditions.
                              POLICE                                              Factors considered in relation to suitability for
                           APPREHENSION
                                                                                  bail include seriousness of offence, criminal
                                                                                  history, likelihood of reoffending. A court date
                                                                                  will be set within approximately one-month.

                                                                                  c) If remanded in custody, attendance at court
                                CHARGED                                           will take place no later than the afternoon of the
                                                                                  following court sitting day. Individuals may be
                                                                                  remanded at the Adelaide Remand Centre, or
                                                                                  depending on bed availability, at any prison in SA.
            POLICE BAIL                     REMANDED IN CUSTODY
                                                                                  d) When a person attends court (the court
                                                                                  nearest to where the offending took place), their
                                                                                  bail arrangement moves from Police Bail to Court
                                                                                  Bail.
[COURT BAIL]                ATTEND COURT
                                                                                  e) If a Guilty plea is made, the person is referred
                                                                                  to the Aboriginal Sentencing (Nunga) Court.
                                                                                  Nunga Court is less formal and provides an
           GUILTY PLEA                           NOT-GUILTY PLEA                  opportunity for the defendant to speak directly
                                                                                  to the Magistrate. Elders sit with the Magistrate
                                                                                  and may comment on the character of the
                                                                                  individual and/or their individual and family
                                                                                  circumstances to assist the Magistrate to
                                                                                  consider all relevant factors. Family members
           ABORIGINAL                         LISTED FOR PRE-TRIAL                and support agencies are encouraged to attend.
       SENTENCING COURT                           CONFERENCE
        (NUNGA COURT) –                                                           f) If a not-guilty plea is made, the defendant is
          Port Adelaide                                                           listed for a pre-trial conference. The purpose of
      (Tuesdays, fortnightly)                                                     the pre-trial conference is to determine which
                                                                                  facts or legal aspects are in dispute and to
                                                                                  explore the possibility of dealing with the charge
                                                                                  other than by way of trial. If the case can be
                                                                                  settled by pre-trial conference, a trial date will be
                                                                                  set.

                                                                                  g) Defendants appearing in the Port Adelaide
                                                                                  Nunga Court who have underlying illicit
                                                                                  substance abuse problems are offered the option
                                 SENTENCING                                       of deferring sentencing for 6 months so they can
                                                                                  participate in the (voluntary) treatment program.

                                                                                   h) (Note - if an Aboriginal Sentencing Court is not
 ALTERNATIVE SENTENCING                          CUSTODIAL SENTENCE                available at the relevant Court, the matter can be
  Community services order                        Summary offences:               heard under Section 9C of the Criminal Law Act
  Good behaviour bond                             2 years or less                 which operates in a similar style. The Judicial
  Home-D                                                                          Officer attends with Elders, defendant,
                                                   Minor indictable offences:      prosecution and lawyer. The Aboriginal Liaison
  Licence disqualification                        7 years maximum term            Officer assists with convening the conference.
  Suspended sentence bond                                                         The victim is invited. Family members and
                                                   Major indictable offence
  Part imprisonment / part bond (s.38)            (District Court: up to life     support agencies are encouraged to attend. It is
  Long adjournment (Griffiths Remand)             sentence                        generally held in a conference room - not a court
  Intervention Program (such as drug                                              room).
    treatment, psychiatric support) to
    address the underlying causes of
    crime                This resource is for Justice Reinvestment-Port Adelaide project purposes only               20
Port Adelaide Magistrates Court and Youth Court Data

The following tables provide an overview of Port Adelaide Magistrates and Youth Court activity, with a particular focus on people from Aboriginal backgrounds.

                                                      Table 5: All defendants lodged at the Port Adelaide Magistrates Court, 2016-17

                                                      First Sitting Place        Aboriginal Group           MCSA           YCSA      Total Defts

                                                        Port Adelaide               Aboriginal                 837         131           968
                                                                                  Non-Aboriginal            5795           235          6030
                                                                                        Total               6632           366          6998
                                                                      MCSA = Magistrates Court of SA / YCSA = Youth Court of SA
                                              Source: Courts Administration Authority – Port Adelaide Magistrates Court data provided for the project

Table 6: All defendants lodged by demographics, 2016-17

 Aboriginal Group / Sex            MCSA                                                                                              YCSA
                                   No Age                                                                                   Total                                                  Total
                                                14-17      18-19        20-24    25-34          35-44   45-59        60+
Table 7: Case lodgement type by Aboriginal defendants at Magistrates Court and Youth Court, 2016-17

 Case Lodge Doc Desc – Aboriginal persons                    MCSA      Case Lodge Doc Desc – Aboriginal persons               YCSA

 Complaint                                                    404      Complaint (Young Offenders Act)                          67
                                                                       Complaint And Summons Thereon
 Complaint And Summons                                        166                                                               32
                                                                       (Young Offenders Act)
                                                                       Information For An Indictable Offence
 Information For An Indictable Offence                        129                                                               22
                                                                       (Young Offenders Act)
 APPLICATION FOR INTERVENTION ORDER                            52      Report Of Non-Compliance With CSO                        2

 Application For Enforcement Of A Breached Bond                42      Application To Enforce Community Service Order           2
 Information For An Indictable Offence And Summons                     Information For An Indictable Offence And Summons
                                                               14                                                               2
 Thereon                                                               (Young Offenders Act)
 Application For An Order Of The Court                         10      Complaint And Summons                                    1
 APPLICATION TO VARY OR REVOKE INTERVENTION
                                                                7      APPLICATION FOR INTERVENTION ORDER                       1
 ORDER
 Report Of Non-Compliance With CSO                              4      Application For Enforcement Of A Breached Bond           1

 APPL TO COURT FOR APPEAL OF ENF DET                            3      Application To Vary/revoke Community Service Order       1
 Complaint & Summons With Endorsements & Form
                                                                3      Total                                                   131
 Pleading Guilty
 Application To Vary Or Discharge A Bond                        1

 Application To Vary/revoke Community Service Order             1

 INTERVENTION ORDER CLS ACT 1988 SECTION 19A                    1

 Total                                                        837

Source: Courts Administration Authority – Port Adelaide Magistrates Court data provided for the project

                                                                    This resource is for Justice Reinvestment-Port Adelaide project purposes only   22
Table 8: Top 20 offences lodged by Aboriginal defendants and offence description at Magistrates Court and Youth Court, 2016-17
  Offence Description – Aboriginal persons                                         MCSA      Offence Description – Aboriginal persons                       YCSA
  FAIL TO COMPLY WITH BAIL AGREEMENT                                                190      FAIL TO COMPLY WITH BAIL AGREEMENT                              26
  BASIC OFFENCE: DISHONESTLY TAKE PROPERTY WITHOUT CONSENT                           75      BASIC OFFENCE: DISHONESTLY TAKE PROPERTY WITHOUT CONSENT        18
  APPLICATION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF A BREACHED BOND                                     53      DRIVE OR USE MOTOR VEHICLE WITHOUT CONSENT                      9
  ISSUANCE OF INTERIM INTERVENTION ORDER - DOMESTIC ABUSE                            43      POSSESS CANNABIS, CANNABIS RESIN OR CANNABIS OIL                9
  DRIVE UNDER DISQUALIFICATION OR SUSPENSION                                         33      COMMIT ASSAULT - BASIC OFFENCE                                  7
  DAMAGE BUILDING OR MOTOR VEHICLE (NOT GRAFFITI OR UNKNOWN)                         32      DAMAGE BUILDING OR MOTOR VEHICLE (NOT GRAFFITI OR UNKNOWN)      6
  DISORDERLY BEHAVIOUR                                                               28      SERIOUS CRIMINAL TRESPASS-NON-RESIDENTIAL-AGGRAVATED OFFENCE    5
  AGGRAVATED ASSAULT (NO WEAPON) AGAINST CHILD OR SPOUSE                             25      BREACH OF COMMUNITY SERVICE ORDER                               4
  CONTRAVENE TERM OF INTERVENTION ORDER- OTHER THAN PROGRAMS                         23      UNLAWFUL POSSESSION                                             4
  UNAUTHORISED PERSON DRIVE MOTOR VEHICLE ON ROAD                                    22      UNLAWFULLY ON PREMISES                                          4
  UNLAWFUL POSSESSION                                                                22      COMMIT ASSAULT - AGGRAVATED OFFENCE OTHER - NO WEAPON           3
  CARRY AN OFFENSIVE WEAPON                                                          19      COMMIT ASSAULT AGGRAVATED OTHER BY USE OF OFFENSIVE WEAPON      3
  COMMIT ASSAULT - BASIC OFFENCE                                                     18      DAMAGE PROPERTY NOT BUILDING OR M/V (NOT GRAFFITI OR FIRE)      3
  DAMAGE PROPERTY NOT BUILDING OR M/V (NOT GRAFFITI OR FIRE)                         13      FAIL TO COMPLY WITH BOND OBLIGATION                             3
  POSSESS CONTROLLED DRUG (NOT CANNABIS)                                             13      ASSAULT POLICE                                                  2
  POSSESS EQUIPMENT TO USE WITH CONTROLLED DRUG (NOT CANNABIS)                       11      CARRY AN OFFENSIVE WEAPON                                       2
  COMMIT ASSAULT - AGGRAVATED OFFENCE OTHER - NO WEAPON                              10      DISORDERLY BEHAVIOUR                                            2
  RESIST POLICE                                                                      10      INTERFERE WITH MOTOR VEHICLE WITHOUT CONSENT                    2
  SERIOUS CRIMINAL TRESPASS-RESIDENCE OCCUPIED-AGGRAVATED                            10      SERIOUS CRIMINAL TRESPASS-RESIDENTIAL-BASIC OFFENCE             2
  DRIVE OR USE MOTOR VEHICLE WITHOUT CONSENT                                         9       UNAUTHORISED PERSON DRIVE MOTOR VEHICLE ON ROAD                 2
Source: Courts Administration Authority – Port Adelaide Magistrates Court data provided for the project

                                                                                                                                                                   23
Table 9: Aboriginal defendants finalised by offence description at Magistrates Court and Youth Court, 2016-17
      Outcome Description – Aboriginal persons         MCSA      Outcome Description – Aboriginal persons       YCSA
      CONSOLIDATED                                      247      BY CONSENT                                       19
      DISCHARGE WITHOUT PENALTY                         181      DISMISSED WITHOUT PENALTY                        15
      FINE                                               98      OBLIGATION                                       12
      WITHDRAWN                                          86      WITHDRAWN                                        11
      IMPRISONMENT                                       69      COMMUNITY SERVICE ORDER                          6
      GOOD BEHAVIOUR BOND                                61      FORFEITURE ORDER                                 4
      SUSPENDED SENTENCE BOND                            58      CONSOLIDATED                                     3
      INTERVENTION ORDER                                 46      DISCHARGE WITHOUT PENALTY                        3
      NOT PROCEEDED WITH                                 24      FORMAL CAUTION                                   2
      COMPENSATION                                       23      NO FURTHER BRCH PNLTY/ORD                        2
      NO FURTHER BRCH PNLTY/ORD                          23      NO FURTHER PENALTY                               2
      APPLICATION DISMISSED                              16      APPLICATION DISMISSED                            1
      FORFEITURE ORDER                                   16      COSTS ONLY                                       1
      DISMISSED WANT OF PROSEC.                          15      WEAPONS ORDER                                    1
      DRIVERS LICENCE DISQUAL                            13
      COMMUNITY SERVICE ORDER                            12
      SECTION 38(2A)                                     12
      NO ACTION TAKEN                                    10
      VEHICLE IMPOUNDING COSTS                            9
      WEAPONS ORDER                                       7

     Source: Courts Administration Authority – Port Adelaide Magistrates Court data provided for the project

                                                               This resource is for Justice Reinvestment-Port Adelaide project purposes only   24
Table 10: All defendants finalised in Aboriginal sentencing courts, 2016-17
                   Outcome Description                                      MCSA
                   CONSOLIDATED                                               96
                   DISCHARGE WITHOUT PENALTY                                  28
                   IMPRISONMENT                                               27
                   SUSPENDED SENTENCE BOND                                    24
                   GOOD BEHAVIOUR BOND                                        21
                   COMPENSATION                                                9
                   NO ACTION TAKEN                                             7
                   VEHICLE IMPOUNDING COSTS                                    6
                   FINE                                                        4
                   NO FURTHER BRCH PNLTY/ORD                                   4
                   SECTION 38(2A)                                              4
                   COMMUNITY SERVICE ORDER                                     3
                   DRIVERS LICENCE DISQUAL                                     3
                   FORFEITURE ORDER                                            2
                   WITHDRAWN                                                   2
                   APPLICATION DISMISSED                                       1
                   APPLICATION WITHDRAWN                                       1
                   COSTS ONLY                                                  1
                   GOOD BEHAV BOND VARIED                                      1
                   INTERVENTION ORDER                                          1
                   SUSP SENT BOND VARIED                                       1
                   TOTAL                                                     246
Source: Courts Administration Authority – Port Adelaide Magistrates Court data provided for the project

                                                                                                          25
PORT ADELAIDE MAGISTRATES AND YOUTH COURTS

      In 2016-17, 837 lodgements by Aboriginal people were made at the Port
       Adelaide Magistrates Court.

      In 2016-17, 131 lodgements by Aboriginal young people were made at the Port
       Adelaide Youth Court.

      More than one-quarter (28%) of lodgements made by Aboriginal young people
       at Port Adelaide Youth Court, were by Aboriginal young people under the age
       of 14 years.

      For young Aboriginal people appearing in Youth Court, the top 5 outcomes were
       ‘by consent’, ‘dismissed without penalty’, ‘obligation’, ‘withdrawn’, and
       ‘community service order’.

      One-quarter (23%) of Aboriginal adult defendants and one-fifth (20%) of young
       Aboriginal defendants attended court in 2016-17 due to failure to comply with
       bail agreement.
      The 2nd most common reason for attending court for Aboriginal adults and
       young people was: ‘Basic offence – dishonestly take property without consent’.

      For all defendants finalised in the Aboriginal Sentencing Court (2016-17), 40%
       involved consolidation of proceedings (where several connected matters were
       pending), 11% were discharged without penalty, 11% were imprisoned, 10%
       received a suspended sentence with bond, and 9% received a good behaviour
       bond.

QUESTIONS FOR PORT ADELAIDE

 ? How can we improve our understanding of Port Adelaide Magistrates Court
      and Youth Court processes and outcomes for Aboriginal people, young people
      and their families including the role of Alternative Sentencing options, Nunga
      Court, Family Conferencing and use of 9C.

 ? Is there research / evidence about the outcomes of diversion and treatment
      intervention programs on reducing reoffending and improving long term
      health outcomes for individuals.

            This resource is for Justice Reinvestment-Port Adelaide project purposes only   26
4.      Social determinants of crime – an Australian perspective

It is important for policy makers and those working in the social services system to have a
comprehensive understanding of the role that social issues play in contributing to incarceration.
Many of the reasons people end up in prison are socially determined, that is, they are a result of
the circumstances in which people are born, grow, live and learn which are often a result of the
unequal distribution of power, money and other resources (Marmot and Wilkinson, 2003).

Some factors such as unemployment, homelessness, mental ill-health, drug and alcohol misuse
and poverty are both a cause and a consequence of incarceration. This pattern shows the
reinforcing cycle and intergenerational impact of imprisonment. The continuation of these
factors in people’s lives beyond their release indicates that the time in prison does little to
improve the health and social outcomes for people from this extremely vulnerable group
(Kinner et al., 2014).

The main social determinants of crime that lead young people and adults to have a greater
likelihood of interaction with the justice system are:
     involvement with the child protection system and family violence
     intergenerational incarceration
     experience within youth detention
     previous incarceration during adulthood (recidivism)
     homelessness
     cognitive disability and mental ill-health
     drug and alcohol misuse
     unemployment, low income and poverty
     low educational attainment
     living in an area of concentrated disadvantage and poverty (Australian Red Cross, 2017).

In the following section of this resource, the factors contributing to risk factors are briefly
explained, followed by a snapshot of South Australian or Port Adelaide data. Where this data is
not readily available, Australian data may be provided as an indicator of trends only. In some
cases additional questions and comments on data gaps are identified.

A: Involvement with the child protection system

     Bringing Them Home
     ‘When the Bringing Them Home report into the Stolen Generations was released in 1997,
     mainstream Australia was shocked to learn that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
     children represented 20 per cent of children living in out-of-home care (HREOC, 1997).
     Now, in 2016, that rate has increased to see Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children
     represent over 35 per cent of children living in out-of-home care’ (SNAICC, 2017, p. 5).

                                                                                                   27
You can also read