Northern Territory Second Reading Speeches Northern Territory Second Reading Speeches[Index] [Search] [Bill] [Help]
| Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time. This bill implements a recommendation made by the Northern Territory Coroner arising from in the inquest into the deaths of Mr Clifford Norman and Ms Kwementyaye Taylor. The findings were delivered in Alice Springs on 22 March 2013. Mr Norman was the driver of a vehicle that failed to stop for the police after being intercepted at a roundabout in Alice Springs. After a short pursuit at slow speed he fled from the police at high speed. The police did not continue to pursue the vehicle due to the excessive speeds involved and their belief that Mr Norman was intoxicated. Approximately 46 seconds after the failed interception, Mr Norman lost control of the vehicle at the intersection of South Terrace and Kempe Street. The vehicle was travelling in excess of 170 km/h when it mounted the kerb and struck a power pole. The power pole was ripped from the ground and the vehicle was all but destroyed. Mr Norman was killed instantly as was the front seat passenger, Ms Taylor. The two adult back seat passengers were seriously injured and trapped in the vehicle and an unrestrained four-year old child remarkably received only minor injuries. Attending police officers, St John paramedics and Fire and Emergency Services personnel were confronted with a devastating scene, and their courageous efforts in attending and removing the seriously injured passengers from the destroyed vehicle that was leaking petrol and engulfed in flames are to be highly commended. In his findings, the Coroner noted the Northern Territory Police had taken proactive steps to limit their use of pursuits through the Police General Order - Emergency Vehicle Driving and Pursuit Driving, and noted that members of the public knew of this policy and were exploiting it by failing to stop when requested and fleeing, often in a dangerous manner and at high speed. The Coroner recommended at paragraph 82(iii) of his findings that timely consideration be given to ‘introducing tougher penalties for offenders who speed or drive recklessly or dangerously when evading police’. The Coroner noted that the offences involving evading police are operating in New South Wales at section 51B of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) and in Victoria at section 319AA of the Crimes Act 1958. . The Northern Territory Coroner stated his recommendation was designed to discourage drivers from failing to stop or attempting to evade police, with the ultimate aim of preventing future deaths. In the Northern Territory the Traffic Act and Motor Vehicles Act contain offences that may be charged when a driver fails to stop for police on request. The fail to stop offence in the Traffic Act has a maximum penalty of 12 months’ imprisonment and the fail to stop offence in the Motor Vehicles Act has a maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment. An analysis of the offences reveals that a gap exists as the current offences in the Traffic Act and Motor Vehicles Act simply require a failure to stop and the maximum penalties reflect that level of criminality only. The Criminal Code Act contains offences that may be charged when dangerous driving occurs. However, they require certain results or circumstances to be proven, namely serious harm, death or reckless endangerment There is no offence in the Northern Territory that criminalises a course of conduct involving a failure to stop for the police, engaging in a pursuit and driving in a dangerous manner and sets a maximum penalty reflective of the level of the criminality involved. This bill resolves this issue and introduces the offence of dangerous driving during a pursuit. The offence will be inserted as the new section 174FB of the Criminal Code. The elements of the new offence are: a) a police officer gives the driver a direction to stop the vehicle under any law enforced in the Northern Territory b) the driver fails to comply with the direction to stop c) the police officer pursues the vehicle d) the offending vehicle is driven in a dangerous manner during the pursuit. Police do not have unfettered discretion to direct a driver to stop a vehicle and the wording ‘under any law enforced in the Northern Territory’ has been used to ensure that the current powers available to police are not interfered with or expanded upon. The maximum penalty for this offence is five years imprisonment. This maximum penalty is more than double the current, fail to stop penalty in the Motor Vehicles Act and is considerably higher than the fail to stop offence in the Traffic Act. The offence inserted by this bill, includes the criminality of the fail to stop offence and encompasses the original circumstances of a police pursuit and dangerous driving. Therefore, the maximum penalty must be higher than the current penalties specified for fail to stop offences. The new section 174FB(2)(a) and (b) clarify two matters relating to the term ‘pursuit’ and are consistent with the provisions in section 119AA(2)(c) and (d) of the Crimes Act 1958, Victoria, and the provisions included to close potential loopholes that maybe exploited by offenders as police may, for public safety reason, pursue the offending vehicle at a slower, safer speed and the fact the pursuit is terminated must not bar authorities from charging this offence if the offender is located and arrested at a later time. The new section 174FB(2)(c) incorporates a definition of ‘driving dangerously’. This provision is identical to the section 174F(3) which contains the definition of ‘driving dangerously’, which is used for the dangerous driving causing death and dangerous driving causing serious harm offences. The offence is a strict liability offence. String liability means that there are no fault elements for the physical elements of the offences. For example, the prosecution does not need to prove the person intentionally or recklessly failed to stop, intentionally or recklessly engaged in a police pursuit; or intentionally, recklessly or negligently drove in a dangerous manner. The prosecution still needs to prove the elements of the offence beyond reasonable doubt. The new section 174FB(4) inserts a specified defence for this offence. Subsection 4 states that it is a defence to the prosecution for an offence against this section if the defendant establishes they were believed, on reasonable grounds, they were not given a lawful direction to stop by police. All defences in part IIAA of the Criminal Code also apply to this offence and mistake of fact, pursuant to section 43AX of the Criminal Code, applies where strict liability is prescribed. A ‘direction to stop’ has been defined in broad terms ‘as any action taken by a police officer to indicate to the driver of a vehicle that they must stop the vehicle’. Examples of a direction to stop are given and mirror provisions at section 64A(5) of the Road Safety Act 1958, Victoria, and regulation 16 and 16A of the Northern Territory Traffic Regulations. The terms ‘driver’ and ‘vehicle’ are already defined in section 174FA(2) of the Criminal Code Act and these definitions also apply to this offence. All drivers have a duty and responsibility to stop for the police when requested. Failing to stop and driving in a dangerous manner, often at grossly excessive speeds and often whilst intoxicated, endangers not only the lives of other road users, police and pedestrians, but also the passengers of the offending vehicle. The current fail to stop offences and the applicable maximum penalties do not adequately reflect the criminal conduct in a police pursuit. This deficiency was noted by the Northern Territory Coroner and is remedied by this bill. I commend the bill to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statement. Debate adjourned. |