Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 1 Hansard (15 February) . . Page.. 269 ..
MS TUCKER (continuing):
On passage of the Crimes Amendment Bill 2000 (No 2), to do with stalking, the definition at section 4 was amended to read:
(a) anything made or adapted for use, or capable of being used, for causing injury to or incapacitating a person; or
(b) anything intended for that use ...
There is an "or" there, not an "and". That is what we are worried about. This definition applies across the Crimes Act, except in parts of the act which have a different definition. In effect, at that time it applied only to offences against the person, except for the situation explained at section 33. Today's bill proposes to remove all other definitions of offensive weapon from the act, leaving only the definition at section 4. This is a problem, because the definition introduced last year in section 4 is much looser because of the phrase "capable of being used".
Many objects are capable of being used as weapons-shoes, staples, beer glasses, handbags, et cetera. This definition at section 4 does not allow any contextualising arguments to be used in defence of someone accused of possessing an offensive weapon. Jon Stanhope's amendments would simply clarify that, I would have thought.
I have another example of a problem. Maybe the Attorney could respond to this. In the Crimes Act 1900, section 101, "Armed robbery", states:
A person who commits robbery and at the time of doing so has with him or her a firearm, an imitation firearm, an offensive weapon, an explosive or an imitation explosive is guilty of an offence punishable, on conviction, by imprisonment for 25 years.
Compare that to the crime of robbery, which is dealt with at section 100 of the Crimes Act 1900:
A person who steals and, immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, uses force on another person, or puts or seeks to put another person in fear that he or she or any other person will be then and there subjected to force, is guilty of an offence punishable, on conviction, by imprisonment for 14 years.
A person who assaults another person with intent to rob is guilty of an offence punishable, on conviction, by imprisonment of 14 years, but a person who is convicted of armed robbery can be sentenced to 25 years and there is reference in that section to an offensive weapon. If the offensive weapon is not connected to intent-
Mr Stefaniak: You have to have intent to commit an armed robbery.
MS TUCKER: But how do you know that?
Mr Stefaniak: You cannot accidentally commit an armed robbery.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .