Page 3121 - Week 08 - Thursday, 7 August 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Abuse Team and ACT Policing, in consultation with the Forensic and Male Sexual Assault Care, the Child at Risk Health Unit, the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions, Canberra Rape Crisis Centre, Services Assisting Male Survivors of Sexual Assault, Victims of Crime counsellors, Richmond Fellowship and any other agencies, to cover all aspects of the investigation of offences, including victim care, taking of statements, collection of physical evidence, and timelines in the various categories of cases to guide the investigation of all sexual offences by ACT Policing; if not, why not and when will such a code be developed and implemented;
(4) What has been done to rectify the practice by the Sexual Assault and Child Abuse Team of referring inappropriate matters to the Director of Public Prosecutions for advice as to whether or not charges should be laid, (a) when the Sexual Assault and Child Abuse Team have not completed a full investigation, (b) where witnesses have not been questioned or (c) where the alleged offender has not been spoken to by police;
(5) What action has been taken by the Minister, given the disclosures and breaches of occupational health and safety contained in the Sexual Assault Response Project report, on pages 5, 53, 88 and 105;
(6) What procedures are in place today to ensure these foreseeable perversions of justice do not continue;
(7) What training has taken place between the Sexual Assault and Child Abuse Team and the Director of Public Prosecution to clarify roles and responsibilities to prevent role confusion and further harm to the victims as a result of these occupational health and safety breaches/confusions identified in the Sexual Assault Response Project report;
(8) How will the Minister educate the community to clarify the roles and responsibilities between the police and the Director of Public Prosecution when addressing sexual assault offences;
(9) When will this education be carried out;
(10) What steps have been taken to address the antiquated views on gender, reasonable prospects of a conviction and how it applies to sexual offences, corroborative evidence, assessing credibility, and intoxicated victims as existed within the Office of the Director of Public Prosecution, when giving advice and deciding to discontinue proceedings, to ensure best practice and the needs of the victim are appropriately addressed;
(11) What mechanisms are in place to ensure that the Director of Public Prosecution provides written advice and reasons to discontinue proceedings;
(12) Are these decisions monitored and or supervised by a senior prosecutor trained in child abuse and child development and experienced in successfully prosecuting cases in court;
(13) What training have the Director of Public Prosecutions’ prosecutors and police been provided with to fully understand how to interview children and to be sensitive to their developmental needs, and how regularly is this training provided to public officials;
(14) What qualification, experience and training do these trainers have;
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .