http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,19619322-29157,00.html

Dial-an-AVO replaces court

29-06-2006
From: The Daily Telegraph

POLICE will be able to take out emergency apprehended violence orders by phone on behalf of terrified victims under the most sweeping reforms to domestic violence legislation in 25 years.

The redrafting of the outdated laws, introduced to New South Wales in 1982, will also broaden the legal definition of stalking to include menacing text messages and threatening emails.
The Daily Telegraph can reveal that, under the first raft of reforms approved by Premier Morris Iemma last week, police will be able to apply for AVOs via a 24-hour direct line to an on-call judge.

It will apply where police believe someone to be a threat and the victim is too afraid to apply for an AVO themselves - removing the need for a victim to approach the courts.

The changes come too late for Sydney mother of two Rachael Young - shot last week by a boyfriend who was in breach of an AVO. Her funeral will be held today.

Police are understood to be furious over the failure of the current system to protect victims, with offenders ignoring orders without penalty.

In the case of Ms Young, police warned that she was in danger when the courts released 32-year-old Stephen Downey on a bond after he breached an AVO.

He shot her in the head in a laneway before turning the gun on himself.

Magistrates will be given the power to continue an AVO when they think a threat still exists, despite a victim claiming they no longer have fear.

The Crimes Act will be changed to remove the requirement that children of victims can be cross-examined.

The most fundamental changes being called for, greater penalties for breaches and enforcement, are still to be addressed.

The number of AVOs granted every year has risen by 40 per cent in the past 10 years to 25,000 annually. Almost half of all the AVOs issued are breached.

With the first stage of changes approved, Mr Iemma has ordered a redrafting of penalties and enforcement of AVOs, which will be introduced to State Parliament in the August sitting.

While details have yet to be approved, it will include greater penalties for offenders who breach orders, including longer jail terms.

The maximum penalty for breaching an AVO is currently two years jail and/or a fine of $5500.

Bail laws have already been changed to remove presumption of bail for offenders with a history of violence.

Homicide Victims Support Group executive director Martha Jabour said: "I am very happy with the changes so far but it is stage one.

"We would like the Government to look at more programs for repeat offenders who breach their AVOs to address this problem."

At the NSW Labor state conference earlier this month Mr Iemma pledged to make domestic violence one of his key social policy commitments.

"These matters strike at the very heart of the family and often concern very serious matters that are life threatening to women and children," Mr Iemma said.

Response from a Male......

Dear Mr Iemma,

I have just read a report in the Daily Telegraph (29/6/2006) on apprehended and domestic violence reforms of the legislation, and greatly feel I need to have my say in this matter before you become blinded by feminist lies and propoganda.

Two years ago, my current wife was harrassed by phone and SMS messages by my ex-wife, ex-sister-in-law, and a friend of thiers. The police did nothing.

Two years ago, I was accused of domestic violence by my ex-wife, and even though she was the perpetrator, I was the one that had the interim order slapped on me. Why? Because I am male.

Over 500 research projects world wide have shown DV to be equally responsible for by both sexes. Recent research reports are now starting to show that females are becoming more violent in the field of DV - greater than thier male counterparts.

On 20th October 2004 (a date burnt into my mind) I was taken by the police to a psych ward to be assessed. The investigation on this you can find on record as I have filed complaints and will soon lodge a futher complaint with the NSW ombudsmans office. The police used the mental health act to remove me, yet obviously did not believe I was mentally unstable through thier actions. If they did, then they were grossly negligent. The police investigator (from the same command) covered up even further. The police Sgt knows my ex-wife.

If the police act like this, then how will you remove the inherent bias of males wanting to protect females or be wooed over by them? What is your back stop to provent the system being abused like it was in my case? Or, are you willing to be dictated to by feminist sympathisers to continues with legislation biased against males, including you yourself.

Which brings me to a final complaint. Under the NSW Crimes Act 1900, section 562AC, part 3b, the legislation descriminates against males. The statement that "recognises that domestic violence is predominantly perpetrated by men against women and children" is a false statement and a lie perpetuated by extreme feminist groups. The research demonstrates overturns this lie and backs my statement.

Nothing in law will stop a male or female from killing the other in domestic violence cases, as recent cases have shown. But laws can be made to help protect both genders equally.

Are you going to let "political correctedness" sexually discriminate?

Are you going to make males a second class group of citizens instead of equals with females?

Where is equallity for all?

Sincerely yours,
xxxxxxxxxxxxx