County Court Chief Judge Peter Kidd talks 'lenient' sentencing

"People are entitled to express their opinions in a democratic society and, of course, I read what's said in the newspapers and on the TV and some of those sentiments are that the sentences are too lenient," Judge Kidd said.

"A lot of our work does sadly involve sexual offending, roughly 50 per cent, or even more at times," he told the Advertiser.

He said sentences for matters across the courts do not come out of the blue.

READ MORE:

"We don't just pick numbers from anywhere," he said.

"We're required to sentence under this rigorous process and we take an oath to sentence according to the law .

"We're not in a popularity contest.

"We don't sentence in accordance with what's on the front page of the latest newspaper."

Chief Judge Kidd has been in his position at the County Court, which covers all indictable crime except for murder and manslaughter charges, since 2015

He said Parliament picks the sentencing law while judges apply it.

"And if the law needs to be changed, that's a matter for Parliament," he said.

He explained that sentencing was a "rigorous exercise" and judges were guided by a set of principles "largely contained in a statute called the Sentencing Act which also picks up 100 years' worth of common law".

"There's a lot of research out there, which indicates that when (the public is) completely informed about what we're required to do - the principles, the facts of the case, the circumstances of the offending, the circumstances of the offender, and the impact upon the victim - there's a lot of research that says when people are informed about all those methods, that they very largely agree with the sentences that we impose, the sentencing standards that the courts set," he said.

"There's a very important body of research which involved surveying hundreds of jurors, people who had served on juries, in particular cases after the verdict and before sentence and then after sentencing.

"So these jurors understood the facts and circumstances of the case and they were given briefings about how sentencing worked. And as I said, overwhelmingly, the views that were surveyed were consistent with what judges imposed."

MORE STORIES:

Chief Judge Kidd also said that judges were not perfect, they were "human like everyone" and they get things wrong from time to time.

"When we get it wrong, there's an appellate process in place and, if it's suggested that a sentence is manifestly inadequate or in fact manifestly excessive, both ways, the parties can appeal to the Court of Appeal," he said.

"And if they think the judge has got it wrong they can be corrected.

"So it's important to understand that there is a self correcting system in place."

Elements of a case like an early guilty plea or the personal circumstances of an offender - like significant childhood deprivation - can also be used by a judge to alter a sentence, within laid-out bounds.

Chief Judge Kidd said there was a "benefit to the community" in an early plea of guilty and that was particularly important during the COVID pandemic.

"As a result of the COVID pandemic, we had to suspend jury trials throughout the state of Victoria," he said.

" ... jury trials were suspended for different periods because at some point we were able to recommence jury trials in some regional locations where we were able to adapt the court environment to meet health standards and health requirements..."

"Immediately prior to the pandemic, we had approximately 1000 jury trials in our lists throughout the state as a result of suspensions.

"Because of the pandemic that grew to nearly 1500 or approximately 1500."

Digital subscribers now have the convenience of faster news, right at your fingertips with the Bendigo Advertiser app. Click here to download.