The plight of the Aboriginal person in the Northern Territory legal system is truly awful. That goes not only for Aboriginal people facing criminal charges, but those who are victims of crime as well.
A 53 year old white male, Shane Elward, was in Darwin Magistrates Court yesterday as a result of an incident last year in a car park when he hit an Aboriginal woman who was lying on the ground. He got out of the car and, apparently, after being told by a witness that the woman was drunk and would be okay, went into a nearby entertainment venue. Elward was drinking at the bar when another woman came into the club and requested help, because the women he struck was dying.
The prosecution had planned to charge Elward with a range of serious charges, but withdrew them, and Magistrate Dick Wallace handed down a $400 fine for failing to drive with due care, but did not take Elward’s license.
Wallace, according to media reports this morning, essentially said that it’s common in the Territory for drivers to run over Aboriginal people lying on the road or in car parks, because they are hard to see.
“It’s clearly the case that an Aboriginal person in the dark on the bitumen or other places is extremely hard to see,” he said. “It’s easy to imagine how such an accident could happen,” Wallace said.
The decision is troubling on a number of fronts.
Firstly, the perception among some lawyers and human rights activists that the NT justice system is a “white person’s system” is reinforced by what appears to be lenient treatment of the defendant in this case. Even though the defendant is no doubt mortified by what happened, and had absolutely no intention of harming the victim, the reality is that this accident caused a death and the courts generally will impose a penalty that accords with that sad fact. A $400 fine is the sort of penalty one would get for a road accident in which no one was injured.
Secondly, if an Aboriginal person ran over a white victim lying drunk on the ground, would the prosecutors’ and police have been prepared to agree to withdraw serious charges such as recklessly causing injury? Would a court describe it as simply “bad luck”, as was the case here?
And what about the conduct of the witness who told the defendant that he did not have to stop and help the victim because she was drunk and would be okay? Does this not suggest that that the human life of Aboriginal Territorians is worth less than that of white people?
Oh, and where are all the victims’ rights advocates this morning? Why aren’t they hitting the airwaves and the newspapers with outraged commentary about the leniency of the sentence in this case? Is it because the victim is an Aboriginal woman in the Northern Territory? You bet it is. How sad.
This crisis will cut hard and deep but one day it will be over.
What will be left? What do you want to be left?
I know what I want to see: I want to see a thriving, independent and robust Australian-owned news media. I want to see governments, authorities and those with power held to account. I want to see the media held to account too.
Demand for what we do is running high. Thank you. You can help us even more by encouraging others to subscribe — or by subscribing yourself if you haven’t already done so.
If you like what we do, please subscribe.
Peter Fray
Editor-In-Chief of Crikey
15 thoughts on ““Bad luck” NT court decision: white defendant, black victim”
Leslie Bursill
June 24, 2009 at 2:19 pmWell there are arguments on both sides. I am Aboriginal and I have nearly run over children in car parks who were hiding and running between cars. In one case I nearly ran over a two year old sitting behind my car? There is no way to see such a thing as a small child sitting directly behind a car, there are reports of parents running over their own children. A black person laying drunk on a roadway may in my opinion actually carry some contributory responsibility??
jungarrayi
June 24, 2009 at 2:21 pmRacists? Us? Nooooo!
So a few days ago I saw on the TV News (I forget which station) that the NT incarceration rate comes third in the world after the U.S.A. and Saint Kitts & Nevis. Before you take me to task I fully realise the NT is not a nation, but if we were we’d come third. As I recall the rate for all Territorians is around 650 per 100,000 of population. The rate for Indigenous Territorians is considerably higher. Several Yuendumu young men are in gaol for such heinous crimes as not having a current driver’s licence or having two cans of beer in their car.
I’ve been a (non-indigenous) resident of Yuendumu for 35 years. My children grew up here, I love the place and despair at the Government propaganda that stereotypes all these communities as dysfunctional dens of iniquity. Its only since the Intervention that I’ve been breathalised and pulled over to be asked for my driver’s licence in Yuendumu. I drive an old car that looks similar to those generally driven by my Warlpiri friends.
It’s great to know that the children and women of Yuendumu are safe at last!
Peter Ward
June 24, 2009 at 2:21 pmNo Greg, it’s not because the victim was an Aboriginal woman in the Northern Territory. It is because anyone who has lived in the Territory for any time knows that, but for luck, it might have been them driving that car.
Most people who have lived there for any time either know someone who has hit a drunk lying in the middle of a main road, or have come very close to having hit one themselves. I myself had a near miss outside the old Nightcliff hotel on my way to work at night when the person stood up as my headlights hit him at 80km/h. I know personally a senior NT public servant who hit a drunk lying on a main road at night outside of Bagot Reserve. It is an unfortunate fact that, in and around Darwin and many other Territory towns, it is not unusual for drunks to be found wearing dark coloured clothing and taking a nap on a warm road surface.
Better street lighting and reinvigourating the 1970s road safety education campaign, “When walking along the road at night, wear or carry something white” will help a lot more than any attempt to link this issue to race.
daveliberts
June 24, 2009 at 3:10 pmI’m reminded of a tale told by a school mate many years ago in the early 90’s. He swore it was true. His dad was driving in the NT, was pulled over by a cop, cop walked up to the driver, did a double-take, and said “Oh, sorry mate, I thought you were black.” Mate’s dad drove away without being further questioned. The reason I believe the story was that my school was, particularly in respect of Aboriginal people, racist as and the story was not particularly told in the context of bleeding heart liberalism so much as a good one-liner.
Hayden Gullefer
June 24, 2009 at 3:22 pmGreg, if you think that’s sad you should go and have a look at the cases involving the charge : “A dangerous act causing death” on the NT Supreme Court homepage.
jacks
June 24, 2009 at 3:39 pmGreg, stop trying to beat up this story and turn it into an issue of race. Its the woman’s fault – she was lying on the road – it could have been anyone who could have driven over here. What punishment did you want the poor man to receive? Two or three years in jail? Don’t be ridiculous. This has nothing to do wit ha “white person’s system.” Yes, someone died but the only person who can be blamed for that is the person who was stupid enough to be lying on the road. If I go out and lie on the middle of the road right now and someone hits me (me being a white male) will you be there to call for the person who hits me to go to jail Greg? No, it will be my own stupid fault.
stephen martin
June 24, 2009 at 3:58 pmA couple of points; the car park in question was reported as ill lit,and it appears to me that the driver was pretty well blameless for the accident. The witness who said the victim was OK was an aboriginal who was with the woman. The only fault that I can see was the fact that the driver took the word of one, who was in all probability as drunk as the victim. He should most certainly have checked that the woman was in fact OK, that he did not is tantamount to “hit and run”.
Bob Gosford
June 24, 2009 at 5:36 pmI note the confected outrage and gormless apologies for the state of NT drivers and the drunks that, as I know well, do fall asleep on the roadway sometimes – but surely every driver has a duty to keep a proper lookout – at all times and places – and that the car-park was poorly lit should surely be no excuse whatsoever – I’m waiting for someone to appeal this poor decision…and just because a person is drunk should be no excuse – what if someone had just happened to collapse from some illness at the same spot? And surely, just because someone tells you that the person is “ok and drunk”, doesn’t relieve you of your duty to make sure of that fact for yourself?
jacks
June 24, 2009 at 5:41 pmThat driver has a duty to keep a proper lookout? Obviously Bob, the problem is you dont usually expect there to be people lying on the road and when its poorly lit the only person who is to blame is the person stupid enough to lie on the road. Of course the man should have gone over to check, but if he’s been assured by the friend that the person is fine and he didnt run away then id say it was more a misjudgment then anything criminal
Bob Gosford
June 24, 2009 at 5:57 pmBut Jacks, unfortunately there are many things (bits of cars, people, animals etc etc) that you wouldn’t usually expect to see lying around on the roadway – thats why there is such a strong onus on all drivers to keep a proper lookout – and forget the “poorly lit” excuse – whatever happened to headlights? And I might be wrong but I seem to recall that on the NT ABC News last night the comment that the woman was ok and just a “drunk” came from one of her, rather than the driver’s, friends. I still don’t see how that comment relieves anyone who has just run over a pedestrian (immobile or otherwise) of their obligations to check further on that person’s welfare. If that had happened this whole affair may have had different outcomes for both the driver and the unfortunate pedestrian.