Whenever we have situations like this people always bring up black on black crime. They do the same in America.
Raven would argue that there is no such thing as black on black crime.
The reason being we don’t use the term for white on white crime or Asian on Asian crime, or in the USA Mexican on Mexican crime.
The only reason we use it is to divert attention away from white racism. Most crime is committed within the race. That has more to do with proximity than anything else.
So it should be no surprise that the majority of Aboriginal victims involve an Aboriginal perpetrator.
But the point of a movement like BLM is to show how the justice system is failing Aboriginal people.
For example: Police in New South Wales pursue more than 80% of Indigenous people found with small amounts of cannabis through the courts while letting others off with warnings, forcing young Aboriginal people into a criminal justice system that legal experts say “they will potentially never get out of”.
Between 2013 and 2017 the police disproportionately used the justice system to prosecute Indigenous people, despite the existence of a specific cautioning scheme introduced to keep minor drug offences out of the courts.
During the five year period, 82.55% of all Indigenous people found with a non-indictable quantity of cannabis were pursued through the courts, compared with only 52.29% for the non-Indigenous population, the data compiled by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research shows.
The data shows police were four times more likely to issue cautions to non-Indigenous people. In the five years to 2017, only 11.41% of Indigenous Australians caught by police with small amounts of cannabis were issued cautions, compared with 40.03% of the non-Indigenous population.
In Western Australia back in April, an 86 year old Aboriginal grandmother with dementia was sent to prison for 6 days for spraying her neighbour with a hose.
Despite having a near spotless record (she had a misconduct restraining order after she damaged the neighbour’s plants and a stealing charge from 1984) the court considered her a “schedule two” offender because she hosed down the neighbour whilst on bail for the damage of the plants.
The grandmother was denied bail at Rockingham Magistrate's Court by Magistrate Leanne Atkins on April 30 and she was remanded in the Melaleuca maximum security prison for eight days.
Although the woman requested a lawyer for the hearing, Legal Aid's duty lawyers are only available every second day at the Rockingham court, so she was forced to represent herself after the court refused to adjourn the matter to the following day.
When asked if she understood the charges laid out against her, she repeatedly told the court 'No.'
She was freed after 6 days when Legal Aid applied for a second bail hearing in the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Judge Joseph McGrath ruled that given the exceptional circumstances another bail hearing must be set immediately.
Fortunately common sense prevailed and she was found 'unfit to plead' because of neurodegenerative Alzheimer's disease and was released without a conviction recorded.
Even the victim did not oppose the ruling.
WA Attorney General John Quigley said he suspects the incident never would have happened if the elderly woman was white.
‘I am deeply concerned that a woman in her 80s with dementia was held in prison cells for almost a week without the option of bail,' he told the West Australian.
'I have to ask myself whether an elderly white woman with dementia in a wealthy suburb would have found herself in prison in such circumstances.
'We need to ensure our state is not jailing Aboriginal people needlessly, particularly those who are vulnerable.'
Further in WA, Police acknowledged a ‘wide and potentially damaging divide’ exists between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal drivers when comparing the impact of police traffic enforcement, in an
internal police briefing note.In 2018 in the Northern Territory 100% of children in custody were Aboriginal.
Chief Justice Martin of the WA Supreme Court commented on structural bias.
He noted there was 'systemic discrimination' which contributes to the overrepresentation of Indigenous people in incarceration:
“ The system itself must take part of the blame. Aboriginal people are much more likely to be questioned by police than non-Aboriginal people. When questioned they are more likely to be arrested rather than proceeded against by summons. If they are arrested, Aboriginal people are much more likely to be remanded in custody than given bail. Aboriginal people are much more likely to plead guilty than go to trial, and if they go to trial, they are much more likely to be convicted. If Aboriginal people are convicted, they are much more likely to be imprisoned than non-Aboriginal people, and at the end of their term of imprisonment they are much less likely to get parole than non-Aboriginal people. Aboriginal people are also significantly over-represented amongst those who are detained indefinitely under the Dangerous Sexual Offenders legislation. So at every single step in the criminal justice process, Aboriginal people fare worse than non-Aboriginal people.”
Chapter 5.39 Reasons for high Indigenous imprisonment rates - Parliament of Australia