Trust warned on plan to defy ban

The Sensible Sentencing Trust has been warned it is going too far by calling on its members to break the law and defy court orders that censor victim impact statements.

Trust chairman Garth McVicar yesterday said members would say whatever they wanted in court until the law was changed.

His comments follow the news that Gil Elliott, father of murder victim Sophie, was forced to read a censored version of the statement he had prepared.

But the Law Society said the trust was using the wrong strategy if it wanted change.

Mr McVicar said the trust would run the "civil disobedience campaign" until Justice Minister Simon Power changed the law to give victims greater freedom with their statements.

The Herald yesterday revealed that sections of Mr Elliott's statement had been crossed out at the judge's request the night before Clayton Weatherston was to be sentenced.

Mr Elliott said it meant he did not get to "have a crack" at Weatherston, who stabbed his daughter 216 times.

Mr McVicar said the campaign had been planned for some time and several members yet to present their statements in court had committed to reading them in full.

He said the campaign would go on, even though Mr Power had assured him yesterday that changes to statement rules would be announced by Christmas.

"If the court system is going to continue failing victims and their families," said Mr McVicar, "they have no choice but to come out fighting for change themselves."

Law Society president-elect Jonathan Temm said the issue was not going to be solved by contempt of court.

"You cannot bring the court into disrespect simply because it is bound by the law of the land."

Mr Temm agreed that while improvements could be made to the process, the campaign was the wrong way to do it.

He questioned whether the Sensible Sentencing Trust would be satisfied even if the law was changed.

"Victims may be able to spend an hour on their feet, railing against the crime, have everybody listen to their anguish and pain and grief, and flog some individual.

"But no amount of victim latitude at sentencing is going to bring back the loved ones or heal the crushed bones."

The trust campaign is being supported by Brian Brown, the father of murder victim Natasha Hayden, who read censored parts of his victim impact statement to her killer Michael Curran despite being told to stop three times by the judge.

Mr Brown is glad he read the statement, which included criticism of a "judicial system [which] from the get-go was hell-bent on protecting this thing and his so-called rights".

Act MP David Garrett is drafting a private member's bill to amend the rules.

VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENTS

What the law does now:

* Victims can speak of the impact of any physical injury or emotional harm suffered through the offence.

* They can also describe any loss of, or damage to, property and any other effects of the offence.

* They cannot criticise the offender or the justice system.

What the Sensible Sentencing Trust wants:

* Victims to be able to give their opinion on the sentence length, and argue for it to be increased to reflect any lack of remorse or misrepresentation of the victim during the trial.

* Victims to be able to ask a court to order specific reparation or compensation.

* Victims to be allowed to draw attention to any disgraceful conduct and attitude during the trail by the offender or their family or supporters.