Psychadelic_Paisly
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2003
- Messages
- 2,442
Chroming not offensive: judge
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,7993815%5E1702,00.html
27nov03
CHROMING, or paint sniffing, by young people in a public place could not be regarded as offensive behaviour, a Victorian Supreme Court judge ruled today.
Justice Howard Nathan made the ruling in overturning a Childrens Court magistrates' decision in the case of a 15-year-old boy.
The boy was with three friends when police, responding to a complaint, found them behind the Tourist Information Centre on the Princes Highway, at Traralgon, on July 21 last year.
When spotted by the police he was carrying two cans and a plastic bag full of spray paint.
All four had paint stains around their mouths and on their clothes and were in possession of cans of spray paint.
Justice Nathan, in allowing the appeal, said there was no evidence from any member of the public to say they were offended, rather than anguished, by the paint sniffing.
Chroming aroused feelings of anguish, despair and exasperation among the investigating police and the magistrate, he said.
"A reasonable person would be saddened, pitiful and concerned by paint sniffing, but not angered, wounded, outraged or disgusted and therefore not offended," Justice Nathan said.
The magistrate earlier found the boy guilty of offensive behaviour but dismissed the charge, meaning that no penalty or conviction was imposed.
The Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service, acting on behalf of the boy, appealed against the decision.
The judge said it was uncertain what the magistrate could have done to help the boy, who told police he had nothing better to do.
But it was not open to the magistrate to find the boy guilty of a criminal offence, he said.
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,7993815%5E1702,00.html
27nov03
CHROMING, or paint sniffing, by young people in a public place could not be regarded as offensive behaviour, a Victorian Supreme Court judge ruled today.
Justice Howard Nathan made the ruling in overturning a Childrens Court magistrates' decision in the case of a 15-year-old boy.
The boy was with three friends when police, responding to a complaint, found them behind the Tourist Information Centre on the Princes Highway, at Traralgon, on July 21 last year.
When spotted by the police he was carrying two cans and a plastic bag full of spray paint.
All four had paint stains around their mouths and on their clothes and were in possession of cans of spray paint.
Justice Nathan, in allowing the appeal, said there was no evidence from any member of the public to say they were offended, rather than anguished, by the paint sniffing.
Chroming aroused feelings of anguish, despair and exasperation among the investigating police and the magistrate, he said.
"A reasonable person would be saddened, pitiful and concerned by paint sniffing, but not angered, wounded, outraged or disgusted and therefore not offended," Justice Nathan said.
The magistrate earlier found the boy guilty of offensive behaviour but dismissed the charge, meaning that no penalty or conviction was imposed.
The Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service, acting on behalf of the boy, appealed against the decision.
The judge said it was uncertain what the magistrate could have done to help the boy, who told police he had nothing better to do.
But it was not open to the magistrate to find the boy guilty of a criminal offence, he said.
