Marc My Words… 7 September 2007
Political comment
By
Marc Alexander

Victims of crime: Condemned to revisit tragedy

Yesterday I suffered from second hand depression. I was, for some time, overwhelmed by a silence that went beyond words. Sitting again at yet another parole hearing, you'd think the familiarity would be somehow comforting. It wasn't. I hated sitting there helplessly watching two people who I had grown fond of over a number of years attempt to translate the brutal loss of their daughter into sentences that conveyed the sheer hell of what they've had to live through. Words break in tandem with the heart. How could any parent regain a semblance of normality when ten years previously the man who savagely snuffed out the light that was their child was coming up for release? Truth is they couldn't. It wouldn't matter how long the killer remains behind bars the colours of life will remain drained until their last breath. When Gareth Smither slayed Karen, he slayed the parents too.

The tragic events of 3 July 1997 shattered a number of lives. That was the night Karen was killed leaving her two-year-old daughter motherless.

Gareth Smither slashed Karen to death with a garden spade and two knives. Given the extent of the wounds recounted later in court, Karen’s death was neither quick nor painless and her daughter had little choice but to hear the sounds of her mother’s last moments of life. But while it was Gareth's hand that was responsible, there is a lot of culpability to go around.

To begin with Gareth’s mother asks for help for Gareth from a psychologist friend, who said ‘[he] is dwelling on the morbid; visiting graves of dead relatives’.[1] A Green Island doctor prescribes Gareth an anti-depressant. He is then taken by his father to see Dr Giblin, who attempts to speed up an appointment with Healthcare Otago Psychiatric Service. He is told this could take up to eight weeks. Gareth is then prescribed a short-term sleeping pill.

On 25th June Gareth attends Dunedin Hospital for a psychiatric assessment, but leaves without being fully assessed. Three days later he is taken to Emergency Psychiatric Services (EPS) after allegedly threatening to kill himself. Later that night he is seen outside Karen’s home by her father, but he walks away. Later, at 11.30pm, Karen calls Gareth’s father and asks him to take Gareth home. During the night, according to his father, Gareth becomes highly agitated. He takes some sleeping pills and peels back the plastic of a safety razor in what is described as a ‘serious attempt at suicide’.

It's been reported that Gareth refuses to attend an EPS appointment. Instead, he goes to his cousin’s place and uses cannabis. On the 30th Dr Lisa Turner from Dunedin Hospital examined Gareth and concludes that he is ‘mentally disordered’ and is in need of treatment.[2] Gareth accepts voluntary admission to hospital and is sent to Ward 9B at Wakari Hospital. But on the 1st of July psychiatrist Ursula O’Sullivan assesses Gareth and is alleged to have concluded that he is ‘not sick enough’, and will be allowed home that night for tea leave. Once at home, Gareth decides he will not go back to the hospital.

On the 3rd EPS is contacted, and a psychiatric Nurse, Alison Ford, visits Gareth and his parents at 7.30 pm. The nurse tells Gareth’s parents that ‘he is an adult and should take responsibility for his own actions’.[3] Gareth leaves the house and drives off.

Some time later Gareth tries to enter Karen’s house through the dining room window. He fails, but later gains entry through a kitchen window. Between midnight and 1.00 am Gareth attacks Karen with a spade and two knives. There are 33 separate wounds around her neck including seven major cuts, which tore her carotid artery and jugular vein. There are cuts and abrasions to her arms and legs consistent with blows from the spade found at the scene.[4] There are 15 multiple cuts to her hands and the back of her right arm, which are described by Dr Alexander Dempter as ‘defensive injuries’.[5]

The next day Karen’s mother becomes worried when Karen does not bring Georgina to her home, where Maureen was to look after her. She phones Karen, with no response, so at 1.00 pm she goes to Karen’s house. Karen is dead and Georgina, physically unhurt, is still in bed in her sleeping bag. The crime scene is described as ‘horrific’ by Detective Inspector Kelly.[6]

Gareth Smither appears in the Dunedin District Court and is charged with murder on the 11th July. On 5th December he is found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment. The jury takes just under 2½ hours to reach a verdict.

On 29 January 1998 Healthcare Otago released a one-page summary from a forty-page report that stated there were ‘procedural weaknesses’ in its handling of the Gareth Smither case.[7] Health Commissioner Robyn Stent later ruled that Healthcare Otago should apologise for their handling of Gareth Smither, concluding that the organisation breached Right No 4 (5) of the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumer Rights, which requires quality and continuity of services. She also criticised the lack of communication between various agencies and the unacceptable delays between GP referrals and psychiatric service appointments.[8] Psychiatric Nurse Alison Ford admitted under cross examination that she was neither aware of Gareth’s psychiatric history back to 1988 nor of a doctor’s concern that he had the potential to harm himself or another when she concluded that Gareth ‘should take responsibility’.

Why was no one told that Gareth had been stalking Karen since he first met her, and was known to have stalked other girls as well?[9] Further testimony revealed that the Mental Health Services were aware that Gareth had raped two girls, one of whom was four months pregnant at the time.[10] The court hearing also brought evidence that Gareth did ‘unusual’ things to animals.[11]

Unfortunately many from the so-called progressive elite remain enthralled to utopian theories of human nature and believe that criminals are driven to commit offences by social exclusion. They are not responsible - it's society that should change. It is the triumph of faith over fact.

I often think that those who spend their time, energy, and effort trying to connect with the worst of our criminals in the vain hope of ‘changing’ them are some of the most narcissistic people imaginable. I know that sounds terrible but what I mean by it is the implied vanity of being able to accomplish in a person who has long eschewed the opportunity to change themselves. The bottom line is this: the most violent and prolific offenders choose to be as they are because they have embraced a priority over their own needs and wants over the rights of others. They are evil in every sense of the word precisely for the reason that in asserting their actions in violation of the rules of civil society, they degrade and dehumanise everybody else.

The do-gooders are a hard target to get angry at simply because they are often very caring individuals who genuinely think they can help. If only that were the prescription we would have long ago ended community violence. The truth is less kind. These people occupy a symbiotic relationship with the criminals they care about. Not only does it give a reason to get up in the morning, an avenue to participate in the personal beneficence of society, but generally also an income. Even the many charitable organisations that deal with criminal reintegration are filled with people for whom it has given a life purpose. And each success story is magnified and emphasised over the overwhelming failures. Few people who have expended much energy on a certain course of action ever take the time to step back and realistically evaluate their efforts and, upon realising its lack of accomplishment, admit it. Its only natural, it happens everywhere.

The problem as I see it is that by diverting attention away from those who deserve it we actually end up supporting the very behaviours we want to eliminate. It is an inescapable reality that your life in prison as a murderer, rapist, wife or husband-basher, is demonstrably better (in the sense of provided for) than is the life of the victim and their family. Criminals thrive on the indulgence of society to treat them as more than they are. To see in them a humanity and respectfulness to civil society which they willingly absolve themselves of the responsibility to uphold.

I realise that my view offends. That’s fine I can live with that. But here’s my challenge to those who disagree: explain how since we’ve abandoned a punitive approach to breaking the law and we’ve thrown billions of dollars into rehabilitation, increased the availability of lesser sentencing options such as home detentions and the like, widely expanded the network of prisoner aid, slashed sentences, abandoned prison work as an obligation, our crime rates have soared?

If all these do-gooders were really achieving anything other than their own satisfaction, why do we still have an 86% recidivism rate after 5 years? No doubt their answer is we still need more resources for them to play with (which is northing less than code for more good money after bad). Meanwhile the family whose murdered daughter I advocated for in yesterday’s parole hearing cannot move on. It’s been ten years. They are not only deprived of their child but by virtue of being the first on the scene, will be forever haunted by the horror of seeing the savagery of her death. They cannot sleep… they are often medicated for depression… there will never be any respite. This is the side of being a victim for which the law has no solution. What we should expect however, is that we do what we can to diminish the opportunity to further re-open the wounds; that we assert the rights of victims and all law-abiding kiwis ahead of that of criminals.

I wish everyone who genuinely cares for our community places a greater emphasis of compassion on those who do live by our laws, and who become victims from those who do not, before they shed tears for the criminal.

ends

© Scoop Media