In the fullness of time, it will emerge that a man currently accused of  sexual violation and murder had boasted before his release from jail about what he was going to do to a woman on release. Prison guards – and even some inmates – took him seriously, and warned the authorities and others that given his history, the man was highly likely to reoffend. Under the law as it stands, there was nothing the authorities could do, once he had reached his mandatory release date. He allegedly then did on release exactly what he had promised he would do.

As most people know, the “three strikes” concept originates from the USA, in particular California. I was recently made aware of another excellent idea emanating from California, one which in my view  we would do well to emulate.

In California, it is possible for authorities to seek to have someone declared a Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) BEFORE they are released from their current sentence, without having to release them and wait until they violate a new victim. Persons declared to be SVP’s are detained for two year periods, potentially renewable indefinitely. The onus is on the offender to show that he (it is almost always a male) is no longer a risk to society. Until that time, SVP’s are held in a secure treatment facility which is more comfortable than a prison, and receive ongoing treatment – if they are prepared to accept it.

Sadly, we have a number of such offenders in New Zealand, and we  currently have no effective way of dealing with them. One of them is Lloyd MacIntosh who has a compulsion to offend against very young children, including babies. When he has been released in the past, he has re-offended very quickly. He is likely to be a risk to the community for the rest of his life.

Fortunately for society, special rules have been made for MacIntosh, who is “free” to live in supervised housing within a prison compound. This continuing detention without a fresh crime having been committed may well be illegal, and is always subject to challenge by one of the legion of “human rights” lawyers who seem only to be concerned about the rights of criminals.

It is time we in New Zealand grasped the nettle and had a discussion about what we should do with such people, rather than deal with them on an individual ad hoc basis. It is simply unacceptable that repeat sexual offenders should have to be released to offend again and again before they can be incarcerated permanently.