Submitted February 4, 2004 - posted the next day
‘Gunga gran’ Margot Laughton in court on appeal
By NAP staff reporters
The prosecutor in Darwin’s “gunga granny’’ case is proof of just how cold-blooded, insane and ignorant lawyers must be to earn a buck.
Like all Department of Public Prosecution lawyers, David Lewis is hell-bent on invoking the harshest possible sentence upon people deemed to have broken the law.
In the case of Margot Laughton, the woman dubbed the gunga granny by the local Murdoch press, the “miscreant’’ is on a disability support pension and was the first person to have her home declared a "drug house" by the Northern Territory Police.
She is also a member of the Stolen Generation.
In the Northern Territory Supreme Court today, Mr Lewis demonstrated how easily solicitors can shed whatever humanity they have in the name of the Queen.
Margot is appealing last year’s conviction of possessing trafficable amounts of marijuana.
Magistrate Anthony Gillies jailed her, and she served five months from August 2, before being released on bail.
In opposing her appeal before Justice Sally Thomas, Mr Lewis said marijuana had been found ‘‘on three occasions’’ at Margot’s NT Housing Commission flat, and that she had previous offences.
“She was not small fry and it was immaterial what she got from the deal,’’ Mr Lewis told the court.
“What did matter was what flowed from the transactions into the community.
“Whether it was ‘bush weed’ or hydroponics is immaterial. There is no proof that she has re-offended. But there is evidence that she is dependent on cannabis.
“A suspended sentence would not assist in her rehabilitation. A stern penalty was imposed for valid reasons. Appropriate discretion was exercised (by Gillies) and concurrent penalties are not appropriate. The totality principle was exercised.
“The sentence was not crushing or unjust. Cannabis gets into the community and causes all sorts of problems such as despair.’’
Mr Lewis cited the similar case of a man sentenced to 12 months’ jail, suspended after 28 days. But that case was different, Mr Lewis said, because he had been a first-offender. Because of her record, Margot’s sentence (therefore) “was not manifestly excessive’’.
One of the reasons Magistrate Gillies imposed a jail term was because he did not believe Margot would not re-offend.
· Margot’s Legal Aid lawyer is Greg Smith.
Quotes taken by Stuart Highway, of the Network Against Prohibition.
