Youth Court Decisions How to Use Full list of key titles CYPFA section Date

Police v W, 5 October 2007, Youth Court, Manukau, Judge Malosi, CRI 2007-292-000285

Name: Police v W
Unreported
File number: CRI 2007-292-000285
Court: Youth Court
Location: Manukau
Date: 5 October 2007
Judge: Judge Malosi
Charge: unlawful taking of a motor vehicle, reckless driving
CYPFA: s101
Key title: care and protection crossover, mental impairment

Case Summary:
W (15 years old) is mentally impaired, and was subject to a s101 CYPFA custody order due to the number, nature, and magnitude of his offending. W was also subject to a secure care order under the Intellectual Disability (Compulsory Care and Rehabilitation) Act 2003. The Court reviewed the ID(CCR)A order.

Judge Malosi considered the option to make an order under s25(1)(b) and s27 of the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003, which would mean the local community care organisation would have responsibility for W’s day to day care, but W would be housed in a CYF secure facility. The Judge described the process to enable this option as a “minefield”. Judge Malosi also considered the option to revert W back to the CYPFA s101 order which would place him under the full care and control of CYF, and W would be housed at the local CYF secure youth facility. The Judge expressed her doubts that CYF was able to provide the same level of security as a youth justice residence, given W’s propensity for absconding. She also endorsed the willingness of the local community care organisation to be involved in W’s care while he was under the protection of CYF.

Judge Malosi criticised the lack of secure care facilities for mentally impaired young offenders, and described the centres set up under the ID (CCR) Act as “manifestly unsuitable for the detention of young people”, and young offenders such as W as “marginalised”.

Decision:
The Court decided to release W into the care of CYF, who must complete a plan that could last, initially, for up to 2 years, with a further 2 years available under a CYPFA s110(2)(a) or (b) order. The Judge said she would be hard pressed to make such an order under the CP (MIP) Act. Proceedings in the Youth Court for unlawful taking and reckless driving were stayed.