NSW Question regarding Section 9

[Tom23]

Hey there. I am a guy who committed a foolish crime a few months ago, hurting someone (mentally) in the process. It's something I should have never done. It was my very first time being involved with law enforcement and I was truly remorseful for what I did. My matter was eventually dealt with in the Local Court and I was issued a Section 9 CRO (which apparently came into effect from the 24th of September onwards). I was found guilty however the court decided not to record a conviction. The CRO is set to last for a year. My biggest concern with this is employment because of my criminal record.

My question is how long it would take for my crime to disappear from a NPC and to get the "no disclosable court outcomes" statement. Would it automatically disappear after a year when the CRO ends or would it remain for 10 years until it is eligible to become 'spent'? A lawyer I spoke to said it was the latter but I was thinking that he might have misinterpreted my question or something. Reading around it seems that it'll only stay around for the duration of the CRO? I am really really hoping that's the case as I only simply want a second chance to prove myself. Getting arrested and going to court was a truly terrifying experience. I just want to stay within the boundaries of the law from now on.

I would really appreciate any answers into this. Thank you in advance.

 

[Tom23]

I must mention the following. Both lawyers I saw (the one who I went to court with and the one I went to see afterwards for legal advice regarding the outcome) said this was a really good outcome. The lawyer who represented me in court said something along the lines of the charges being 'dismissed' by the court so long as I don't reoffend during the CRO. The conversation I had with the other lawyer (the one who I went to seek legal advice from who I mentioned in my original post) was about a hour long and what I asked him towards the end was how long a finding of guilt would remain on a NPC for. It was then that he said 10 years but I am not sure whether he was saying this in respect to my situation or in the context of someone who was convicted of a crime. Maybe I wasn't specific enough with him? I wasn't really in the right state of mind at the time to be asking perfectly coherent questions.

 

[Scruff]

... the court decided not to record a conviction.

My question is how long it would take for my crime to disappear from a NPC and to get the "no disclosable court outcomes" statement.

I find this to be a strange question. I would have thought that if the court didn't record a conviction, then nothing would show on your criminal record - no conviction recorded = nothing recorded on criminal record.

Am I missing something?

 

[Tom23]

I find this to be a strange question. I would have thought that if the court didn't record a conviction, then nothing would show on your criminal record - no conviction recorded = nothing recorded on criminal record.

Am I missing something?

Well from reading around, it seems that for the purposes of the Criminal Records Act 1991 (NSW), a finding of guilt with no conviction will be treated as a "conviction" for the duration of the CRO. This outcome I got (Section 9 CRO) is what replaced the Section 10 good behaviour bonds in NSW from the 24th September onwards. It's exactly the same as a Section 10 good behaviour bond but allows a magistrate to impose additional conditions from what I read. The following websites contain the best information I've come across regarding all this.

No Conviction - Section 10 and CRO - Streeton Lawyers
Criminal records and section 10s
What is a section 10, and what is the new CRO ? - National Criminal Lawyers
Conditional Release Order (CRO) - Criminal Sentencing NSW

 

[Scruff]

Ah, okay. Well that second link seems to explain it pretty well.

This:

But such a conviction will also become “spent” and therefore not disclosable once any good behaviour bond has been discharged or has expired. And, if no good behaviour bond is ordered (that is, if the court makes a section 10(1)(a) order), the “conviction” will be “spent” immediately and the defendant will not have a criminal record that is disclosable.

and this

The issue for any person with a record is whether the record, or parts of it, is / are disclosable. In the case of section 10s, that depends on when any bond attached to the section 10 expires. For example, a person who obtains a section 10 with a 12 month bond will have a record that shows the section 10 for 12 months.

mean that in your case, it will be on your record for 12 months. After that, it is no longer "disclosable" - in that while the Police can still see it, it is no longer "disclosed" in a "criminal history check", such as the type of check that a prospective employer can have done.

I think the laywer you spoke to simply misunderstood your question.

 

[Tom23]

Ah, okay. Well that second link seems to explain it pretty well.

This:

and this

mean that in your case, it will be on your record for 12 months. After that, it is no longer "disclosable" - in that while the Police can still see it, it is no longer "disclosed" in a "criminal history check", such as the type of check that a prospective employer can have done.

I think the lawyer you spoke to simply misunderstood your question.

That's what I thought as well. When I came home that day after seeking legal advice I was devastated knowing that I'll have a criminal record for 10 years despite the crime being recorded as a non-conviction in the court system. I just didn't know how I should proceed anymore. Afterwards I did some research on my own in the following days and then slowly came to the realisation that maybe the lawyer just misinterpreted my question. I just needed a second opinion on this so thanks for all your input. If you don't mind me asking, there's one more thing I'd like an opinion on. The lawyer who I went to court with said that while I can legally say that I was never convicted of a crime some employers may ask trickier questions such as whether I had ever been arrested or found guilty of a crime before. If a NPC does not disclose any crimes is there a necessity to answer something like that truthfully given that they'll never find out? While I know that lying is not a great thing to do, if something like that was to be answered truthfully then it's almost a given that an employer won't hire you. So is there a legal need to disclose something like that in my sort of context?

 

[Scruff]

Legally? Well, technically and depending on the situation, you might be able to get into some trouble.
Morally? Well, that one is really up to you.

As for the real world, unfortunately there's no way of really knowing.

Let's say a prospective employer does a criminal history check and nothing shows. Let's also say that you know they've done the check and that nothing showed up.

But then at an interview, they ask "have you had any other run-ins with the law that you want to tell us about?" You know that they have no way of already knowing, so the question is, why did they ask if they've already done a check? There's a couple of ways to look at it:

1. They want you to think that they already know there's something else, so they ask to see if you admit to something they don't know about (basically, an extension of the criminal history check).
2. They want to see if you're honest enough to admit to something when you know that they don't already know (if you admit to something, it shows honesty).

The problem is, you have no way of knowing which it is. With #1, they might ask because they don't want anyone with any history, so if you admit to anything, you're out. With #2 however, admitting to something could be a positive and actually work in your favor - especially if 50 other people all say "nup, nothing". You've shown that you're honest.

I was at an employment agency recently and they were having a little session with some jobseekers. The advice they were giving was, when asked at an interview about criminal history, "always disclose everything!" She even said that she had done that herself and got the job.

I can also tell you that I've had two professional driving jobs and on both occasions, I told them up front that I had 4 DUI's on my driving record from when I was young. I must admit that one of those jobs was through a friend, so they knew anyway - but the other one I applied for in the usual way from an advert.

The thing is, you just don't know what they're thinking or whether it's a pro or a con to say something. I guess if in doubt, stay quiet. But what if the interviewer has a mate who's a cop and he knows what the cops know?

Arrrggghhh - I think we're over analyzing now.

 

[Tom23]

Your views were quite insightful. Thank you for that. I feel that the best thing to do is to remain quiet without disclosing anything unnecessary and see how everything goes. Though it may not be the moral thing to do, it is really the only viable path for someone who has committed a crime given how unforgiving and paranoid society is towards someone who has a criminal history. I don't agree at all with the female at the employment agency you visited. Disclosing a crime is without a doubt going to create a bias towards you and they will more likely lean towards someone with a clean record to try and maintain their reputation. Although of course, as always, there would definitely be some exceptions as it would really depend on the employer. Either way I am glad you've put your past behind you and moved on with your life. I will also try and do the same. I was really really lucky this time. Getting charged with a crime myself changed my entire perspective on people classified as criminals and I am extremely sympathetic towards those who were convicted of a crime but just want to move on with their life and prove to others that they've changed. I only wish society would change someday to accommodate such a view.

Thanks again for all your opinions and I wish you well with whatever you're doing in life right now.