Ezra Mam: A Case Study in Soft Police Prosecution (not soft courts)

Magistrates can only give sentence for the charges before them, not the actual crimes the crim has committed.

In the case of Brisbane Broncos player Ezra Mam, who recently pleaded guilty to driving with an illicit drug in his system and driving without a license following a head-on collision that injured a woman and her four-year-old daughter (fracturing the girls hip), questions have arisen regarding the adequacy of the charges and the resulting sentence.

Mam was fined $850 and received a six-month license disqualification, with no conviction recorded.

Given the circumstances—driving unlicensed, under the influence of cocaine (and other drugs), and causing injuries—there is a pertinent question as to why more severe charges under the Queensland Criminal Code were not pursued.

Potential Application of Section 328A

Section 328A of the Queensland Criminal Code pertains to the dangerous operation of a vehicle.

Specifically, subsection 328A(2)(a) addresses situations where an offender operates a vehicle dangerously while adversely affected by an intoxicating substance, carrying a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment. Furthermore, subsection 328A(4) stipulates that if such dangerous operation causes grievous bodily harm or death, the offender is liable to imprisonment for up to 14 years.

In Mam's case, the presence of a cocktail of drugs in his system, driving on the wrong side of the road, and the resulting injuries to the mother and child could potentially satisfy the criteria for charges under these provisions.

Comparison to Similar Cases

A comparison can be drawn to the case of Kelly Renee Liddicoat, who, while driving under the influence of drugs, caused an accident resulting in two fatalities and received a prison sentence. While the outcomes differ due to the severity of the consequences, both cases involve driving under the influence leading to harm, raising questions about the consistency in the application of charges and sentencing.

Considerations and Implications

The decision to charge Mam with lesser offenses may involve several factors, including prosecutorial discretion, the specifics of the incident, and evidentiary considerations.

However, the apparent leniency has led to public scrutiny and concerns about potential biases, especially given Mam's high-profile status as a professional athlete.

It's essential to recognise that the magistrate's sentencing was constrained by the charges presented. Therefore, any perceived inadequacy in the penalty is the fault of the prosecutor (Queensland Police), not the Magistrate.

Statement from Ezra Mam

Video: Courier Mail

Conclusion

The disparity between the charges filed against Ezra Mam and the severity of his actions, especially when compared to similar cases, underscores the need for a thorough examination of prosecutorial decisions in such matters. Ensuring that charges appropriately reflect the gravity of offenses is crucial for maintaining public confidence in the justice system and upholding the principles of fairness and accountability.

The Bronco's have confirmed they will keep Mam as a player and no meaningful penalty will be given by them.