Bootcamp participant charged over armed robberies during community phase
A teenager in the Government's youth bootcamp programme has been charged over two armed robberies while in the community phase.
RNZ first reported the charges on 25 September, reporting the young person was in the second Military Style Academy pilot when arrested. RNZ
The teenager faces charges of aggravated robbery with an offensive weapon and unlawfully taking a motor vehicle. The charges relate to two separate incidents.
Police said one incident happened in Rotorua. Masked offenders entered a store with weapons, smashed display cabinets and stole items. They left in two stolen vehicles. Police said no one was injured.
Police said three people were arrested in Waitara after a report of assault and robbery. Two of the three were charged with aggravated robbery with an offensive weapon and unlawfully taking a motor vehicle.
The second pilot involved 10 young people. It started in March with a residential phase, where participants live on site, and moved to a community phase in July, where they live back in the community with supervision. The teenager was in that community phase at the time of the arrest.
The pilot ran before Parliament passed the law to put bootcamps on a permanent footing. Taking part was voluntary. The Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill passed its third and final reading last week, the final vote needed to become law. It gives the Youth Court the power to sentence serious young offenders to a bootcamp.
Two other participants in the second pilot left during the residential phase. They left voluntarily, the Minister confirmed in August.
The broader context here is the shift from a voluntary trial to a court-ordered sentence. The second intake was tested without court orders. Under the new law, Youth Court judges have a sentencing option they did not have during the pilot period.
Looking at what this means for the Beehive and for Oranga Tamariki, the facts point to one difference. A residential phase keeps participants on site. A community phase involves liberty and risk. How that risk is managed, and by whom, will be central to questions for ministers and to scrutiny by a select committee, the group of MPs that examines laws and agencies.
In my view, the numbers will also shape the debate. Ten began the second intake. Two left voluntarily in residence. One now faces serious new charges while in the community phase. Supporters will point to the voluntary status of the pilot. Critics will point to the seriousness of the alleged reoffending. Neither assessment can be settled on these facts alone. What can be said is the legislated model will now be judged on compliance, reoffending and completion, and this case will be cited each time those measures are discussed.
