Criminal Law
05.04.24
How long after committing a crime can you be charged for it?
Is there a cut-off time between committing a crime and the police being able to charge you? This is a question we are sometimes asked in criminal law and the answer is yes, and no.
A statute of limitations is the maximum amount of time between a crime being committed and when a charge is laid.
In the ACT, there is no limitation period for offences that carry more than six months’ imprisonment. That is, if you commit a serious crime, you could still be charged for it even decades later.
In all other circumstances (for example, offences that attract penalties of six months or less imprisonment, or no imprisonment at all), the limitation period is 12 months, except where the legislation specifies otherwise. After 12 months, charges can’t be laid.
That’s not to say all offences that carry a penalty of more than six months’ in jail will be prosecuted. The ACT Director of Public Prosecutions policy states that the decision to prosecute can be a two-stage process. First, does the evidence offer reasonable prospects of conviction?
If the prosecutor concludes there are reasonable prospects, they must then consider whether it’s in the public interest for the prosecution to proceed. One of the factors when considering this is the staleness of the alleged offence.
Obviously, the more serious the offence, the more likely it is to be prosecuted regardless of how long ago it was alleged to have been committed. Following the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in 2013, there was a significant influx of investigations and prosecutions for historical child sexual abuse, particularly in religious institutions – some offences dating back many decades.
The lack of limitation period is particularly interesting against the background of advancing forensics and technology which has prompted the re-opening of a number of ‘cold cases’ in Australia which received renewed publicity through true crime podcasts and social media.
The Teacher’s Pet podcast saw Chris Dawson convicted of murdering his wife Lyn Dawson some 40 years after the crime. Claremont killer Bradley Robert Edwards was convicted in 2020 of killing two women in the 1990s in Perth after being linked through DNA evidence. There are various other recent examples of convictions for historical offences, usually murder or sexual assault.
Historical offences present unique difficulties for the criminal justice system. The difficulty with the inherent delay is the significant disadvantage to the alleged offender – and in some instances, the complainant.
Excessive delay between the alleged crime and the investigation/trial obviously affects the availability of witnesses and the clarity of their memories. The delay also makes it far more difficult for alleged offenders to obtain exculpatory evidence that points to their innocence.
If you believe you are under investigation for a historical or recent crime, the best thing you can do is arm yourself with a good criminal defence lawyer. You may think innocent people don’t need a lawyer, but this is not the reality. It is important to get a lawyer before the police are involved to protect your rights and interests.
If you need advice, contact one of our highly experienced criminal lawyers at info@aulich.com.au