Mr GREG PIPER (Lake Macquarie) (16:00): I speak to today's petition and hope I can do justice to the advocacy of Melissa and Andrew Dimovski, who tragically lost their son Bryson in a fatal hit and run. There was nothing to suggest that 28 July 2023 would be unusual for the Dimovski household. Fourteen‑year‑old Bryson was excited about his new Facebook Marketplace find, a gaming monitor. As his sister Emily drove him to Belmont North to pick it up, they wondered what the suburb would look like in 80 years. Bryson said, "I hope I live long enough to see it." Unfortunately, he did not even have the chance to see the next day.
At 5.30 p.m. he was riding his e-scooter on a road shoulder in Warners Bay when he was struck by a driver who had been drinking at a pub, picked up a "roadie" and was distracted by his phone. He returned briefly to the scene of the crash and saw Bryson's scooter. With no witnesses present, he made the decision to flee. He hid his car, arranged to be picked up and later searched the term "hit and run" online. Bryson was found about 10 metres from where he was struck, around seven hours later. For seven hours on a cold winter's night, Bryson lay alone while his loved ones frantically searched for him. After a drawn-out legal process of more than two years, the driver was sentenced to just five years imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years and three months.
Andrew and Melissa Dimovski believe the law failed their son. They, along with more than 21,000 people who signed their petition, are calling for change. The thread that runs through the proposed reforms is the conviction that leaving the scene of a crash is a deliberate act, separate from the circumstances of the crash. The gravity of this act and the harm it causes, particularly where the crash is fatal, must be recognised by the law. The petition asks the Government to do four things. First, it asks to increase penalties for failing to stop and assist after a fatal crash. As mentioned, this would recognise the magnitude of the crime.
Secondly, the petition asks the Government to treat drivers who flee the scene of a fatal or serious crash like those who refuse drug and alcohol testing. The issue was put to me like this. Two drivers are involved in identical serious crashes. The first stays at the scene, and police require their blood and urine samples. The driver refuses, and there are serious consequences for doing so, including fines, imprisonment and licence disqualification. The second driver flees and is not located until after the statutory testing period of four hours has expired. In doing so, the second driver is able to achieve what the first driver, who refused the test, could not—they avoided both the test and the penalties associated with refusal.
The Dimovskis pose what I consider to be a compelling question to the Government. If saying no to testing has a legal consequence, why does fleeing and remaining unfound until police can no longer require testing potentially produce a better outcome for the driver? This petition asks for the law to treat drivers who avoid giving samples by fleeing a crash the same way it treats drivers who refuse mandatory testing. The law should remove any incentive to flee. Thirdly, the petition asks the Government to make section 52AB of the Crimes Act a "show cause" offence under the Bail Act.
Melissa and Andrew saw the driver walk out of the police station without spending a minute in custody and go on to live in the community for more than 12 months. The change to the Act would recognise that a driver deliberately leaving someone at the scene of a crash, particularly after a fatality, is sufficiently serious that a release should require proper scrutiny by a magistrate. Fourthly, it asks the Government to remove intensive correction orders as a sentencing option for fatal fail‑to‑stop offences so that a custodial sentence is imposed. Again, this is to recognise the gravity of the crime.
Melissa and Andrew understand that changes to criminal laws need to be carefully considered and cannot happen overnight. However, the changes they seek are compelling. They are asking for their proposed reforms to be properly considered and investigated by the Government. Nothing can deliver the justice Bryson deserves, but some change can leave a legacy that honours Bryson and the enormous effort of his parents in pursuit of a more accountable and just legal system.