Editorial: Questions surround legal system

Boxing Day 2013

LET'S make this perfectly clear. There is no one more responsible for Nigel Dixon's dangerous crime wave at Christmas last year than Nigel Dixon.

Our special report today around the circumstances of Dixon's offending, addiction to illegal drugs and mental health is not a "Nigel sob story" nor is it in any way an excuse for his behaviour.

It's a miracle his actions didn't kill someone. He was a bad bugger and deserved to be jailed.

Questions around the circumstances leading up to his crime spree and eventual arrest still need to be asked.

I have been covering Nigel Dixon court appearances for this newspaper since he was a cocky teenager 10 years ago at the age of 17, when he had his $43,000 in traffic fines wiped for 300 hours' community service.

At time the story created a national stir, with the judge being criticised for copping him such an easy break. Dixon could have learned from that but he didn't.

Eventually, he went straight with help from Destiny Church and changed his life around, even no longer needing to be prescribed drugs for schizophrenia.

But his slip back into a life of crime and drugs such as P took over and he became dangerous.

Sue Dixon, his long-suffering mother who has been by his side at court appearances since he was a teen, warned authorities time and time again he was dangerous and needed help.

She begged for him to be locked up without first committing a serious crime or be put in a secure facility where he would be forced to take medication for his illness.

He didn't get that help - and yes, Dixon didn't help himself.

Police and mental health agencies no doubt worked within the law, but what good is the law if they are left helpless to do the right thing to keep the public safe from someone like Dixon?

Dixon will be released in three years. Will next time be any different?