Craig D. Longman is Head of Legal Strategies and a Senior Researcher with Jumbunna Institute for Indigenous Education and Research, Research Unit House of Learning (Research Unit) at the University of Technology, Sydney. He is also a Barrister at Frederick Jordan Chambers.
Mr Longman has worked extensively in Criminal and Civil Litigation, including in high-profile Human Rights matters such as the defence of Palm Island man Lex Wotton to charges arising from the events on Palm Island in 2004.
Joining Jumbunna in October 2010, his research and advocacy focuses upon the experience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander individuals in their interactions with the Australian legal system, particularly in the area of Criminal and Coronial Law. He has continued to assist community members in relation to coronial matters, and has prepared and presented on reform in relation to numerous areas of law reform, including Bail, Sentencing, Policing, Legal Aid funding and Native Title.
Mr Longman is a graduate of the Australian Company Directors Course and a member of NSW Law Society Indigenous Issues Committee.
- Barrister, Frederick Jordan Chambers.
- Member, Indigenous Issues Committee, Law Society of New South Wales.
- Member, Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, Member.
Strategic Litigation, Criminal Law, Human Rights Law, Jurisprudence, Indigenous Issues, Advocacy.
Anthony, T & Longman, C 2017, 'Blinded by the white: A comparative analysis of jury challengeson racial grounds', International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 25-46.View/Download from: UTS OPUS or Publisher's site
Indigenous peoples in Australia, the United States and Canada are significantly overrepresented as defendants in criminal trials and yet vastly underrepresented on juries in criminal trials. This means that all‐white juries mostly determine the guilt of Indigenous defendants or white defendants responsible for harming Indigenous victims. In this article, we explore cases in which Indigenous defendants have perceived that an all‐white jury's prejudice against Indigenous people would prevent them receiving a fair trial. It focuses on Indigenous defendants (often facing charges in relation to protesting against white racism) challenging the array of all‐white juries. Across these cases, Australian courts rely on formal notions of fairness in jury selection to dismiss the Indigenous defendant's perception of bias and foreclose an inquiry into the potential prejudices of white jurors. We compare the Australian judicial 'colour‐blindness' towards all‐white juries with that of the United States and Canada. We argue that the tendency for courts in the United States and Canada to question jurors on their biases provides useful lessons for Australian judiciaries, including in relation to the impending trials of Indigenous defendants in Kalgoorlie, Western Australia, accused of committing crimes in response to white racist violence. Nonetheless, across all jurisdictions where there is a challenge to the array based on racial composition, courts consistently uphold all‐white juries. We suggest that the judicial view of the racial neutrality of white jury selection misapprehends the substantive biases in jury selection and the injustice perceived by defendants in having a white jury adjudicate an alleged crime that is committed in circumstances involving protest against white prejudice.
Anthony, T, Marchetti, E, Behrendt, L & Longman, C 2017, 'Individualised Justice through indigenous Community Reports in Sentencing', Journal of Judicial Administration, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 121-140.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
There is a growing pool of research on court outcomes in sentencing Indigenous people but relatively little research on the information available to sentencing courts to consider Indigenous background. Although Australian courts mostly have discretion to consider Indigenous circumstances, such consideration depends on submissions and reports tendered in court. The High Court in Bugmy v The Queen (2013) stated 'it is necessary to point to material tending to establish [the defendant's deprived] background' if it is to be relevant in sentencing.1 The main repository of court information on defendant background is counsel submissions and, where the defendant is facing imprisonment, Community Corrections' Presentence Reports. Based on 18 interviews with judicial officers, lawyers and court staff in New South Wales and Victoria, this article identifies the need for more information on relevant Indigenous background factors in sentencing. The introduction of discrete Indigenous community reports that present Indigenous perspectives on the person's background and rehabilitation was regarded as important for addressing the Bugmy requirement. This article makes reference to the wide-scale experience in Canada of First Nations presentence reports, known as 'Gladue Reports', and the more small-scale Australian experiences of Indigenous cultural reports, to indicate how this material can enhance individualised justice in sentencing Indigenous peoples.
Feature Length Documentary Film
Fred Maynard: Aboriginal Patriot Narrated by Professor John Maynard, this short documentary film focuses on the life of his grandfather Fred Maynard, who established the AAPA in the 1920s, the first large scale Aboriginal rights movement. Fred was born on 4 July 1879 at Hinton, New South Wales. In 1925 Maynard launched the Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association (A.A.P.A.). The group protested against the revocation of north-coast farming reserves; they also demanded that children no longer be separated from their families, or indentured as domestics and menial labourers. The A.A.P.A. advocated that all Aboriginal families should receive inalienable grants of farming land within their traditional country, that their children should have free entry to public schools, and that Aborigines should control any administrative body affecting their lives.
Panel Member for public roundtable with leading academics and practitioners on Indigenous Deaths in Care and Custody.
Longman, CD 2018, 'Bowraville Murders: Evidence Issues'.
A presentation to Legal Aid, NSW DPP and ALS "Training Trial Lawyers (solicitor advocates)" course outlining the investigatory and evidential issues arising in the Bowraville murders.
Longman, CD 2018, 'Cultural Revitalization and Strategy and Tactics among Indigenous Nations'.
A presentation to Syracuse University students on cultural revitalization and strategies and tactics used by Australian First Nations to renew culture and exercise self-determination within a Colonial legal sphere.
Longman, CD 2018, 'Overview of Legal and Criminal Justice Issues in the Indigenous Population'.
A presentation to Syracuse University Students on the legal and criminal justice issues faced by First Nations in Australia
Longman, CD 2016, 'Scales of justice still tipped towards police who harm people in their custody', The Conversation.
Accountability for the deaths of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people at the hands of the state remains absent 25 years after the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody's report.
O'Brien, R 2015, 'Journal of Indigenous Policy', Jumbunna Indigenous House of Learning, Sydney, Australia.
An edition of the Journal of Indigenous Policy curating the submissions of the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Legal Services between 2010 and 2014.
Longman, CD, Behrendt, L & Vivian, A 2015, 'Submission to the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs regarding the Native Title Amendment (Reform) Bill No. 1, 2012.'.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
A Supplementary Submission to the NSW Legislative Council's Standing Committee on Law and Justice Inquiry into the Family Response to the Murders in Bowraville including Responses to Questions on Notice
Successive governments have insisted, and continue to insist, that they have rejected ideologically-based policy with regard to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Instead they claim that they are in favor of evidence-based policy, looking to 'evidence of what works' and 'what is successful in overcoming Indigenous disadvantage'.
How then to evaluate these claims? Is it possible to reconcile these claims of evidence-based policy with the government's failure to improve the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people? Or would policy based on evidence look different to the last decade of government action?
longman, C 2012, 'Opal Fuel...its time to finish the job', Tracker Magazine.
Longman, CD 2012, 'State of Failure', Tracker Magazine.
Longman, CD 2012, 'Stronger Futures shines a light on a nation's racism', Tracker Magazine.
Longman, CD 2012, 'When an uprising is a justified response', Tracker Magazine.
An article looking at the rule of law, accountability and the civil unrest on Palm Island in 2008.
Longman, CD & behrendt 2012, 'A submission to the Director, Criminal Law Review, NSW Department of Attorney General and Justice regarding the Statutory Review of Part 8 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2006'.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
Longman, CD, Watson, N, Nicholson, A, Vivian, A, Priest, T, De Santolo, J, Gibson, P, Behrendt, L & Cox, E 2012, 'Listening But Not Hearing: A Response to the NTER Stronger Futures Consultations June to August 2011.'.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
A report compiled between researchers at Jumbunna Indigenous House of Learning evaluating the Stronger Futures consultation process against Australia's obligations under international law to consult with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in relation to decisions that affect them.
The Report includes a 'Report Card' providing an overview of the efficacy of the consultation process.
Longman, CD 2011, 'Exposing Thin Blue Lines', Tracker Magazine.
Longman, CD 2011, 'Police Investigators too in-house to probe deaths in custody', The Conversation.
Longman, CD 2011, 'Punishing our most vulnerable', Tracker Magazine.
A submission by Jumbunna Indigenous House of Learning to the NSW Law Reform Commissions review of Bail Law in New South Wales
Response to the National Human Rights Plan Secretariat, Human Rights Policy Branch, Cth Attorney-General's Department relating to the Draft National Human Rights Baseline Study