The judicial discretion Justice McCallum exercised in R v Gittany highlights how discretion justly allows laws to be implemented on a case-by-case basis in the criminal justice system, considering individual circumstances. Sentencing and judicial discretion are aspects of the criminal justice system which allow for the victim, offenders and society's rights to be balanced to a considerable extent. .
Current bail laws allow for greater protection of the offender's civil liberties, while upholding the protection of victims and society. In R v Gittany, the magistrate granted conditional bail as an "exceptional circumstance" under S 9c of The Bail Act 1978 was found to exist as a result of the strong argument in Gittany's defence. He also had strong community links and a $630 000 surety was paid. As the trial progressed, his conditions were tightened, and bail eventually revoked. While the bail, in this case, seems to have balanced rights successfully; it was evident that the criminal justice system was having difficulties striking this balance in other cases. This is seen in the 2011 review of The Bail Act 1978 by The NSW Law Reform Commission. A 2012 Sydney Morning Herald Article titled "Bail for Youth Must be easier, review finds" states that the review found the presumptions against granting bail "has served to fill prisons and depart from the basic principles of justice," as well as disproportionately affect young people. As a result of this review, The Bail Act 2013 (NSW) was implemented. This simplified the laws, and removed presumptions relating to bail, instead implementing a 'risk management test', whereby police or courts decide if the offender poses an unacceptable risk to the victim or community. Therefore, society and the victim's rights to safety are better balanced with the offenders right to be "presumed innocent until proven guilty according to the law", under Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.