Justice?

[Legends of 2017]

Thanks for the gratuitous tip but I'm far from "shocked". Sadly I'm hardly suprised really.

My post did mention manslaughter so of course I realised that. It also mentioned Justice Terry Forrest stating the maximum sentence for manslaughter is 20 years. The 2 guilty parties here got a fraction of that. Potentially around 1/3 and 1/4. I know someone who got more for accidentally going off a bridge on his motorbike and his girlfriend dying.

I would be very disappointed if someone I loved was killed, dismembered and incinerated and those found guily only had to face a few years in jail.

I respect your right to feel differently but I can't see why you're telling me how I shouldn't feel, especially considering the sentence was way below the maximum allowed.

I would seriously wait for them to come out. Vigilanteism, I know, but that's what the'justice' system has come to in victoria. Thanks hulls, bumbly

How about the case the other day where someone nearly hacked off someones foot, only got 2 1/2 years?

 

[Legends of 2017]

and yet more evidence that judges are out of touch with reality. 9 years and 3 months is 'manifestly excessive' for raping a 10 year old girl : . Wonder what the sentence would be if it happened to someone they knew?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/a-man-who-raped-a-10-year-old-girl-has-had-his-jail-term-cut-by-judges/story-e6frf7kx-1225917761165

A man who raped a 10-year-old girl has had his jail term cut by judges
September 11, 2010
A MAN aged 66 who raped a 10-year-old girl has had his jail term cut to a four-year minimum by appeal judges, who used the case to argue criticism of soft sentences is ill-conceived and wrong.
Child-sex victim advocates are angry that the man who raped the girl and later masturbated in front her has had his minimum sentence cut by more than two years - despite the judges describing his crimes as a "devious and opportunistic" breach of trust.
The man also fondled the breast of an eight-year-old girl on his bed.
Court of Appeal judges Chief Justice Marilyn Warren and Justice Robert Redlich found that the original maximum sentence of nine years and three months, with a 6 1/2-year minimum, was "manifestly excessive".

The judges reduced the man's sentence to a maximum six years and nine months' jail with a four-year, three-month minimum.

The man pleaded guilty to sexual penetration of a child under 16 and two counts of committing an indecent act in the presence of a child.
He had a close relationship with the 10-year-old, who affectionately called him "grandpa". The man told police the 10-year-old had instigated the sexual contact and that the touching of the eight-year-old under her top was accidental.

He submitted the length of his sentence was manifestly excessive because the act of penetration was "relatively fleeting", he had no relevant prior convictions, he was the victim of child sex abuse and jail would be "more burdensome" for him.

In response to one of the man's grounds for appeal, the two veteran judges criticised media coverage.

"There is a misconception prevalent within the public domain that generally, sentences imposed by the courts are too lenient," the judges said.

Later they referred to a Sentencing Advisory Council report.

"The community is very poorly informed about most sentences that are imposed," the judges said, adding that the media reported "selectively" to entertain.

"The public have a right to criticise and hear the criticism of others through the media. That is a legitimate and important function of the media. But it should be informed and balanced discussion."

Child Wise chief executive Bernadette McMenamin said she believed the reduction in sentence was "far too lenient" and reflected ignorance about the impact of sex abuse.

"I really believe the judiciary are out of touch with community attitudes," Ms McMenamin said.

She believed that any act of penetration of a child should receive no less than 10 years.

"We work with victims of child sex abuse on a daily basis and the issue is the impact it has on the child," Ms McMenamin said.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

and yet more evidence that judges are out of touch with reality. 9 years and 3 months is 'manifestly excessive' for raping a 10 year old girl : . Wonder what the sentence would be if it happened to someone they knew?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/a-man-who-raped-a-10-year-old-girl-has-had-his-jail-term-cut-by-judges/story-e6frf7kx-1225917761165
......

Yup, unfortunately this is what we've come to expect from our justice system. Often the judge makes a long-winded speech before sentencing about the abhorrent nature of society...blah blah blah then goes ahead and give a sentence closer to the minimum than the maximum.

I wonder if our judges spend too long on the bench once instated? I wonder if there is a way we could avoid the cloistered nature of their positions?

 

[1eyedtiger]

Sorry to drag up an old thread.

The case involving the murder of Sarah Cafferkey has yet again stirred the pot.

http://www.news.com.au/national/bacchus-marsh-man-charged-with-sarah-cafferkeys-murder/story-fndo4cq1-1226520423114

Here we have a suspect who has murdered in that past, escaped from jail and unbelievably later released, just so he could murder again.

In my mind, the death penalty is no longer about punishment or being a deterrent, it is about permanently removing these scum from our society and preventing them from ever committing a crime ever again. In saving this scumbag, the anti death penalty mob have cost another innocent person their life. Congratulations. If we had a true life sentence in this country where life really meant life and not some watered down sentence to appease the politically correct among us, then the death penalty wouldn't be needed, they would die behind bars (and actually be punished for their crimes). But we don't and so the scum of this earth should be permanently removed.

I would like to ask those who are against the death penalty what is more barbaric, a society that adequately deals with those who perform serious crimes such as murder or a society that let's these people live and be released to commit further crimes against other members of society?

Strange how the human race routinely kills other animals for the slightest offense against a human (dog bite) but a human who should know better gets away with murder.
Dog bites person - Put down (after all, it's just a dog and so the taking of life doesn't matter.)
Person kills person - Jail sentence then released. Kills another person but that doesn't matter either. The life of the killer is the corner stone of our justice system.

Person should know better, therefore should be put down too.

If you're so concerned about innocent prisoners being given the death sentence, then give us a true life jail sentence and let the appeals system do it's job.

 

[tigertim]

Yep, murder should be a life sentence.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

I don't agree. The death penalty just transposes the offender's wrong-headedness onto the state. No human has the right to decide who lives and who dies. That's it. End of. Giving that power to the state is a terrrible idea and isn't a deterrent, check the numbers on death row in the good old U.S. of A. While you're at it check the numbers on those wrongfully convicted. How many innocent people murdered by the government in the name of justice is a small enough percentage to justify the system. I say zero. I don't think there is a margin of error. And people make errors all the time. In the case in question, while it seems likely, we don't know that this particular dirtbag was the dirtbag that killed Sarah Cafferkey.

I do agree on life meaning life, and there are statutes that allow it. But it needs to be reserved for cases where there is absolutely no doubt about the facts. Port Arthur is one of those cases as is Hoddle St, but there aren't that many. In surveys conducted by the Department of Justice (or some related office) it has been shown that when ordinary citizens are presented with all the facts and arguments of actual cases and asked to suggest sentences they on average produce a LOWER sentence than the real sentencing judge.

I am reading The Geek Manifesto at the moment and it talks, in part, about the lack of robust scientific bases for a lot of justice policy. In most prisons rehabilitation seems to be a myth. So if the current syystem doesn't work perhaps we need to look at it but with a truely critical eye and without politics or emotive fauxtrage. Really try to understand the failings and devise tests using rigorous methods to see if there is a better way.

 

[Josh Beckett]

No human has the right to decide who lives and who dies. That's it. End of.Giving that power to the state is a terrrible idea and isn't a deterrent]

Pity the offender in question didn't follow this mantra.

If I was personally touched by a crime of this manner, I would care less if a death penalty acted as a deterrent (although I am not in favour of the death penalty). I imagine the removal of the offender from the face of the earth would be welcommed.


[In the case in question, while it seems likely, we don't know that this particular dirtbag was the dirtbag that killed Sarah Cafferkey.]

He has pled guilty so it's pretty likely he is the culprit


[I do agree on life meaning life, and there are statutes that allow it. But it needs to be reserved for cases where there is absolutely no doubt about the facts. Port Arthur is one of those cases as is Hoddle St, but there aren't that many.]

Agree with this, if there is no doubt life should mean exactly that

 

[KnightersRevenge]

No human has the right to decide who lives and who dies. That's it. End of.Giving that power to the state is a terrrible idea and isn't a deterrent]

Pity the offender in question didn't follow this mantra.

If I was personally touched by a crime of this manner, I would care less if a death penalty acted as a deterrent (although I am not in favour of the death penalty). I imagine the removal of the offender from the face of the earth would be welcommed.

He has pled guilty so it's pretty likely he is the culprit

Agree with this, if there is no doubt life should mean exactly that

I absolutely agree but as I sit here rational and un-offended-against I can say that I understand the consequences of my actions. As such I agree that if someone did something abhorrent to one of my family I would probably do something illegal in the moment. But I accept that the law of land applies to me even in such circumstances. I see that the dirtbag in question has now admitted culpability so I say throw the book at him. If he got 13 years the first time I would hope that he gets at least double that for this offence and given his recidivism maybe even more, but I suppose that is the difficulty in our justice system...finding the balance between punishment and rehabilitation.

 

[RfC77]

Murderers, rapists, and pedophiles should all be fed into a tree-chipper and used as blood n bone on farms or chum for the fishermen, by doing this they can make a positive contribution to society. Each trial uses up millions of dollars in legal aid and that's on top of their upkeep which again runs into the millions. I cannot believe that there are people out there arguing for the rights of such scum and who are also happy for their taxes to be used in such ways.

 

[Azza]

Murderers, rapists, and pedophiles should all be fed into a tree-chipper and used as blood n bone on farms or chum for the fishermen, by doing this they can make a positive contribution to society. Each trial uses up millions of dollars in legal aid and that's on top of their upkeep which again runs into the millions. I cannot believe that there are people out there arguing for the rights of such scum and who are also happy for their taxes to be used in such ways.

Execute suspected murderers, rapists, and paedophiles without trial eh? I think not.

 

[Rosy]

... If he got 13 years the first time I would hope that he gets at least double that for this offence and given his recidivism maybe even more, but I suppose that is the difficulty in our justice system...finding the balance between punishment and rehabilitation.

If there is a 0.1% chance of rehabilitation going wrong it's not worth the risk. It obviously didn't work the first time. A young woman has had her right to life brutally taken away from her by a repeat offender. Her family have been given a life sentence of suffering and pain. I don't think he should ever be allowed out again. I'd imagine there'd be a few hardened crims who'd like a chat with him in prison.

 

[tigergollywog]

Murderers, rapists, and pedophiles should all be fed into a tree-chipper and used as blood n bone on farms or chum for the fishermen, by doing this they can make a positive contribution to society.

I dont reckon I would spread pedophile blood and bone on my corn crop. It wouldnt seem right.

I heard a buddhist monk (he had spent 7 years meditating and had smuggled Aung Sang shu's memoirs out of her house arrest) who had taken up stream-of-consiousness stand up comedy (I'm not joking - only in Byron Bay). He reckoned pedophile catholic priests should have their dicks cut off and shrink wrapped and sold as dog meat at Coles. NOONE laughed out of the 300 audience, except me, who couldnt breath from laughing so much. It was quite a surreal experience.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

If there is a 0.1% chance of rehabilitation going wrong it's not worth the risk. It obviously didn't work the first time. A young woman has had her right to life brutally taken away from her by a repeat offender. Her family have been given a life sentence of suffering and pain. I don't think he should ever be allowed out again. I'd imagine there'd be a few hardened crims who'd like a chat with him in prison.

I don't disagree Rosy. In my original comments I referred to cases where the facts are not in doubt. This seems to be one of those cases and as such I hope the maximum penalty is applied. But there are plenty of cases that seem cut and dried when reported in a newspaper that turn out to have much more nuance when all of the facts are known or when circumstance and coincidence conspire to put an innocent person in the frame. That is why due process needs to be followed. But I would like to see a real study of the usefulness of gaols and of what we could do to make them better?

 

[Liverpool]

I don't disagree Rosy. In my original comments I referred to cases where the facts are not in doubt. This seems to be one of those cases and as such I hope the maximum penalty is applied. But there are plenty of cases that seem cut and dried when reported in a newspaper that turn out to have much more nuance when all of the facts are known or when circumstance and coincidence conspire to put an innocent person in the frame. That is why due process needs to be followed. But I would like to see a real study of the usefulness of gaols and of what we could do to make them better?

They already have Foxtel, internet, 3 meals a day, can study degrees and tafe courses...and you want to look at making them better???

I tell you how you can make 'them better'...and that is to make them how they should be, as a deterrent.
Small cells, bread and water meals, hard labour, no internet, no tv, one visit a month.

Regarding executions...they shouldn't be used as a deterrent but simply a way to rid the world of people who we really don't need in this world and their crimes were the most abhorrent of all.

 

[tigergollywog]

Yep, its all black and white and oh so easy. No thought of a variable spectrum, where at one end, you have the bloke in Moe who stabs dead 2 blokes for parking him in, and as the judge rightly said 'has no prospects for rehab and needs to be removed from society'. In this case, maybe bread and water and only channel 9 would be apt. However, at the other end of the spectrum, you might have a repentant father who got addicted to something and made a really dumb decision that didnt really hurt anyone (maybe he got caught up on the punt, chasing his debts and took $100k off the commonwealth bank). He might have had a bad 12 months and his judgment lapsed. If you dont know how that feels, you aint human. Do you reckon a couple of years of bread and water, bustin rocks is gonna do him and society much good? I think Confusious said, in his native tongue, man who thinks world simple is simple man. :-*

 

[KnightersRevenge]

They already have Foxtel, internet, 3 meals a day, can study degrees and tafe courses...and you want to look at making them better???

I tell you how you can make 'them better'...and that is to make them how they should be, as a deterrent.
Small cells, bread and water meals, hard labour, no internet, no tv, one visit a month.

Regarding executions...they shouldn't be used as a deterrent but simply a way to rid the world of people who we really don't need in this world and their crimes were the most abhorrent of all.

No you're right Livers, what was I thinking? Lock 'em up all up, I vote Livers for Chief Justice. Let's make the new suburb in Werribee a goal instead so we can keep all the ne're do wells Livers doesn't like. Here I was making it all complicated when it is all so cut and dried. The bad guys all wear blacks too so they should be easy enough to find. Bob Brown is probably an environmental terrorist so we'll re-open Van Diemen's Land for his ilk. The PM is guilty of fraud so that takes care of her. We'll fence off NT and herd all the Abos in there. Another problem solved. I am re-born Livers....lead me on to Shangri-La.

 

[Liverpool]

Yep, its all black and white and oh so easy. No thought of a variable spectrum, where at one end, you have the bloke in Moe who stabs dead 2 blokes for parking him in, and as the judge rightly said 'has no prospects for rehab and needs to be removed from society'. In this case, maybe bread and water and only channel 9 would be apt.

Stop being soft mate....bread, water, and channel 9 is too much for a multiple repeat offender who is now a double murderer.
This case is a pretty easy one for the death penalty.
"No prospects for rehabilitation" means jail is a waste of time and a drain on our taxes.

Jail should be a deterrent.....death penalty should be simply to rid ourselves of the ones who wouldn't be walking out of jail anyway.

 

[Brodders17]

Stop being soft mate....bread, water, and channel 9 is too much for a multiple repeat offender who is now a double murderer.

i dont think anybody, no matter how terrible the crime, deserves to be forced to watch ch9.

 

[Azza]

Stop being soft mate....bread, water, and channel 9 is too much for a multiple repeat offender who is now a double murderer.
This case is a pretty easy one for the death penalty.
"No prospects for rehabilitation" means jail is a waste of time and a drain on our taxes.

Jail should be a deterrent.....death penalty should be simply to rid ourselves of the ones who wouldn't be walking out of jail anyway.

Just what our society needs. More disregard for life.

 

[tigergollywog]

i dont think anybody, no matter how terrible the crime, deserves to be forced to watch ch9.

Your right Brodders, I was getting a bit swept up in the hysteria. maybe SBS on friday nights for good behaviour.