'He killed girlfriend due to emotional pain', court told

[Skyryder]

Is this the same defence applied in battered wife cases?

Yes it is. A better one would be diminished responsibility. This would take into account the symptoms of the battered wife syndrome.

But I don't think the Government will go there.

Skyryder

[Winston001]

Ah call me naive, but who's going to put that money up?

Exactly. No ganger is going to waste money on this asswipe. If he gets hurt it'll be because some nasty crim enjoys hurting people and can pretend its justified.




Judith Ablett-Kerr should be ashamed of herself at this point. She took a huge gamble defending him with the provocation out, probably was arrogant, or perhaps desperate enough to resort to it. How she could even bring herself to defend him is beyond me. Yeah, yeah someone had to I guess.



Publicity. Profile. Lots and lots of free advertising. A legend in her own lunchtime. Not particularly well-regarded in the profession. Maybe Greg King had similar motivations.

[Genestho]

Exactly. No ganger is going to waste money on this asswipe. If he gets hurt it'll be because some nasty crim enjoys hurting people and can pretend its justified.


Shouldn't say this but I will. I concur with your statement Winston ( As always!!! hehe)

[scumdog]

Exactly. No ganger is going to waste money on this asswipe. If he gets hurt it'll be because some nasty crim enjoys hurting people and can pretend its justified.

Yup, prison is full of people like that - fuckwitted criminals that think they are not as bad as other fuckwitted criminals in there.

And think giving one of the 'other' ones the bash is fully justified.

Maybe if we gave 'em all knives, in a month or two there would be one bleeding criminal left.??

[doc]

Yup, prison is full of people like that - fuckwitted criminals that think they are not as bad as other fuckwitted criminals in there.

And think giving one of the 'other' ones the bash is fully justified.

Maybe if we gave 'em all knives, in a month or two there would be one bleeding criminal left.??

Dont think so. They will be scared of him cos he such a "Loose unit"

Just keep him in a Sth Island jail and our crims will be safe. OSH will prevail :yes:

Who the hell would provoke him with his MO

[peasea]

Dont think so. They will be scared of him cos he such a "Loose unit"

Just keep him in a Sth Island jail and our crims will be safe. OSH will prevail :yes:

Who the hell would provoke him with his MO

Can we poke him through the bars with long sticks?
That'd be fun, I'd pay to do that.

[Winston001]

Can we poke him through the bars with long sticks?


Long pointed sticks? Ho, ho, ho. We want to use pointed sticks, do we? :shit: Getting all high and mighty, eh? Fresh fruit not good enough for you eh? Well I'll tell you something my lad. When you're walking home tonight and some great homicidal maniac comes after you with a bunch of loganberries, don't come crying to me!! :angry:

[doc]

Can we poke him through the bars with long sticks?
That'd be fun, I'd pay to do that.

Nup the way to really hurt him would be to ignore him, and give him menial tasks to do for life. Especially if the screws were all deaf mutes.

[doc]

homicidal maniac comes after you with a bunch of loganberries, don't come crying to me!! :angry:

They have nasty prickles. Very Monty Python. You sick barstard

[normajeane]

Long pointed sticks? Ho, ho, ho. We want to use pointed sticks, do we? :shit: Getting all high and mighty, eh? Fresh fruit not good enough for you eh? Well I'll tell you something my lad. When you're walking home tonight and some great homicidal maniac comes after you with a bunch of loganberries, don't come crying to me!! :angry:

LOL:Punk: ACDC playing out loud on our old television at present and we both enjoy your witisms, (oh the wine helps says scummy). Why be some PC with a pointed stick?? i say...

[peasea]

Long pointed sticks? Ho, ho, ho. We want to use pointed sticks, do we? :shit: Getting all high and mighty, eh? Fresh fruit not good enough for you eh? Well I'll tell you something my lad. When you're walking home tonight and some great homicidal maniac comes after you with a bunch of loganberries, don't come crying to me!! :angry:

I'd just tell him to jam his loganberries.

[peasea]

LOL:Punk: ACDC playing out loud on our old television at present and we both enjoy your witisms, (oh the wine helps says scummy). Why be some PC with a pointed stick?? i say...

If you want to see cool personified it's the Scummy show on TV3, thinly disguised as 'Hot Fuzz'.

[normajeane]

Meh, just waiting for "Hot Trolls" to be made!

[Genestho]

Dont think so. They will be scared of him cos he such a "Loose unit"

Who the hell would provoke him with his MO

I beg to differ - I'd suggest, there are many loose units with grandiose delusions of superiority, and tendancies of narccism in NZ jails!
Provocation wouldn't be an issue, because someone may want "the reputation".
Ain't that how it works inside? It's a different world remember.

I know we've rung the neck out of this topic...but a couple of things....

I see the defence of provocation may be removed as a legacy to Sophie.
Now, I can see why - with her character torn to shreds after her tragic demise, and I don't have a problem with the why.

But are we being objective here?

I note Judith defended Gay Oakes with provocation - granted it failed.
(Interesting she would use this defence again under the evidence in this trial)

But can our resident bush lawyers clarify something for me please?

The difference between self defence and provocation.

Is provocation based on a relationship between offender and victim?
And self defence, defense from a strangers attack?

A scenario, your home is invaded by a group of men, you are gang raped, beaten, they've told you they will kill you when finished, you have an opportunity to fight for your life, and an offender is killed, self defence or provocation?

You're raped and beaten within an inch of your life constantly over time by your partner, you kill him, self defence or provocation?

What are the legal definitions between self defence and provocation, and can we afford to do away with this provocation defense?

[Winston001]

What are the legal definitions between self defence and provocation, and can we afford to do away with this provocation defence?

I wish there was a simple answer. FWIW there are whole chapters in legal texts on these questions. Here is a c&p:

"Provocation does not make an unlawful homicide excusable or justifiable. It does, however, provide a defence to a charge of murder and it entitles the accused to have his offence reduced from murder to manslaughter. In this respect it differs from self-defence which, if established, provides the complete answer to a charge of murder."



"Self defence - The test involves three steps:

First, what the accused believed the circumstances to be from his or her point of view.

The second is whether, bearing in mind the belief of the accused about what was happening, he or she was acting in self defence considered from the accused’s point of view.

Third, given that belief, the force used in self defence was actually reasonable."

[Genestho]

Thanks Winston, for the clear and conscise C&P! Bling awarded!

I see the difference Sir!!!!

I can see this will be rather complex....

[oldrider]

Just tuned in to 60 minutes on TV3, Clayton Weatherston is the son of a man that I know personally very well.

I could not ever see anything in the characteristics of his parents that their son could ever turn out like Clayton has. (still no remorse, still the victim?)

I really do feel desperately sad for his parents and siblings but Clayton and his lawyers are the pits in my estimation! :nono:

[short-circuit]

Just tuned in to 60 minutes on TV3, Clayton Weatherston is the son of a man that I know personally very well.

I could not ever see anything in the characteristics of his parents that their son could ever turn out like Clayton has. (still no remorse, still the victim?)

I really do feel desperately sad for his parents and siblings but Clayton and his lawyers are the pits in my estimation! :nono:

His parents spoke with dignity and sincerity.

[Usarka]

I see the defence of provocation may be removed as a legacy to Sophie.
Now, I can see why - with her character torn to shreds after her tragic demise, and I don't have a problem with the why.


I have a problem with the proposed law change. He tried a defence and it failed, and now National are using Labour's patented knee-jerk^TM law making policy.

The only reason her character was torn to shreds was because *we* fed the tv news rating machines and watched every last second of his defence.

The hundreds of thousands of people who paid so close attention to this trial are just as guilty for smearing her character.

[Genestho]

Oh believe me, I question whether doing away with the provocation defense is a good idea.
Not all offenders are created equal.
I'd suggest we Stop. Breathe and Think this one through.

And you're right "our" need to be fed the gorey details, therefore feeding the networks and magazines - their ratings, is insatiable.

[short-circuit]

I have a problem with the proposed law change. He tried a defence and it failed, and now National are using Labour's patented knee-jerk^TM law making policy.

The only reason her character was torn to shreds was because *we* fed the tv news rating machines and watched every last second of his defence.

The hundreds of thousands of people who paid so close attention to this trial are just as guilty for smearing her character.

Agreed - voyerism at it's worst. But the adversarial justice system is itself a failure, it's archaic and it opens the door for abuses of this kind.

[_Shrek_]

I have a problem with the proposed law change. He tried a defence and it failed, and now National are using Labour's patented knee-jerk^TM law making policy.

The only reason her character was torn to shreds was because *we* fed the tv news rating machines and watched every last second of his defence.

The hundreds of thousands of people who paid so close attention to this trial are just as guilty for smearing her character.

we didn't follow it all, but you are right about the knee-jerk, in this case the law did work, as the jury found the AH guilty of murder as they should have, as for smearing her character I don't think it has even thow the defence tried

[boostin]

Wasn't it John Key saying something along the lines of "The test is if the law is working, if its working fine then it doesnt need removing/adjusting". That was in regards to the new anti-smacking laws.

Seems to me that provocation is working just fine. Leave it alone.

[oldrider]

I have a problem with the proposed law change. He tried a defence and it failed, and now National are using Labour's patented knee-jerk^TM law making policy.

The only reason her character was torn to shreds was because *we* fed the tv news rating machines and watched every last second of his defence.

The hundreds of thousands of people who paid so close attention to this trial are just as guilty for smearing her character.

Agreed, actually the law worked, the Judge and Lawyers need to be censured if there has been misuse of the "provocation" clause and it can be established as such!

Murder is gory at the best of times, therefore for the truth to out, gory must be addressed.

The process just allowed the act of murder to continue on and on and on, at the victims expense and she had no defence against it!

Emotionally, I feel the defence lawyers acted in an obscene manner and the Judge allowed them to exploit "provocation" beyond acceptable limits. (JMHO)

[mstriumph]

.............

So.

Can emotional pain ever form justifiable provocation for murder?

Does cruelly driving someone to that state of mind make a murder victim someone that the world is better off without?

Your thoughts please, ladies and gentlemen.

Any sort of pain could be provocation methinks - but whether any resultant murder would be justifiable or not would be up to the skills of his lawyer, the extent to which the jury could be swayed by it and, probably, a dozen other variables.

On a personal level, that lawyer would have to work damn hard to make me believe he could emotionally 'lose it' 200 times :laugh:

however - i've worked with some REALLY shitty people and abuse isn't confined to PERSONAL relationships soooooooooooooooo <_< anyone got the contact number of a really skillful scumbag - sorry - lawyer?? :innocent:

[mynameis]

18 years eh.

Long enough? Too short? Too long a sentence, whatya thoughts?

[sil3nt]

Why even release these nut jobs back into the community. Prison is only going to make him even more fucked up than he is.

[Naki Rat]

Based on the likelihood that he won't survive 18 years inside due to either self harm or someone earning the bounty on him, it is 'enough'.

[Headbanger]

I suggest we calculate the cost of keeping him imprisoned for life, Give me half of that amount, I'll kill him and dispose of the body.

In hindsight they should have called me in before the trial, could have saved millions of our money and no one would have to see this cunt made into a celebrity.

[tomobedlam]

18 years eh.

Long enough? Too short? Too long a sentence, whatya thoughts?

I don't like his chances of getting parole even when he is eligible to apply, with it being a high profile case and the brutally of the murder. Also hopefully in 18 years time the parole people will understand that some people should never be released

[ital916]

I wonder if culprits of such hideous crimes would think twice if they knew that a cushy jail cell was not waiting for them but death in the same manner that they inflicted upon their victim.

In this case it would require clayton weatherston to be stabbed 216 times.........imagine the guy with the clicker counting them.

[tomobedlam]

I wonder if culprits of such hideous crimes would think twice if they knew that a cushy jail cell was not waiting for them but death in the same manner that they inflicted upon their victim.

In this case it would require clayton weatherston to be stabbed 216 times.........imagine the guy with the clicker counting them.

the quick answer to that is no

[firefighter]

I know if I was a family member I would be waiting the 18 years for him to be released, and i'd have told him that in my victim statement which the family read to him.

I'd have told him, in 18 years time, I will be waiting for your release, you have'nt gotten away with anything.

[XxKiTtiExX]

Certainly not long enough. But lets see if he's still keen to discuss his penis sob stories now. :buggerd:

[ready4whatever]

Give her family each a baseball bat and lock them in a room with clayton for 5 minutes. If he survives he may walk free (let his family know that)

[ynot slow]

About a month per stab/cut,not bad eh.Imagine if he stabbed her once.

[GDOBSSOR]

Here's the NZ Herald article (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10580426&pnum=0).

Given the details available, what's all y'all's take on the apparent defence of reduced responsibility due to emotional pain making him lose self-control?

Me, I'd acquit him. There are quite a few bitches out there that need a good stabbing, and reading between the lines, I'd say he got himself one.

Chances are he's saved dozens of other guys a broken heart in the future.

Now, maybe he shouldn't get a medal, exactly, but I'd certainly say it's not a case of cold-blooded murder.

So.

Can emotional pain ever form justifiable provocation for murder?

Does cruelly driving someone to that state of mind make a murder victim someone that the world is better off without?

Your thoughts please, ladies and gentlemen.

This post is years old but you worry me severely.
This is either a joke or serious.
If it's a sick joke, it's NOT FUNNY, Sophie Elliott was a young lady who didn't deserve at all to be murdered and her family devastated. Please refrain from being an idiot in future.
If you're serious... Then you are a sociopath. He got his feelings hurt, so she deserved to die? People get hurt everyday. I have been sexually assaulted. It doesn't give me the right to go to the house of the boy who did it and stab him two hundred times. My first boyfriend dumped me by text and strung me along for MONTHS. He'll do it again. If I took a knife to university and went to his class and stabbed him 200 times, I would deserve everything I got.
Clayton Weatherston is a dangerous man who should be kept away from society at all costs. Just watching him on tv made me choke on my drink.

[jrandom]

If it's a sick joke, it's NOT FUNNY

Best you not do any laughing then.

:yes:

[GDOBSSOR]

You might have guessed I would be a starter for this obviously trolling thread.

How any Mother could not have gathered something was wrong before her daughter received 216 stab wounds is beyond me, but I digress.



She heard screaming, ran up stairs and he pushed her out of the room and locked the door in her face.

[nodrog]

This post is years old but you worry me severely.
This is either a joke or serious.
If it's a sick joke, it's NOT FUNNY, Sophie Elliott was a young lady who didn't deserve at all to be murdered and her family devastated. Please refrain from being an idiot in future.
If you're serious... Then you are a sociopath. He got his feelings hurt, so she deserved to die? People get hurt everyday. I have been sexually assaulted. It doesn't give me the right to go to the house of the boy who did it and stab him two hundred times. My first boyfriend dumped me by text and strung me along for MONTHS. He'll do it again. If I took a knife to university and went to his class and stabbed him 200 times, I would deserve everything I got.
Clayton Weatherston is a dangerous man who should be kept away from society at all costs. Just watching him on tv made me choke on my drink.

Does you user name stand for Gay Dumb Old Bitch Should Stay On Ritalin?

[Jantar]

This thread had died and doesn't deserve to be ressurected. However as you were not a member of this site when it was posted you do have the right to comment on it.

Personally I saw the OP's post as nothing more than a troll, so I ignored it.

As an aside, I should mention that I have met Sophie's father when he was guest speaker at a social function I attended. There is a lot of information that was never made public, and I believe that if we had the death penalty in New Zealand then Weatherspoon would be a prime candidate.

[jrandom]

As an aside, I should mention that I have met Sophie's father when he was guest speaker at a social function I attended.

Ah, an unbiased data source. Lucky you.

[GDOBSSOR]

You know that he has admitted killing her, right?

What about Arthur Allan Thomas?

[Jantar]

Ah, an unbiased data source. Lucky you.
Certainly NOT unbiased. But factual information from a biased source is far better than inferred information from an unbiassed source.

[jrandom]

Certainly NOT unbiased. But factual information from a biased source is far better than inferred information from an unbiassed source.

The point I was making is that 'factual information' itself may well be somewhat blurry, when presented by the father of a murdered girl.

[blue rider]

The point I was making is that 'factual information' itself may well be somewhat blurry, when presented by the father of a murdered girl.

you don't have a point.., and quite frankly i doubt you ever had one when posting this thread.
You just come across as a wee little piss le vent, who was not loved by Mama and now has difficulties with the Ladies.

No one absolutly no one deserves to die like this. No one deserves to be butchered. No one deserves to be mutilitated.

emotional pain.....Yeah sure TUI.

[jrandom]

you don't have a point.., and quite frankly i doubt you ever had one when posting this thread.

Mm, no, I did. You're letting your emotion cloud your ability to empathise. If you're dead-set against the idea of girls being stabbed to death, good on ya mate - but you'll never be able to effectively act against something you don't understand.

Not that you're going to act against it, though, are you, Miss Blue Rider? Sitting around and agreeing that terrible things are terrible has never been known to achieve much, y'know.


... not loved by Mama and now has difficulties with the Ladies.

Or perhaps mama loved me a little too well, and the ladies have been too easy?


No one deserves to be butchered.

Since that's entirely subjective, I can't argue with it.

[SMOKEU]

Gotta love it when the feminists come out.

[Nova.]

such a shame too, she was smoking hot.

[PrincessBandit]

How about we let this thread go back to where it was before the major dredge.
See the mischief you can still cause all these years on Dan? You sure know how to set 'em up doncha!

[scumdog]

Gotta love it when the feminists come out.

Good on ya for doing so!!:woohoo:

[SMOKEU]

Good on ya for doing so!!:woohoo:

Is that your secret fantasy?

[Banditbandit]

I have been sexually assaulted. It doesn't give me the right to go to the house of the boy who did it and stab him two hundred times.

The right? who needs a "right" ??? "Rights" are legal fictions ... and exist nowhere outside the minds of wimping liberals.

If he offended you that much - just do it ...

[imdying]

What about Arthur Allan Thomas?What about him? He admit killing her too? :confused:

[Paul in NZ]

What about him? He admit killing her too? :confused:

No but he definitely didn't kill her....

[GrayWolf]

The simple truth in all these cases, From Mark ELLIS, through to David BAIN,
there are circumstances, facts, and possibilities in history, that for the reason of either side of the courtroom's best interest for a successful outcome, prosecution or defence, that will NEVER see the light of day, or are considered insignificant, or simply do not get used. Also the media of course ALWAYS reports the full and unbiased facts, without slanting them for either sympathy or a 'good story'...

I am/was a personal friend of the father of Gareth McFadgen, the guy who was set alight at a party some years ago and died from about 80% burns, there was behaviour from the perpetrator much earlier in the evening that indicated he was 'going to do it' but was not seen as 'significant' during the trial/hearings. So that 'behaviour' ended up not being part of the final decision and sentence. Anyone here who heard a guy saying, I am going to set that 'grass skirt alight', and making 'weak attempts to' several times before his 'supposed totally inebriated state where he was not thinking logically' would not expect it to be ignored, but it wasn't seen as 'significant evidence'.

end result? in the eyes of the parents who lost an early 20's son, and the parents/husband of a young woman severely burnt trying to put out the fire (plastic grass skirt) they will never feel justice was fully done.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Please, Flying Spagheti Monster, allow this thread to die.

[Brett]

This thread, namely the original post, was retarded to begin with in 2009 and is no less so now. Someone want to relegate this to PD now?

[jrandom]

Someone want to relegate this to PD now?

Unfortunately for some, offensiveness isn't automatically a criteria for shit getting PD'd.

[SMOKEU]

Unfortunately for some, offensiveness isn't automatically a criteria for shit getting PD'd.

Good, because there are too many cry babies around.

[James Deuce]

http://i.imgur.com/EX5v4.jpg

[Brett]

Unfortunately for some, offensiveness isn't automatically a criteria for shit getting PD'd.

Not the offensiveness - by all means be controversial, but this thread is not going to go anywhere now is it?

[jrandom]

Not the offensiveness - by all means be controversial, but this thread is not going to go anywhere now is it?

It'd go even less anywhere if people didn't post in it, dude. But, by all means, reply to this as well and keep it going.

:sunny:

[Usarka]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/c9s9sPXXkqw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

..........