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

[jrandom]

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.

[mowgli]

Can emotional pain ever form justifiable provocation for murder?

Is this the same defence applied in battered wife cases?

[wbks]

I know that you shouldn't bite the bait, but my thoughts are thats a really stupid thing to say

[jrandom]

Is this the same defence applied in battered wife cases?

'Emotional pain'? I haven't ever heard of it being applied thusly, no.

[Matt Bleck]

You better hope boomer doesn't see this thread..... :jerry:

[Ragingrob]

Sounds pretty weak to me. What the hell could the girl say to him to make him stab her more than 200 times? Cutting her ears off, slicing the end of her nose off, cutting a nipple off, stabbing her breasts, not to mention stabbing her lower area too.

Freaks like that need to be in jail. Killing someone isn't exactly a great way of handling your emotions. Some road-users drive me insane but I don't pull them outta their car and severe their body parts.

Hope he doesn't drop the soap.

[Katman]

Stabbed over 200 times.

Is there that much space on a human body?








(But was he wearing a colourful jersey? He might get off - eventually)

[jrandom]

What the hell could the girl say to him to make him stab her more than 200 times? Cutting her ears off, slicing the end of her nose off, cutting a nipple off, stabbing her breasts, not to mention stabbing her lower area too.

Freaks like that need to be in jail.

So it's the manner in which he killed her that bothers you.

Interesting.

Would you feel better about it if he'd limited himself to, say, a single shot to the back of her head?

[MIXONE]

I reckon he should claim self defence!

[Ragingrob]

So it's the manner in which he killed her that bothers you.

Interesting.

Would you feel better about it if he'd limited himself to, say, a single shot to the back of her head?

Maybe you shouldn't quote half of what I said...

You miss things such as -

"Killing someone isn't exactly a great way of handling your emotions"

So no... It's not just the manner.

[Maha]

Stabbed over 200 times.

Is there that much space on a human body?




Yes, if you use a toothpick.

[jrandom]

"Killing someone isn't exactly a great way of handling your emotions"

Bear in mind, though, we can't all be perfect.

[wbks]

A single shot might indicate he did it to kill her, not because he's a fucking freak who wanted to degrade her and destroy her body... Or so I would imagine what with the stabbing of certain parts and slicing up her body. He should have gone the other way people who get fucked around by a girl and cant get over it choose: Suicide

[Katman]

Can you imagine it?

"Hang on, I'm only up to 186".

[mowgli]

I reckon he should claim self defence!
or perhaps NCEA English is to blame, "Is this a dagger which I see before me..."

Clutching at straws, I'd say

[Ragingrob]

Bear in mind, though, we can't all be perfect.

No we aren't at all, but people this far from perfect can go waste away in jail.

[sunhuntin]

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.

in certain cases, i think yes.

i know the mother of my neice and nephews is someone who has caused my family 3 years of heartache, from accusing all of us of molesting my neice, ringing the cops on mum when she refused the bitch entry to her home, to being passed out on the couch on p with the baby at her tit and the two older kids nowhere in sight. she even had my brother [the kids father] bottled at a pub one night. nearly bloody killed him. you name it, and shes probably done it.

my entire family would quite happily do some jail time if it meant removing her from her kids lives. shes nothing but dangerous and is a shit role model. my neices first birthday, you could her beating the crap out of her oldest son inside the house. however, i dont think any of us could do it with force... knife or gun or anything. personally, id poison her... spike her drugs or something.
pretty much, having the bitch killed is our only option... cyfs and the police dont seem interested... one seemed to think it was normal for a 6 month old baby to be wearing size 3 clothes.

[NDORFN]

He should've staged "accidental" 3rd degree burns to her face. That'd level the playing field.

[Solly]

.............Freaks like that need to be in jail. Killing someone isn't exactly a great way of handling your emotions.....

Killing someone IS exactly the ONLY way of handling Psycho prick like him!!!!

I suggest he burns.......nice & slow.......

I challenge all to come up with some "appropriate" way/s to deal with arseholes like him.

[Katman]

my entire family would quite happily do some jail time if it meant removing her from her kids lives. personally, id poison her... spike her drugs or something.
pretty much, having the bitch killed is our only option...

I think you've just been added to the police database.

[FROSTY]

Ya know it aint often I agree with Jrandoms views on life n love n stuff.
But Literally I can say "there but by the grace of god go I"
I was going out with a lady that literally picked and picked at literally everything I did. Day after day nothing was right nothing was good enough. after 18 months something inside me snapped.
I grabbed my lid and quite literally walked out the front door and never went back --only the darn thing wasn't open.

[Madness]

Stuff (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2530634/Sophie-Elliott-killing-Weatherston-calm-collected) quote Crown prosecutor Marie Grills "33-year-old Weatherston took the knife with him when he visited 22-year-old Miss Elliott's Dunedin home on January 9, 2008."

That sounds like premeditation to me.

Put him in Paremoremo with Burton.

[NDORFN]

What is really needed is a better understanding and management of PMS by both men and women. That'd solve ALOT of socialogical issues.

[HenryDorsetCase]

I dont care how bright he is: bullet in the head (after due process of course!)

[HenryDorsetCase]

in certain cases, i think yes.

i know the mother of my neice and nephews is someone who has caused my family 3 years of heartache, from accusing all of us of molesting my neice, ringing the cops on mum when she refused the bitch entry to her home, to being passed out on the couch on p with the baby at her tit and the two older kids nowhere in sight. she even had my brother [the kids father] bottled at a pub one night. nearly bloody killed him. you name it, and shes probably done it.

my entire family would quite happily do some jail time if it meant removing her from her kids lives. shes nothing but dangerous and is a shit role model. my neices first birthday, you could her beating the crap out of her oldest son inside the house. however, i dont think any of us could do it with force... knife or gun or anything. personally, id poison her... spike her drugs or something.
pretty much, having the bitch killed is our only option... cyfs and the police dont seem interested... one seemed to think it was normal for a 6 month old baby to be wearing size 3 clothes.

all the family gathered just sang a chorus of "happy birthday" a bit louder while that was going on?

[Mom]

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. Your thoughts please, ladies and gentlemen.

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

Can I say up front "fuck off you weirdo!" :D

He stabbed out her eyeballs, I forget the number of times per eye for the moment, he cut off her ears and her nipples, a part of her nose and he stabbed her many other times to make sure she was good and properly DEAD! He also did this while her mother was in the house. How any Mother could not have gathered something was wrong before her daughter received 216 stab wounds is beyond me, but I digress.

While it is true that some people are very annoying and also very abusive, he is not attempting a defense of battered woman defense (yes I know he is male) he admits manslaughter. He lost it and did her in because he snapped apparently. Before he snapped though he turned up at her house with a knife (not the pocket variety), unusual thing for a Uni lecturer to carry around normally.

Be interesting to see how this clever woman defends him. She is smart lady. He is pyscho wack job :yes:

[ManDownUnder]

... after 18 months something inside me snapped....

What he said. The answer is yes to JR's question - there is just such a phenomenon, and as I understand it, it is the basis of the battered wife defence... i.e. she is battered so often that she eventually gets to a point where there's nothing left to lose... so she fights back.

And when it starts to come out - it all comes out. I suggest the 200 stabbings could be symptomatic of exactly that.

... or not... because I didn't read the article (but then I don't have to. As a KBer I reserve the right to form a fully qualified opinion on proportion of the available facts and opinions I see fit... let's call it 69th amendment)

[PrincessBandit]

I'd like to know how he admits to "manslaughter". "But your honour, I really didn't think that stabbing her that many times and cutting off parts of her body would actually kill her..."

[Katman]

Ya know it aint often I agree with Jrandoms views on life n love n stuff.
But Literally I can say "there but by the grace of god go I"
I was going out with a lady that literally picked and picked at literally everything I did. Day after day nothing was right nothing was good enough. after 18 months something inside me snapped.
I grabbed my lid and quite literally walked out the front door and never went back --only the darn thing wasn't open.

Not quite the same though, is it?

[YLWDUC]

You called me a loser, Oh, I'm in so much emotional pain. Come here girly, let me 'Manslaughter' you to resolve my pent up emotional issues. Abso-f#$@ing-lutely pathetic.

Manslaughter is for those cases where you did'nt actually intend to do anything, but because you're so stupid the person died. Eg: Like leaving your kids locked in the car on a hot day. Or not looking behind the car when you reverse up a driveway and kill your own child. As opposed to putting your child in a washing machine. Or stabbing your girlfriend 200 times.

What this guy is trying to argue is what the States would call 1st degree vs 2nd degree Murder. He might not have meticulously planned her death, but he sure as sh1t gave it a good go when he got 'overcome with emotion'

anyway, my two cents for the week.

[boostin]

It is required under s169(2)(a) that the provocation in the circumstances was “sufficient to deprive an “ordinary person, but otherwise having the characteristics of the accused, of the power of self-control”.

Ordonary person would stab his Mrs after a little emotional mind fuck. Yeah not likely.

[CookMySock]

SO? He can leave any time...

Steve

[Genestho]

Ok, I'll bite. CHOMP.:bash:

Jran, FFS.
This ain't exactly clan of the cave bear times, when breast beating men get to drag off ooga booga (the woman) and slice her up, because the stunningly beautiful woman broke his poor wee heart.

He should've HTFU like 99% of the rest of the population, and moved on.

Love hurts and all that.

Her poor mother was locked outside the door listening to the screams, as he stabbed her, and sliced her up.
Provacation??? FFS

Don't you think that behaviour is a little derranged?

I do, and I don't want him to live in my community.

IMHO, I hope he ain't got no colourful jersey's, and the evidence better be clear on this one.

[FROSTY]

Not quite the same though, is it?
Ya see mate I just don't know. --I literally say "there but for the grace of god" Because If I had zigged instead of zagged--gone back to "have it out" I honestly can't say what I would have done.
I'm pretty sure that instead of minor easilly repaired slices in my leathers if she was standing between me and the door she would have gone through the door in front of me.
The silly thing is it isn't big stuff usually because big stuff sets off loud enough warning bells that you get the heck out of there. Its the whole one straw at a time thing.
It was I must say 25 years ago .

NO way am I ever saying that hurting another human being is a good thing just that I can relate (I think).

[FROSTY]

Repeating here NO way do I condone violence.
BUT Lets just for a moment change sexes of the two people
SHE stabbed HIM 200 times because of the emotional abuse--NO he diddn't hit her but he belittled her,emotionally abused her till she broke down and went to his house and stabbed him. It was the only way out she could see.
Would we be reacting the same way??

[Usarka]

It shouldn't take more than 180 stabs to regain control of your emotions in a situation like this. Guilty.

[Patrick]

We know she drove him to it, how????

Is this just another version of "blame the dead person?????"

Only the killer knows of this version........?

That sounds very familiar.

Here we go again.........:woohoo:

[Winston001]

It is required under s169(2)(a) that the provocation in the circumstances was “sufficient to deprive an “ordinary person, but otherwise having the characteristics of the accused, of the power of self-control”.



Yep. Sounds like he's trying for temporary insanity - except that isn't recognised by the law unless psychiatrists can convince the court. Pretty rare.

Under s 169 culpable homicide, which would otherwise be murder, may be reduced to manslaughter on the grounds of provocation such as would deprive “an ordinary person, but otherwise having the characteristics of the offender” of the power of self control, and subject to the other conditions laid down in the section. The test to be applied is the effect of the provocation on an ordinary man in a sober condition.

I don't go along with the HTFU line. Human beings have an extraordinarily wide range of emotions and in some people that can amount to periods of mental illness.

Has no-one here ever been in a blind rage? A red-mist complete loss of rational control? That is what the battered women's defence boils down to. It might also describe his temporary mental state.

[Genestho]

I understand loosing the plot in a red rage, but he took the knife to the house, stabbing someone 200 times would take a certain amount of time, normal people would pause to think at (pick a number from 0-200 blood spurts) O heck, what am I doing, but he didn't stop, and then went on to slice.
That's something else. I'm sure we'll see exactly what he was sufficiently deprived of under his provocation defense.


EDIT! Sorry Frosty - read that the wrong way! EEEK! My bad! Maybe reaction would be different if the sex's were reversed! I'm not sure.
I doubt mine would be!

[PrincessBandit]

... Because If I had zigged instead of zagged--gone back to "have it out" I honestly can't say what I would have done.


But the reality was that you did "zag" instead of "zigging" and thereinlies a huge difference. Btw, does this mean you if you'd "ziggazig-ahhh'ed" that you're a fan of the Spice Girls?

**I'm running off to hide.....**



BUT Lets just for a moment change sexes of the two people
SHE stabbed HIM 200 times because of the emotional abuse--NO he diddn't hit her but he belittled her,emotionally abused her till she broke down and went to his house and stabbed him. It was the only way out she could see.
Would we be reacting the same way??

Yes, I think we would. There are many ways to get out, no matter how hard it might be. And yes I am aware of how trite that might sound, especially to those who have "been there, done that". However your question was "would we still be reacting the same way??", and I'm pretty sure there would be very little support for a woman who did the same.

[Naki Rat]

Manslaughter rather than murder. This has got to be the ultimate in denial of self responsibility.

[Mom]

Repeating here NO way do I condone violence.
BUT Lets just for a moment change sexes of the two people
SHE stabbed HIM 200 times because of the emotional abuse--NO he diddn't hit her but he belittled her,emotionally abused her till she broke down and went to his house and stabbed him. It was the only way out she could see.
Would we be reacting the same way??

Any female that inflicted the level of alleged :puke: violence on a guy, that this poor girl sustained, would be in for exactly the same comments as I am making now. This was not loss of control, resulting in a death. This was a systematic re-killing of a person.

The difference here is he is not using the alleged loss of control leading him to snap as a defense, he has pled guilty to a charge he is not facing. Judith Kerr is one very smart lady. Watch this space is all I can say.

[Ronin]

I was going out with a lady that literally picked and picked at literally everything I did. Day after day nothing was right nothing was good enough. after 18 months something inside me snapped.


Shit, you went out with my ex?

[Katman]

But the reality was that you did "zag" instead of "zigging" and thereinlies a huge difference. Btw, does this mean you if you'd "ziggazig-ahhh'ed" that you're a fan of the Spice Girls?



Fuck's sake PB.

That might be all it takes to push him over the edge!

[boostin]

I understand loosing the plot in a red rage, but he took the knife to the house, stabbing someone 200 times would take a certain amount of time, normal people would pause to think at (pick a number from 0-200 blood spurts) O heck, what am I doing, but he didn't stop, and then went on to slice.
That's something else. I'm sure we'll see exactly what he was sufficiently deprived of under his provocation defense.


EDIT! Sorry Frosty - read that the wrong way! EEEK! My bad! Maybe reaction would be different if the sex's were reversed! I'm not sure.
I doubt mine would be!
There is an argument both ways, one suggesting that an ordinary person would regain self control in the time it takes to stab someone 200 times.

The other is that stabing someone 200 times is evidence that the person actually lost control.

[scumdog]

Can you imagine it?

"Hang on, I'm only up to 186".

"And I've got a stitch, not as fit as I thought, better stop for a breather"

What a nong, out of the gene pool for him, toot sweet.

[Genestho]

There is an argument both ways, one suggesting that an ordinary person would regain self control in the time it takes to stab someone 200 times.

The other is that stabing someone 200 times is evidence that the person actually lost control.

Hmmmmm, I see what you're saying.
Bloody hard to imagine that the screams from Mother and Daughter and covering himself, and the room with blood, the image of the girl looking like chopped up steak, couldn't have snapped him out of it, but I do see your point!

Sorry edit: He brought the knife with him, as said earlier that would indicate premedititation and; Would the slicing indicate a bit of thought, or has he "gone animal"? Guess we'll find out.

[boostin]

Hmmmmm, I see what you're saying.
Bloody hard to imagine that the screams from Mother and Daughter and covering himself, and the room with blood, the image of the girl looking like chopped up steak, couldn't have snapped him out of it, but I do see your point!

Sorry edit: He brought the knife with him, as said earlier that would indicate premedititation and; Would the slicing indicate a bit of thought, or has he "gone animal"? Guess we'll find out.
Hard to make a decision without more information. From what I know so far (not much at all) I don't think he should have a defence of provocation.

Some of the posts by guys in this thread show that they have not lost self control when put is apparently similar situation.

[short-circuit]

Ya see mate I just don't know. --I literally say "there but for the grace of god" Because If I had zigged instead of zagged--gone back to "have it out" I honestly can't say what I would have done.
I'm pretty sure that instead of minor easilly repaired slices in my leathers if she was standing between me and the door she would have gone through the door in front of me.
The silly thing is it isn't big stuff usually because big stuff sets off loud enough warning bells that you get the heck out of there. Its the whole one straw at a time thing.
It was I must say 25 years ago .

NO way am I ever saying that hurting another human being is a good thing just that I can relate (I think).

Hahahahahahaha

This from the man who a fortnight ago started a thread lamenting a lack of personal responsibility in the younger generation

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=100857&highlight=personal+responsibility

[short-circuit]

Manslaughter rather than murder. This has got to be the ultimate in denial of self responsibility.

Ya see Frosty - that's what I was thinking

[FROSTY]

Ya see Frosty - that's what I was thinking
Nope just that everyone has a breaking point. I found mine that day.

[YellowDog]

An interesting one JD.

Every human being can be driven in to a state of violence.

Some of us need more goading and driving than others.

It wasn't exactly a 'whoopsie' I seem to have accidentally stabbed you in a sudden fit of range whilst the red most was still clearing. This guy lost it big time and mutilated the victim.

This guy seems to be taking himself seriously, but I really don't think he has a case at all.

[oldguy]

What the F**K is wrong with the NZ male, women getting murdered, also that kiwi guy in the US and his wife, what a waste and so very pretty too.

[Katman]

and so very pretty too.

Um, I'd have left that bit out.

I don't think there'd be any more of an excuse just 'cos they're fugly.

(But I'm sure that's not what you meant).

[Mikkel]

What the hell could the girl say to him to make him stab her more than 200 times?

It would most likely have less to do with what is being said and more to do with failing to shut up when told to.


Stabbed over 200 times.

Is there that much space on a human body?

As they say, it's not the size - it's how you use it that matters.

That said, I can't see how it wouldn't start getting repetitive after a while. Maybe he never read about Pat Bateman - if he had he should have been more creative...


I don't think there'd be any more of an excuse just 'cos they're fugly.

It's statistically proven that men generally will put up with more shit from a stunning looking woman than a fugly minger. So actually, yes it is more of an excuse...


All the disrespectful piss-taking aside - this is a truly horrendous occurrance. Sick puppy indeed. No amount of emotional pain will ever justify any violent response. I doubt the trial will take long - and I have a feeling they aren't going to announce a parole date too.

[CookMySock]

It shouldn't take more than 180 stabs to regain control of your emotions in a situation like this. Guilty.The "stab" is not a useful technique for regaining control of ones' emotional state anyway. ;)

Steve

[discotex]

Psychopath.

If he'd killed her and ran once he snapped back to reality you could almost buy the story.

The fact that he stayed there cool as ice suggests he thought he was in the right.

I'd say it's highly likely he'll kill again.

[fire eyes]

Makes for interesting reading ..

[alanzs]

Murder is murder. Oldest play in the lawyers book; blame it all on the DEAD victim. "She had it coming..."

Fuck him, too bad the death penalty isn't applicable here.

[Genestho]

Murder is murder. Oldest play in the lawyers book; blame it all on the DEAD victim. "She had it coming..."

Fuck him, too bad the death penalty isn't applicable here.

Didn't they try that on with Colleen Burroughs, the young girl who was run over a few times, by some MM members after propostioning her for sex, and she refused.

Her character was torn to pieces. Never mind that her body was already. Terrible.

[puddytat]

Man,.. the planets full & this fucker doesnt deserve the space he takes up, off with his head!!
You cant rationalise his behaviour, why bother?. Anyway you look at it he was so way out of line that he fell off the edge.
He will now cost us millions.....
Fucker.

[dave_a]

This shit makes me fucking sick, I hope he gets arse rapped and beaten daily in prison

[short-circuit]

I hope he gets arse rapped and beaten daily in prison

What do you suggest his arse should be "rapped" with?

[Ragingrob]

What do you suggest his arse should be "rapped" with?

Eminem :headbang:

[dave_a]

What do you suggest his arse should be "rapped" with?

big throbbing schlong

[scumdog]

Eminem :headbang:

Is that a sort of enema???:dodge:

[Ragingrob]

Is that a sort of enema???:dodge:

Na they're little candy covered chocolates :drool:

[sinfull]

erectile disfunction = Claytons sex

[Dirty_Harri]

This shit makes me fucking sick, I hope he gets arse raped and beaten daily in prison

I could not have said it better Dave.

Don't worry, this sick f*ck will get his.

[Clockwork]

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.


Appologies if I'm mistaken but weren't you on the "Hang 'im by the balls" side of the argument when TV got into similar bother last year?

[Headbanger]

He was caught in the act, he has admitted causing her death, Why the hell is there a defence?

They should send everyone home, allocate 4 minutes to decide how soon they can execute him, and then bury a bullet in his skull.

Could have it all sorted for a couple of hundred bucks.

[ynot slow]

He was caught in the act, he has admitted causing her death, Why the hell is there a defence?

They should send everyone home, allocate 4 minutes to decide how soon they can execute him, and then bury a bullet in his skull.

Could have it all sorted for a couple of hundred bucks.

The tosser admits to manslaughter due to lighter sentance,but prosecution want murder.

To say he had impotence problems with her what a poofter,he'll have fun in jail,as getting it up will be least of his worries,good riddence.

[Patrick]

The tosser admits to manslaughter due to lighter sentance,but prosecution want murder.

To say he had impotence problems with her what a poofter,he'll have fun in jail,as getting it up will be least of his worries,good riddence.

Still life for Mans laughter.....

He will make perfect jail bait... he can't get hard so he won't be accused of being a poof while being arse fucked by Bubba then...??? :blink:

[R6_kid]

He will make perfect jail bait... he can't get hard so he won't be accused of being a poof while being arse fucked by Bubba then...??? :blink:

What does getting hard have to do with having pretty lips?

[Tink]

This thread makes me sick! wtf entertainment over!!!:done:

[Dirty_Harri]

This thread makes me sick! wtf entertainment over!!!:done:

Good call.

[Winston001]

Any female that inflicted the level of alleged :puke: violence on a guy, that this poor girl sustained, would be in for exactly the same comments as I am making now. This was not loss of control, resulting in a death. This was a systematic re-killing of a person.

The difference here is he is not using the alleged loss of control leading him to snap as a defense, he has pled guilty to a charge he is not facing. Judith Kerr is one very smart lady.

Maybe.

Be cautious of people who take on high-profile cases and run headline grabbing defences. My observation is they are mostly interested in their own ego and the publicity.

I can't see manslaughter succeeding here. The only argument is he says she attacked him first - yeah right! :angry:

[Marmoot]

I reckon he should claim self defence!

Temporary insanity is a better defense.

[tychver]

Maybe.

Be cautious of people who take on high-profile cases and run headline grabbing defences. My observation is they are mostly interested in their own ego and the publicity.

I can't see manslaughter succeeding here. The only argument is he says she attacked him first - yeah right! :angry:

There's a legal precedent in NZ for manslaughter if the killer was severley provoked, we glossed over it in LAWS101. But I think any evidence of premeditation, such as bringing the knife, would make it unavailible. Any judge who entertains this in regard to Weatherson should be shot. Accidentally killing the guy who was screwing your wife when you came home is a lot different to planning to stab your ex.

I don't like Judith Ablott Kerr much at all. She ran as a local MP for National, against convention of lawyers being uninvolved in govenment). Clearly all she's interested in is her self.

[Winston001]

There's a legal precedent in NZ for manslaughter if the killer was severley provoked, we glossed over it in LAWS101. But I think any evidence of premeditation, such as bringing the knife, would make it unavailible. Any judge who entertains this in regard to Weatherson should be shot. Accidentally killing the guy who was screwing your wife when you came home is a lot different to planning to stab your ex.

I don't like Judith Ablett-Kerr much at all. She ran as a local MP for National, against convention of lawyers being uninvolved in govenment). Clearly all she's interested in is her self.

Agreed. Manslaughter can be viewed as acting in a careless/dangerous/negligent manner so as to cause death. Which is why some fatal accidents are escalated to manslaughter charges.

Essentially Ablett-Kerr seems to be running provocation and/or self defence but since the guy brought a knife with him, that's a real stretch.

As for her.....I couldn't possibly comment....:devil2:

[alanzs]

The sheer brutality of the murder should demand the harshest punishment available for this weak assed fucking murderer! Blaming the victim is beyond comprehension. FUCK HIM!!!!

[Badjelly]

The Law Commission has recommended abolishing the defence of provocation


http://www.nzlawyermagazine.co.nz/Archives/Issue77/N3/tabid/620/Default.aspx

Having served on a jury in a murder trial, I heartily agree.

[Winston001]

The Law Commission has recommended abolishing the defence of provocation


http://www.nzlawyermagazine.co.nz/Archives/Issue77/N3/tabid/620/Default.aspx

Having served on a jury in a murder trial, I heartily agree.

But...but..what about battered women's syndrome?? That's essentially provocation. What happens to that??

[alanzs]

The Law Commission has recommended abolishing the defence of provocation


http://www.nzlawyermagazine.co.nz/Archives/Issue77/N3/tabid/620/Default.aspx

Having served on a jury in a murder trial, I heartily agree.

That provocation is a defence makes a sham of the justice system.

[Badjelly]

But...but..what about battered women's syndrome?? That's essentially provocation. What happens to that??

There's some discussion of that in the article I linked to.

The defence of provocation tends to be used by the batterers more than the batterees.

[Badjelly]

That provocation is a defence makes a sham of the justice system.

I wouldn't go that far. Provocation is only a partial defence. A person who carries out a homicide under serious provocation is still guilty of a serious crime (manslaughter).

[PrincessBandit]

I wouldn't go that far. Provocation is only a partial defence. A person who carries out a homicide under serious provocation is still guilty of a serious crime (manslaughter).

Which is probably why the wily young man is angling for manslaughter. I was under the impression that manslaughter was essentially for something that resulted in death where there was no actual intention of that outcome. e.g. punching someone, knocking them to the ground, they hit their head and die as a result of the injury. In no way shape of form could this man remotely think that the continued injuries he was inflicting would result in anything other than the death of this woman.

[98tls]

This thread mirrors the problem of our society really,the facts are there for all to see but still theres a trial or as here a debate,this guy has no further reason to breathe and is no longer of any use to our society,just like a stray dog his misery could be ended painlessly and quietly with no fuss.My thoughts go to his victims family.

[Cheshire Cat]

:whocares:

[Tink]

This thread mirrors the problem of our society really,the facts are there for all to see but still theres a trial or as here a debate,this guy has no further reason to breathe and is no longer of any use to our society,just like a stray dog his misery could be ended painlessly and quietly with no fuss.My thoughts go to his victims family.

So the entertainment of news of this disgusting low life is over... I agree he has no further reason to breathe... and thoughts completely to the family.

[Badjelly]

...I was under the impression that manslaughter was essentially for something that resulted in death where there was no actual intention of that outcome. e.g. punching someone, knocking them to the ground, they hit their head and die as a result of the injury....

Caveat: I am not a lawyer

Both murder and manslaughter are forms of culpable homicide. You are guilty of culpable homicide if you have killed someone and either intended to cause death or intended to cause serious harm and were reckless as to the possibility of death resulting from your actions. (I'm not sure if that's exactly right, but it's close enough.) So the situation you describe might well be murder.

There are various defences against the charge of murder. Self defence is a complete defence: if you kill someone, but were justified by an pressing need to defend yourself (or maybe someone else) then you may be found not guilty of murder or manslaughter. Provocation is a partial defence: it reduces murder to manslaughter. To claim provocation there are various tests: there must have been a provocative act (but maybe just some harsh words) and it must have caused the offender to lose self control (whatever that means), but furthermore it must have been sufficient to cause a person with ordinary powers of self control to lose self control. To reject a defence of provocation, the jury must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the provocation did not meet these criteria.

So you're on a jury, you know the killing has been preceded by an argument in which harsh words might well have been said. You have to decide whether these harsh words did cause a loss of self control and been sufficient ... etc. Can "You shot me, you bastard!" be claimed as provocation for a second, fatal shot? Not easy.

[oldrider]

Can't find the previous thread about this trial!

That jury should have been back almost instantaneously. "Guilty of murder"

The way the Judge lead the jury before retiring sounds to me like the low life bastard is going to get off with manslaughter!

Where do we get these soppy bloody judges from?

I have no trust in the jury system and now I have even less faith in our Judges! :nono:

[98tls]

Bit like the 12th time drunk 16th time disqualified driver on tv tonight,he gets 9 months.....wow what a hardship.

[ynot slow]

Yep he wanted to plead guilty to Manslaghter,prosecution should have said ok,but chuck him away for maximum non parole,insstead a trial at expense and a judge telling the jury he should be not guilty of murder,but manslaughter.Sometimes you gotta wonder.

[The Duck 01]

Can't find the previous thread about this trial!

That jury should have been back almost instantaneously. "Guilty of murder"



Plus 1

And whats more we have had to watch it on the news every night.

Haven't the main stream media got better things to report on than a GUILTY BUGGER that is sick as to believe he did it in self defence.

Why waste good money with a trial.

The state could pay to put corners back on NZ roads. They have buggered that to in the name of Safety.

Rant Over

[Pussy]

I reckon he has tried to play the "Antonie Dixon" card.
Guilty as sin of murder IMHO

[Indiana_Jones]

His dad did it when he was having a shower.

Honest.

Joe believes him.

-Indy

[riffer]

I reckon he has tried to play the "Antonie Dixon" card.
Guilty as sin of murder IMHO

well with luck he'll meet the same fate.

[boostin]

Can't find the previous thread about this trial!

That jury should have been back almost instantaneously. "Guilty of murder"

The way the Judge lead the jury before retiring sounds to me like the low life bastard is going to get off with manslaughter!

Where do we get these soppy bloody judges from?

I have no trust in the jury system and now I have even less faith in our Judges! :nono:

What exactly did the judge do that was so bad? I have only read on Stuff.co.nz and that just says she said something along the lines of "You must reach your decision uninfluenced by prejudice or sympathy,"


Yep he wanted to plead guilty to Manslaghter,prosecution should have said ok,but chuck him away for maximum non parole,insstead a trial at expense and a judge telling the jury he should be not guilty of murder,but manslaughter.Sometimes you gotta wonder.

The judge told the jury that he should not be guilty of murder? Really?

[short-circuit]

well with luck he'll meet the same fate.

Nah he'll get what he gave - stabbed 200 times (up the arse with multiple phalluses)

[Mikkel]

They should reintroduce public hangings...

Just look at the entertainment value - not to mention the potential profit from the pop-corn and beer sales.

:sigh:

[Skyryder]

Can't find the previous thread about this trial!

That jury should have been back almost instantaneously. "Guilty of murder"

The way the Judge lead the jury before retiring sounds to me like the low life bastard is going to get off with manslaughter!

Where do we get these soppy bloody judges from?

I have no trust in the jury system and now I have even less faith in our Judges! :nono:


The Judge has to give the jury clear instructions as to what constitutes the difference between manslaughter and murder. Any bias or clear misinformation on legal matters and the defence may have grounds for appeal.

He'll go down for murder. Two hundred plus along with the mutilation has sealed his fate.


Skyryder

[Maha]

They should reintroduce public hangings...

Just look at the entertainment value - not to mention the potential profit from the pop-corn and beer sales.

:sigh:

Hell yeah, live on TV too, so we can all take the time to watch.

[James Deuce]

If he gets done for murder, there won't be a story in it, no diverting entertainment, no morning tea rants, no millions of words on Internet forums and the Sensible Sentencing Trust will be left without a platform.

[YellowDog]

Agreed. Yes the way I heard it was that the judge was only explaining the difference to them.

I would be extremelty surprised if the jury find that all 216 stab wounds were the result of provocation.

It is unfair for us to judge him when he do not know the full story.

BUT what a complete fucking nutter. He is not saying he didn't do it, he is just saying that he was driven to doing it. What I don't understand is how he forgot to mark himself with stab wounds and then plant the scizzors in her by now cold hand.

[scumdog]

Bit like the 12th time drunk 16th time disqualified driver on tv tonight,he gets 9 months.....wow what a hardship.

Wow, that realy sends out a strong message:rolleyes:

Good old NZ 'justice'.

Most judges find doling out meaningful punishments abhorent for some obscure reason.

[98tls]

Wow, that realy sends out a strong message:rolleyes:

Good old NZ 'justice'.

Most judges find doling out meaningful punishments abhorent for some obscure reason. But hey no doubt he will get a long stretch when he/lets face it he probably will kills someone,talk about ambo at the bottom of the cliff.

[Laava]

I reckon he has tried to play the "Antonie Dixon" card.
Guilty as sin of murder IMHO

Let's hope he plays the rest of the hand!

[buffstar]

Go directly to jail - do not pass go - do not collect $200

Give the man a bright red VICTIM tee shirt......"Mwaaaaah she was mean to me, she hurt me on the inside where i am pink and soft and vulnerable, Boo Hoo. Woe is me" - I also am hopefull that he gets arse reamed in jail and finds out what real pain to his pink bits are.

He was a fair few years older (obviously not wiser) than his gf/murder victim, infact he was a lecturer at the same place she was a student - hmmmm is it only me that sees that? Hey, Im not saying that she wasnt a bitch to him....but the ends really dont justify the means here, absolutely disgusting abhorrant behaviour, not to mention bad form to stab another human being and mutilate them. Obviously premeditated and totally brutal.

to quote a fav song "we dont need no water let the motherfucker burn....burn motherfucker burn"

ya'll have a nice day now

[Winston001]

Yep he wanted to plead guilty to Manslaghter, prosecution should have said ok......

Really? Imagine this was your sister/daughter and the prosecutor said - "look, we'll just go with manslaughter, its easier......"

[hospitalfood]

I think he should be done for murder.

I think he thought she did need a good stabbing, and 217 is a good stabbing.

I would rather see him man up in court.

[Badjelly]

...but the ends really dont justify the means here, absolutely disgusting abhorrant behaviour, ...

Of course it's digusting. (BTW, is there some competition for saying how disgusting this, that or the other crime is? There seem to be a lot of entrants.) But provocation isn't about ends justifying means, about rational calculation, it's about the opposite: the words in the law are "loss of self control".

Therein lies a problem: there are many, many drama queens and kings who use their propensity to "lose it" as a threat and a weapon. Why on Earth should the law consider this a defence? "I couldn't help it because I'm a narcissist who doesn't give a damn about anyone but me and she upset me." Please!

Anyway, let's not complain about the verdict until it's in. I'll be very surprised if it's manslaughter. And, oldrider, please don't criticise the jury for not being back in 5 minutes. They have a duty to make a judgement about a very difficult area of law. They have a duty to do this very carefully. They can take as long or as short a time as they like, as far as I'm concerned.

[Goblin]

Wow, that realy sends out a strong message:rolleyes:

Good old NZ 'justice'.

Most judges find doling out meaningful punishments abhorent for some obscure reason.Maybe that's because they're all ex-lawyers who have lived in the lap of luxury for so many years they have lost sight of reality. There is no justice in NZ. Just a court system to keep the lawyers and judges on their money-go-round. Ever noticed how many lawyers are overweight?

[Lissa]

Give the man a bright red VICTIM tee shirt......"Mwaaaaah she was mean to me, she hurt me on the inside where i am pink and soft and vulnerable, Boo Hoo. Woe is me" - I also am hopefull that he gets arse reamed in jail and finds out what real pain to his pink bits are.
I totally agree! Which makes me think he has some sort of mental problem, he obviously believes that he is the victim and that it is Sophies fault he is in the unfortunate predicament he is in at the moment. He wants us all to believe that Sophie was capable of murder herself. UNBELIVEABLE. He not only stabbed her over 200 times, he cut the tip of her nose and ears off with scissors, that's not self defense or provocation as far as I see it, that's madness.

[Winston001]

He not only stabbed her over 200 times, he cut the tip of her nose and ears off with scissors, that's not self defense or provocation as far as I see it, that's madness.

Aye and there's the rub. Essentially he's trying a temporary insanity defence but there is no psychiatric evidence of a psychotic episode. So he's trying to persuade the jury that because of his peculiar mental world, stabbing in an out-of-control frenzy was the way he'd react to being provoked.

Not the actions of a normal person, but the actions of a person with his personality disorders.

[MsKABC]

he obviously believes that he is the victim and that it is Sophies fault he is in the unfortunate predicament he is in at the moment. He wants us all to believe that Sophie was capable of murder herself.

That is a typical narcissist for you. Projecting all their bad behaviour onto others and not taking responsibility. They are emotional vampires and impossible to live with. They all end up miserable and alone in the end though, or in his case, prison. Hope he rots.

[imdying]

he cut the tip of her nose and ears off with scissors, that's not self defense or provocation as far as I see it, that's madness.No, that's the cold calculated actions of man who had already planned this defense well in advance. He's a murderer, of the worse kind.

Whilst I have no particular love for the justice system as it stands, I think they're doing what they can to deal with this guy within the boundaries as they are. I do wonder if perhaps an overhaul is needed though; I mean, this guy is clearly a piece of shit and there are no reasons why he should live, but we have no provision for exterminating people like this yet.

Thousands of poor people will die today, and we're spending a few hundred thousand dollars deciding what to do with this piece of filth who has already admittedly savagely killing a fellow New Zealander? That's logical how again? :confused:

[bungbung]

Guilty!

As you'd hope

[Badjelly]

Aye and there's the rub. Essentially he's trying a temporary insanity defence but there is no psychiatric evidence of a psychotic episode. So he's trying to persuade the jury that because of his peculiar mental world, stabbing in an out-of-control frenzy was the way he'd react to being provoked...

Exactly.

As I recall it, the defence of provocation requires that there was a loss of self-control (stabbing someone 200-odd times might be considered evidence of that) and that it was brought on by acts or words of the victim that were sufficient to cause a loss of self-control in a person with ordinary powers of self-control but otherwise with the characteristics of the victim. It's a tricky defence for the jury to consider and also quite a tricky one for the defence to put forward, because they have to get across the idea that the accused lost control, that the provocation was substantial (at least in terms of the accused person's outlook on life and particular sensitivities) but not that the accused lost control too easily.

(As I've said before, I think they should get rid of the defence of provocation.)

[Badjelly]

Guilty!

Thanks for that. :apint:

[Morcs]

Im sure if Kiwi women didnt think and act like they are equal to men, none of them would get the bash. owwww.

[James Deuce]

Guilty. Happy now?

[MSTRS]

An hour of deliberation per week of trial. And the jury never got dinner or lunch. At least they got the verdict right.

[Goblin]

Guilty. Happy now?
No. He has to be sentenced yet. What's the bet he gets less than 20 years? He will be looked after, a nice cell with underfloor heating, TV, 3 meals a day at the taxpayers expence. Not what he deserves.

[Indiana_Jones]

.... that's madness.

Madness?


<img src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_c6eej13Ry_A/RhT0xuNwBGI/AAAAAAAAATs/ME7SM6cKDoM/s400/300+kick.jpg">

THIS IS SPARTA!

-Indy

[Headbanger]

Right, Now shoot the fuck.

[Forest]

Guilty!

As you'd hope

Glad to hear it!

[Crasherfromwayback]

That could happen to the guy could ever be bad enough. Not even making him a ginga. Oh...hang on...

[Laava]

Waiting to be sentenced? What's the worst that could happen?

[firefighter]

Right, Now shoot the fuck.

In the face...

[Naki Rat]

Maybe D-Block at Pare' will sort him out :buggerd:

[PrincessBandit]

I see there is now calls for a review of using provocation as a defense. About time. Surely in this "civilised" day and age people can learn other ways of coping with real or perceived acts of provocation without resorting to killing them.

[Naki Rat]

I see there is now calls for a review of using provocation as a defense. About time. Surely in this "civilised" day and age people can learn other ways of coping with real or perceived acts of provocation without resorting to killing them.

Self responsibility ?? It'll never catch on :scratch:

[peasea]

Right, Now shoot the fuck.

That'd save us a few bucks wouldn't it? Unlikely to ever happen though.

We could base his sentence on what someone might get for stabbing someone once; GBH with a weapon might get you what? 3-5?

Times that two hundred-odd for all Elliot's stab wounds.
Six hundred to a thousand years?
Yup, seems fair to me.

White Island would be just the place too.

[ManDownUnder]

That'd save us a few bucks wouldn't it?

True - Arthur Allen Thomas wouldn't have wasted our money on Prison - or gotten that huge payout!

[PrincessBandit]

True - Arthur Allen Thomas wouldn't have wasted our money on Prison - or gotten that huge payout!

Mmmm, but are you really comparing the two cases that seriously? AAT had plenty of grounds for "beyond reasonable doubt"; Weatherston seems to lack this.

[ManDownUnder]

Mmmm, but are you really comparing the two cases that seriously? AAT had plenty of grounds for "beyond reasonable doubt"; Weatherston seems to lack this.

Fair question - and no - I'm not comparing cases, simply recognising we have the same judicial and trial system in place and while good - it's not perfect.

Inherant in that statement is the firm belief of one law for all. No exceptions, even extreme ones.

[Badjelly]

Mmmm, but are you really comparing the two cases that seriously? AAT had plenty of grounds for "beyond reasonable doubt"; Weatherston seems to lack this.

But if "shoot the fuck" had been the law when AAT was sentenced, he would never have got the benefit of any doubt.

All convictions are supposed to be proven beyond reasonable doubt, but, in hindsight, some of them clearly aren't.

[peasea]

True - Arthur Allen Thomas wouldn't have wasted our money on Prison - or gotten that huge payout!

I don't recall there being any witnesses to AAT's alleged actions. Sophie's mum was there, however, and Withered-dick has confessed.

[peasea]

But if "shoot the fuck" had been the law when AAT was sentenced, he would never have got the benefit of any doubt.

All convictions are supposed to be proven beyond reasonable doubt, but, in hindsight, some of them clearly aren't.

While some of them simply suffer from ineptitude or evidence planting/tampering.

[Badjelly]

This just caught my eye:


The Guilt of Clayton Weatherston (http://publicaddress.net/6064#post6064) | Jul 22, 2009 11:24

It was not surprising to learn from a One News poll that Clayton Weatherston has, in record time, become the most reviled man in New Zealand.

It was a little more surprising (albeit for only a moment) to hear he has asked Guinness World Records to note the accomplishment.

[vifferman]

A coupla things:
Regardless of whatever the jury decided, he's unlikely to go and kill another girlfriend.
Regardless of what the sentence is, he doesn't seem to have any guilt about what he's done, or to have even accepted responsibility. So... apart from keeping him off the streets (at great expense), what's the point? It's going to be neither appropriately punitive, nor effectively rehabilitative. He's taken away someone's life (70 years?) and will stay in Her Majesty's Hotel for maybe 12, with good behaviour? Does that measure up well? (oh right - I keep forgetting we have a legal system, so the scales of justice can't be expected to even approximate a level plane).

I suppose it's reasonable telly, although the pacing was a little slow, and there has not yet been any poetic justice or whatever to make for a satisfactory ending. Perhaps some scissors (216 pairs?) could be smuggled into whichever hotel he ends up in?

[MisterD]

Given his defence was that he's got a personality disorder that caused him to flip out under provocation (that would barely make the rest of us post nasty stuff on Facebook) and stab and deliberately mutilate Sophie, I'd say he was a stright up candidate for preventative detention...or am I missing something about the requirements for PD?

[Finn]

It was a little more surprising (albeit for only a moment) to hear he has asked Guinness World Records to note the accomplishment.[/INDENT]

I hope you realise that was a joke.

[Headbanger]

True - Arthur Allen Thomas wouldn't have wasted our money on Prison - or gotten that huge payout!

Great point.

Shooting them is clearly the way to go. That will stop the years of bitching about being locked up, and nag nag nag nag about not being guilty.And end all payouts.

Hell, I'm trying, But I cannot see a single negative to this course of action.So simple yet so effective.

[ManDownUnder]

Great point.

Shooting them is clearly the way to go. That will stop the years of bitching about being locked up, and nag nag nag nag about not being guilty.And end all payouts.

Hell, I'm trying, But I cannot see a single negative to this course of action.So simple yet so effective.

Innocent men... dead.... after due process was done... and no negatives?

[imdying]

Innocent men... dead.... after due process was done... and no negatives?You know that he has admitted killing her, right?

[crazyhorse]

He was a fuckwit - glad with the result :clap:

[Headbanger]

Innocent men... dead.... after due process was done... and no negatives?

Only in that the defence lawyers aren't also shot when losing a case.

I also think they should consider shooting the prosecution and the police involded if an innocent person is convicted. But seeing as we can't bring the dead back to life, I say too fucking bad, Harden up.

And don't get me started on piss weak judges and that stupid bitch who wants to see an amnesty for prisoners.

chk chk boom.

[Shaun S]

he's unlikely to go and kill another girlfriend.
And you know this how?

He has justified what he has done in his own mind - and "it's ok, he had a reason to do what he did" in other words it's ok to take another persons life if the reasoning behind it is there. What guarantee do you have he wont come to that conclusion again?

I do agree with you re the 12 odd years in jail though – and that is why I also agree that someone who has admitted to committing such a violent crime should hang, be shot, be fried. Take your pick.

[ManDownUnder]

You know that he has admitted killing her, right?

Yup - was referring to my earlier post in respect of Arthur Allen Thomas.


Only in that the defence lawyers aren't also shot when losing a case.

I also think they should consider shooting the prosecution and the police involded if an innocent person is convicted. But seeing as we can't bring the dead back to life, I say too fucking bad, Harden up.

And don't get me started on piss weak judges and that stupid bitch who wants to see an amnesty for prisoners.

chk chk boom.

Troll - find thy bridge and be gone

[davebullet]

A coupla things:
Regardless of whatever the jury decided, he's unlikely to go and kill another girlfriend.
Regardless of what the sentence is, he doesn't seem to have any guilt about what he's done, or to have even accepted responsibility.

I think someone that snaps like that and stabs someone 200 something times could do this again. I don't think 200 times was a conscious count. Sounds like his mind went apeshit and turned into a killing machine. IF he can't remember the incident and doesn't avoid situations that trigger that reaction in the future, he could do so again.

I agree with you that prison time doesn't do justice to the life he has taken. I really feel sad for that young woman and her family and the devastation he's caused.

If there is some other form of justice, he will be a target in prison. He'll either become someone's bitch, be made to do disgusting things or come to some grief (loss of limb, bodily function or possibly life).

[Headbanger]

Troll - find thy bridge and be gone

Yeah, That will work.

Muhahahahaha

chk chk boom.

Lets not be silly and try and align my comment of shooting this fucker in anyway to the case you mentioned. They are so far apart you do yourself a disservice by trying to force a comparison, The fucker was seen to stab her to death, and never denied doing so.

[gwigs]

I,d like to get 6 members of the victims family and issue them with a baseball bat and pair of Doc Martens each.......lock the smug F***k in a room with them for 20 mins...... if hes still alive after that then jail him for life..

[YellowDog]

Did anyone at all actually believe this guy had any kind of case?

Even his legal represenation did not appear as being convinced or convincing.

[imdying]

Yup - was referring to my earlier post in respect of Arthur Allen Thomas.Mmmm, I realise that... what I can't figure out is why you would bring up his case when it bears absolutely no relation to this one? The suggestion was that in that case it would be appropriate to put a bullet in self confessed murderer, not to put a bullet in every convicted person.

[Genestho]

If he gets done for murder, there won't be a story in it, no diverting entertainment, no morning tea rants, no millions of words on Internet forums and the Sensible Sentencing Trust will be left without a platform.
Don't worry JD, SST already have 100 or so victims and families of violent crimes and murders that are together by choice, with which to change victims rights for the future, thanks.

Gosh hope you're never a victim of a violent act dude!

[Scouse]

No. He has to be sentenced yet. What's the bet he gets less than 20 years? He will be looked after, a nice cell with underfloor heating, TV, 3 meals a day at the taxpayers expence. Not what he deserves.At least this jury wasn't as gullible as bains Jury.

[James Deuce]

Don't worry JD, SST already have 100 or so victims and families of violent crimes and murders that are together by choice, with which to change victims rights for the future.

Gosh hope you're never a victim of a violent act dude!


Errr, I think you've read that a little wrong? Perhaps?

At the end of the day I don't think anyone gives a rat's banana for Sophie Elliot, just like I don't think anyone gives a rat's banana about whether or not I've faced a violent act or not. I have, more than once, however I don't categorise myself a "victim" nor would I be looking for help from Garth McVicar and cronies.

The Middle Ages have ended and the mono-browed retribution freaks need to get over it. The Spanish Inquisition is no longer recruiting.

[ManDownUnder]

Mmmm, I realise that... what I can't figure out is why you would bring up his case when it bears absolutely no relation to this one?

No worries - I'm not sure if you saw this.


Fair question - and no - I'm not comparing cases, simply recognising we have the same judicial and trial system in place and while good - it's not perfect.

Inherant in that statement is the firm belief of one law for all. No exceptions, even extreme ones.


The suggestion was that in that case it would be appropriate to put a bullet in self confessed murderer, not to put a bullet in every convicted person.

Because there are occasions that won't work either... but that's a whole other argument, separate thread etc

[Headbanger]

At the end of the day I don't think anyone gives a rat's banana for Sophie Elliot, just like I don't think anyone gives a rat's banana about whether or not I've faced a violent act or not.



Well, I give a fuck about people getting murdered, and being the target of violent acts.

Jaded much?

[Finn]

If there is some other form of justice, he will be a target in prison. He'll either become someone's bitch, be made to do disgusting things or come to some grief (loss of limb, bodily function or possibly life).

I reckon he will top himself before Christmas. Remember this post...

[RC1]

I reckon he will top himself before Christmas. Remember this post...

dont know about topped but beaten and raped most probably :nono:

[Edbear]

I reckon he will top himself before Christmas. Remember this post...

Possibly. He's unstable mentally and thinks he's done nothing wrong. He reminds my family of another person of similar nature in his speeches to the court. This other person wouldn't top himself though. So it will be interesting to see how long he survives and whether, and how, he meets his end.

[ready4whatever]

they should just execute him

[vifferman]

Did anyone at all actually believe this guy had any kind of case?
He did, I think.
It seemed to consist of "she pissed me off greatly, and was a horrible slutty person, which I then went to remonstrate with her about. She then (allegedly) attacked me with scissors, so I was just defending myself. It's her that's at fault."



At the end of the day I don't think anyone gives a rat's banana for Sophie Elliot.
Yeah, I do.
She looked OK, and I think it is sad she is dead.
OTOH, Yuman Beenz have a 100% mortality rate. You have to go sometime.
I guess that most of us would prefer it to not be suffering death by mutilation.

[James Deuce]

Well, I give a fuck about people getting murdered, and being the target of violent acts.

Jaded much?

My personal experience would lead me to believe that it is the rare individual that will purposefully and meaningfully help people in need. Standing around (literally and figuratively) ranting abut "victims rights" and "sensible sentencing" is not particularly helpful.

Most people who have unfairly been the "victim" of an injustice that affects their quality of life, or out and out violent crime quickly realise the futility of bearing the perpetrator any ill-will. You have to get on with your life. Defining your life by bad stuff can only have one ending. Have a look at TGW. She's trying to make a difference for everyone, not focussing on punishing a drunken murderer.

[Headbanger]

My personal experience would lead me to believe that it is the rare individual that will purposefully and meaningfully help people in need. Standing around (literally and figuratively) ranting abut "victims rights" and "sensible sentencing" is not particularly helpful.

Most people who have unfairly been the "victim" of an injustice that affects their quality of life, or out and out violent crime quickly realise the futility of bearing the perpetrator any ill-will. You have to get on with your life. Defining your life by bad stuff can only have one ending. Have a look at TGW. She's trying to make a difference for everyone, not focussing on punishing a drunken murderer.

Yeah, I think your pin-holing people, But never mind.

You can take any stance you like without it dictating and ruining your life. Having been at the receiving end of extreme violence myself, Do I spend my life being torn up about it?, No, not once I got over the hump.

Would I give my approval to have the person hung? Yep, Hang em high.

[Cheshire Cat]

Patrick Bateman anyone?

[James Deuce]

Umm, you're really struggling to understand me aren't you. In neither example you quoted did I say what you thought I did.

Neither did I say I didn't care.

I was supporting your stance, not putting words in your mouth. You've reacted quite oddly.

[jrandom]

Patrick Bateman anyone?

Remind me to show you my business card sometime.


The Middle Ages have ended and the mono-browed retribution freaks need to get over it.

Best sentence posted in this thread so far. Including any of my own.


You've reacted quite oddly.

It's rational discussion, Jim, but not as we know it.

[Mully]

The Spanish Inquisition is no longer recruiting.

I wasn't expecting that.

[Cheshire Cat]

Umm, you're really struggling to understand me aren't you. In neither example you quoted did I say what you thought I did.

Neither did I say I didn't care.

I was supporting your stance, not putting words in your mouth. You've reacted quite oddly.

:argue::argue:


the best thing to do about him?

OFF WITH HIS HEAD!!!

[Winston001]

I wasn't expecting that.

Noone expects the Spanish Inquisition!! :devil2:

Our chief weapon is making you listen to Judith Ablett-Kerr for 13 days without rest.

[Winston001]

I see there is now calls for a review of using provocation as a defense. About time. Surely in this "civilised" day and age people can learn other ways of coping with real or perceived acts of provocation without resorting to killing them.

Its been raised by the Law Commission for 10 years, ever since the "battered woman" defence was invented. By Judith Ablett Kerr by coincidence. Provocation should be a sentencing matter, not an excuse.


I'd say he was a straight up candidate for preventative detention...or am I missing something about the requirements for PD?

Murder = Life imprisonment. Parole can be granted from about 10 years in, so the question will be what sort of non-parole period will be imposed. Maybe 14 years, 20 years tops, but there are worse murders.

Preventive Detention requires previous convictions of a serious nature. Unavailable here.

[peasea]

I wasn't expecting that.


No one expects that.

[peasea]

Noone expects the Spanish Inquisition!! :devil2:

Our chief weapon is making you listen to Judith Ablett-Kerr for 13 days without rest.

Bugger, you beat me to it. I'm not feeling well though. (Especially after that lot.....)

[Skyryder]

I reckon he will top himself before Christmas. Remember this post...

I reckon someone else will.

Remember this post.


Skyryder

[buffstar]

If you have a 'bad dog' that attacks ppl - you put it down (or the lawmakers do) - a dog is generally pretty stupid: they act on instinct, dont consider consequences etc etc.............IMO thats a good call - put the fucker to sleep. Yes?
WHY dont we apply the same rules to ppl? not all ppl that have been accused of murder - and to whom some doubt still remains - but the ones to whom there is no defence, like this guy, like the fuckwitts who killed Nia Glassie.

I dont pretend to be hugely clever so cant give a heap more examples (short/long term memory are pretty crap too which dosnt help) and Im sure that there will be ppl who dont agree with my opinion, which if Im honest is coming directly from my own emotional reaction to this sort of thing......

I just find it really fucked up and sick that this arseclown is getting so much coverage in the media and in forums like this. I find it really sad that his propoganda and ravings about Sophie are being aired to the country - Her poor fkn family have surely been through enough hell????? and we all have an opinion.......

I reckon kill him and others like him

[Virago]

Did anyone at all actually believe this guy had any kind of case?

Even his legal represenation did not appear as being convinced or convincing.

Agreed - and yet his defence counsel went through the motions of attacking the victim and her family.

I often wonder how well these lawyers sleep at night.

[vifferman]

Agreed - and yet his defence counsel went through the motions of attacking the victim and her family.

I often wonder how well these lawyers sleep at night.
It's a job. They are working on behalf of their client, to do their best to present the case that they have agreed with their client.

You're all forgetting: this has NOTHING to do with justice, and everything to do with our legal system and the process of the law. Plus they deal with so much crap, they must get inured to it after a while. Oh yeah - there's also the money.

[Goblin]

Agreed - and yet his defence counsel went through the motions of attacking the victim and her family.

I often wonder how well these lawyers sleep at night.I too often wonder how defence lawyers can live with themselves. Perhaps that's why most of them are so overweight...the only comfort they can find in life is food. Can you imagine successfully defending a murderer or paedophile?

[ready4whatever]

Do what they do in China. kill him and take his organs for people who deserve them. thats why china is ahead and wealthy, they dont spend millions on criminals like NZ does

[mister.koz]

"Emotional pain"? jeez thats as excusing as "i was on P"

Its a reason, not an excuse.

If ya can't handle your emotions and you allow yourself to get into a position to loose control then you are still guilty.

Admittedly "i did it because i lost control" is better than "i did it because i am pure evil".

How can someone honestly believe that putting themselves in a situation where they break the law excuses them from the repercussions?

What next? "no officer, i was speeding because i was annoyed at my boss, you can keep your ticket and here's a lawsuit for badgering me about it"

[vifferman]

Its a reason, not an excuse.
Are you sure you've got that the right way round? :confused:

The guts of the matter is, this will probably be changed. It should never have been part of the defence, and at most just considered as part of sentencing as a mitigating circumstance.

[mister.koz]

Are you sure you've got that the right way round? :confused:

The guts of the matter is, this will probably be changed. It should never have been part of the defence, and at most just considered as part of sentencing as a mitigating circumstance.

Good point... what i am trying to say is that it doesn't excuse his actions, he allowed himself to get into that position.

[slofox]

If I had killed everyone who has given me "emotional pain" the world would be half empty....hmmmm spose it would keep overpopulation in check at that...

[Mully]

Agreed - and yet his defence counsel went through the motions of attacking the victim and her family.

I often wonder how well these lawyers sleep at night.

I wonder what his lawyer was thinking, presumably having met the smug prick, letting him take the stand. That probably assisted in convicting him.

The first day was him gloating about how much smarter he was than the rest of the world. The balance of the week was the smart arse glibly defending his "superior" intellect and saying how, while he was much smarter than he was, she played him like a $5 ukelele, thereby forcing him to give her a good stabbing.

[vifferman]

When's the movie due out? :corn:

And the book of the film?



Actual, the whole story's kinda boring and sordid. In this case, given there was never any doubt that he was the culprit, a bullet would've been SO much cheaper and easier, albeit less entertaining for the rubberneckers (and less harrowing for the families). But perhaps "The Death of 216 Cuts" would've been more appropriate as a sentence/outcome/penalty.

[Badjelly]

Are you sure you've got that the right way round? :confused:

The guts of the matter is, this will probably be changed. It should never have been part of the defence, and at most just considered as part of sentencing as a mitigating circumstance.

That's the one good thing that is likely to come out of this trial: the proposal to remove the partial defence of provocation to the charge of murder has been revived.

People get provoked and commit crimes all the time. This is considered in sentencing. Only for murder does it change the name of the offence. I believe this is a hang-over from the days when there was a mandatory death sentence for murder.

That said, Clayton Weatherston is not the best advertisement (to put it mildly) for the defence of provocation. I think we can all think of situations where we might have more sympathy for the accused. "I found this guy torturing and raping my 5-year old daughter so I shot him." Hmmm?

[ManDownUnder]

I reckon someone else will.

+1, and I think it will come at the hands of someone who disagrees they're not as good as he is, doesn't like being looked down upon, and is will to prove just how tough he is.

What's that saying... something like "Many a nose has been broken by the owner's mouth"? I heard Billy Connelly say it once... very wise words.

[Badjelly]

+1, and I think it will come at the hands of someone who disagrees they're not as good as he is, doesn't like being looked down upon, and is will to prove just how tough he is.

Someone who's provoked by his attitude?

[ManDownUnder]

Lets not be silly and try and align my comment of shooting this fucker in anyway to the case you mentioned. They are so far apart you do yourself a disservice by trying to force a comparison, The fucker was seen to stab her to death, and never denied doing so.

Understood and agreed. My focus was on one law for all and I personally don't agree with the death penalty. That is just my opinion however and as I age I'm finding more room for the possibility of it.

I freely admit this appears to a pretty black and white case of "he dunnit". He admitted it, he was caught doing it... etc. I don't think more complete evidence would be needed... or even possible.

[imdying]

No worries - I'm not sure if you saw this.

Because there are occasions that won't work either... but that's a whole other argument, separate thread etcYup, fair enough too.

[imdying]

I reckon he will top himself before Christmas. Remember this post...That would be the ideal situation... :yes:

Metal box with two 3/16" holes, loaded pistol, weld up the door, drop it from a Herc, and never look back.

He can either top himself quickly, or enjoy the anticipation of a nice slow drowning. Either way, we'll never find out which one he opted for, not that we'd care in any case. :rockon:

[Laava]

Hope I don't get into trouble over this! Oh well how bad can it be? I am sure I can stab my way out of trouble!:bash:

[Winston001]

I too often wonder how defence lawyers can live with themselves. Perhaps that's why most of them are so overweight...the only comfort they can find in life is food. Can you imagine successfully defending a murderer or paedophile?

Understandable and the most common question asked of lawyers - how can you defend a guilty person??

The answer is that everyone is entitled to a fair defence. The only person standing between the State and an accused is their lawyer. The lawyers job is to test the prosecution case. To see if it stacks up.

For example right now, a child has admitted her allegation of being pimped by her father was a lie.

The other aspect is not to confuse the lawyer with the client. This is just one case, the lawyer will have a stack of others bubbling away in the background. So its important not to become emotionally involved in a case.

And finally - how many accused do you think ever say "I'm guilty" to their lawyer? They are always innocent. :yes:

[Winston001]

I think we can all think of situations where we might have more sympathy for the accused. "I found this guy torturing and raping my 5-year old daughter so I shot him." Hmmm?

Or someone burgling your farm at night......or your best mate in bed with your wife....?? Plenty of people on KB who think using a shottie in those circumstances is fair and reasonable.....:innocent:

[Goblin]

...And finally - how many accused do you think ever say "I'm guilty" to their lawyer? They are always innocent. :yes:Quite a few I would think. How many lawyers tell a client they should plea not guilty when they've already said they are? "Oh but we can possibly get you off if you plea not guilty or guilty to a lesser charge."

I still believe that we dont have a justice system here. Just a court system that makes it look like something is being done, only to appease the victims and keep the cash flowing for lawyers and judges.(no offence to you Winston) Then there's the pathetic sentencing we have ....but that's another thread.:rolleyes:

[Headbanger]

Quite a few I would think. How many lawyers tell a client they should plea not guilty when they've already said they are? "Oh but we can possibly get you off if you plea not guilty or guilty to a lesser charge."


yep.

My lawyer threw a 3 pronged sales pitch at me when I said lets just plead guilty and get the matter settled with one court date. He didn't shut up until I told him I was not going to pay to have him argue with me. Its all a scam to turn a $300 job into a $30000 job.

[eurodick]

Just shows that an education and or intelligence doesn't necessarily guarantee a balanced or full life??? I can see the new Tui Billboards... "she provoked me 216 times!!" or I stabbed her then she gurgled which she knew was a direct affront to my sensibilities so I stabbed her some more..."
I give him a month or two inside before he gets his

[Headbanger]

Murderer Clayton Weatherston has reportedly been moved into at-risk prison unit after a bounty was put on his head.

One of the sources said $55,000 had been offered in exchange for Weatherston's "unpleasant death" and that price was expected to reach six figures.



Fuck reporters are stupid, No one is going to pay a cent to have him killed.

[imdying]

Just shows that an education and or intelligence doesn't necessarily guarantee a balanced or full life??? I can see the new Tui Billboards... "she provoked me 216 times!!" or I stabbed her then she gurgled which she knew was a direct affront to my sensibilities so I stabbed her some more..."
I give him a month or two inside before he gets his

A month you say? (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2668166/Bounty-on-Clayton-Weatherstons-head) :sunny:

[oldrider]

Guilty. Happy now?

No not yet, the sentencing has yet to come, that will be "interesting" to say the least. Personally, the Judge has me worried! :shifty:

[Deano]

Has anyone said how much he looks like Mikey off American Chopper ?

Only 60kg lighter.

[scumdog]

Murder = Life Imprisonment.

Only it ain't for life.....:crazy:

[scumdog]

Let's face it, most of you are really pissed off at his 'arrogance' and the fact he stabbed a corpse 199 times.

If he had hung his head and had 'only' stabbed her ten times this thread would only be one page long.

[Winston001]

Quite a few I would think. How many lawyers tell a client they should plead not guilty when they've already said they are? "Oh but we can possibly get you off if you plead not guilty or guilty to a lesser charge."

Trust me, offenders rarely ever confess - they always have another story. But lets imagine you are charged with Dangerous Driving and your lawyer points out that the lesser charge of Careless Use also fits the facts. Would you honestly want your lawyer to take the police's word for the correct charge??


I still believe that we don't have a justice system here. Just a court system that makes it look like something is being done, only to appease the victims and keep the cash flowing for lawyers and judges (no offence to you Winston). Then there's the pathetic sentencing we have ....but that's another thread.:rolleyes:

No offence :D its an understandable view. The truth is, the money cases are civil proceedings - people and companies suing each other. Very few lawyers do criminal defence work. Go into any District Court and have a good look at the defendants - most of them have sod-all and certainly no money to pay lawyers. I know because it used to be normal to serve a sort of apprenticeship as a duty solicitor. Now even young lawyers won't do that.

Occasionally well-off individuals face criminal charges and can afford a criminal barrister. In order to attract that type of client, some barristers deliberately take high-profile cases on Legal Aid - not for the money but for the fame. It works for them. Its also the reason extravagant defences are argued - grabs media attention.

The Weatherston case could be a telling example..... ;)

[peasea]

Understandable and the most common question asked of lawyers - how can you defend a guilty person??


One word: Money, money, money.

This made me chuckle............

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10586216

[98tls]

Let's face it, most of you are really pissed off at his 'arrogance' and the fact he stabbed a corpse 199 times.

If he had hung his head and had 'only' stabbed her ten times this thread would only be one page long. Add if the victim was a fatty.:innocent:

[peasea]

Would you honestly want your lawyer to take the police's word for the correct charge??


Or anything else for that matter.

[peasea]

Let's face it, most of you are really pissed off at his 'arrogance' and the fact he stabbed a corpse 199 times.

If he had hung his head and had 'only' stabbed her ten times this thread would only be one page long.

216 actually.

See, cops get it wrong all the time.........:yes:

[Crasherfromwayback]

216 actually.

See, cops get it wrong all the time.........:yes:

Maybe the first 17 stabs she was not yet a corpse.

[peasea]

Maybe the first 17 stabs she was not yet a corpse.

Anything's possible. Maybe she was such a control freak she inflicted the first 17 herself, just to set him up.

[doc]

Let's face it, most of you are really pissed off at his 'arrogance' and the fact he stabbed a corpse 199 times.

If he had hung his head and had 'only' stabbed her ten times this thread would only be one page long.

199 times. I thought he stabbed her 216 :gob: times so I have heard over and over again.

Ferk the wounds and scene must have looked like an abottior.

Hope his cell looks the same aye.

[98tls]

199 times. I thought he stabbed her 216 :gob: times so I have heard over and over again.

Ferk the wounds and scene must have looked like an abottior.

Hope his cell looks the same aye.
Am thinking/hoping that the inside of his heads a mess,plenty of room in a cell for him and his demons.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Anything's possible. Maybe she was such a control freak she inflicted the first 17 herself, just to set him up.

I just hope the poor girl was dead before the cunt mutilated her.

[NDORFN]

It wouldn't have happened if she was in the kitchen :wari:

[98tls]

It wouldn't have happened if she was in the kitchen :wari: Yea it would,probably could have found a sharper knife as well.

[NDORFN]

Yea it would,probably could have found a sharper knife as well.

Why would anyone kill thier wife or girlfriend while she's cooking them dinner?

[98tls]

Why would anyone kill thier wife or girlfriend while she's cooking them dinner? Some women are shit cooks.Could actually come under self defence,"your honour if i had to eat anymore of that crap".

[scumdog]

Maybe the first 17 stabs she was not yet a corpse.

How come YOU were smart enough to figure that out yet others.....:scratch:

[NDORFN]

Some women are shit cooks.Could actually come under self defence,"your honour if i had to eat anymore of that crap".

That's not far off what actually happened.

[Crasherfromwayback]

How come YOU were smart enough to figure that out yet others.....:scratch:

Sheeeesh mate...don't sound so surprised! I got school c tenth attempt!

[Pussy]

Sheeeesh mate...don't sound so surprised! I got school c tenth attempt!
You ever thought of a career in agricultural aviation, Pete? :)

[Crasherfromwayback]

You ever thought of a career in agricultural aviation, Pete? :)

Sure...but the only time I've been able to fly of my own accord is when I've parted company with another fucking bike!

[Winston001]

Some women are shit cooks.Could actually come under self defence,"your honour if i had to eat anymore of that crap".

Good point, maybe he just wanted her to cook him some eggs... :devil2:

[Crasherfromwayback]

Good point, maybe he just wanted her to cook him some eggs... :devil2:

It's not as Mr soft cock wet the bed was able to fertilize any!

[Mom]

Well with any luck...

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10586216

[98tls]

The demons in his head will fuck him up eventually methinks,small cell with a toilet next to his pillow and endless hours to take it all in:woohoo:

[peasea]

How come YOU were smart enough to figure that out yet others.....:scratch:

It's not about figuring it out, it's about pointing fingers. Good grief, you should know that, of all people.

[AllanB]

Poor wee weirdo - I might post him a tube of KY - extra large. Thinking he may need it.

I fail to understand why he was allowed to sit in court for three days spouting off a load of what was effectively bullshit with nothing other than 'his' memory of events to back-up the crap flowing from his mouth.

At least that same mouth will be working overtime at night from now on......

[Indiana_Jones]

Leave him a length of rope in his cell and let him do the rest.

-Indy

[98tls]

Poor wee weirdo - I might post him a tube of KY - extra large. Thinking he may need it.

I fail to understand why he was allowed to sit in court for three days spouting off a load of what was effectively bullshit with nothing other than 'his' memory of events to back-up the crap flowing from his mouth.

At least that same mouth will be working overtime at night from now on...... Sadly i think it a reflection of how fucked up this worlds become.Surely there really wasnt any need for a trial,end of the day hes worse than a dog with behavioural problems,they fix them pretty easy.

[AllanB]

Surely there really wasnt any need for a trial.

Yep another million or so down the dunny :crybaby:

[vifferman]

A guy at work used to be a prison guard. He said that how it will go down, is Weatherston will be put in the "at risk" unit (which he has). Then some other inmate will "get a beating" and lodge a complaint, saying he fears for his life, then be put in the "at risk" unit too. Eventually, Weatherston will mysteriously get the crap beaten out of him, and even more mysteriously, no-one will know who was involved, and there'll be no witnesses. Justice, prison-style.

[98tls]

A guy at work used to be a prison guard. He said that how it will go down, is Weatherston will be put in the "at risk" unit (which he has). Then some other inmate will "get a beating" and lodge a complaint, saying he fears for his life, then be put in the "at risk" unit too. Eventually, Weatherston will mysteriously get the crap beaten out of him, and even more mysteriously, no-one will know who was involved, and there'll be no witnesses. Justice, prison-style. About it,scum dealing with scum really,whoever puts his hand up to do it will be just as bad as Weatherston as in a long termer with nothing to lose.

[Gareth51]

Leave him a length of rope in his cell and let him do the rest.

-Indy

All cells should have a length of rope hanging from the ceiling for exercise,would save millions in taxes

[Forest]

What a coincidence!

Today was also the first day of the rest of my life.

Spooky!

[Bren]

Imagine going in with an asshole the size of a 5 cent piece...and comin out with it the size of a 50cent piece

[Pussy]

There will be just a slight "whoosh" noise when he farts! :D

I'll be very pleased to hear of his demise

[98tls]

Imagine going in with an asshole the size of a 5 cent piece...and comin out with it the size of a 50cent piece Reminds me of "Claytons" In this case it could be "the shag your having when your not having a shag".

[oldrider]

You ever thought of a career in agricultural aviation, Pete? :)

Hey Pussy, how come birds can fly and none of them ever went to flying school and they don't need a licence to do it? (pt) :confused:

[scumdog]

It's not about figuring it out, it's about pointing fingers. Good grief, you should know that, of all people.

No second prizes, move along...

[sil3nt]

$55,000 for his death? And they expect it to grow? Has ANZ opened a donation account or something as I have a few spare dollars lying around.....

Ah im only kidding death would be way to good for this prick. Several near death beatings would do the trick i think

[short-circuit]

Predictable - anal fixation.

[scumdog]

Predictable - anal fixation.

Meh, usual KB fixation...:shifty:

[The Stranger]

$55,000 for his death? And they expect it to grow?


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

[Mom]

This psychopath (cor, big word for after wine o'clock on Friday night) not only stabbed her, he inflicted some terrible damage to her once she was dead. Who knows when she died, but lets hope very quickly after this very scarey man attacked her. To continue to inflict the damage he did to her is inexplicable unless you hold some sort of degree in human behaviour I guess.

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.

He is about to discover that he is not the big I AM inside, doubt he will survive to sentencing, but certainly not for long afterwards.

[Virago]

Anything's possible. Maybe she was such a control freak she inflicted the first 17 herself, just to set him up.

Hmmm...

Remember the pair of scissors? Perhaps she was running with them...?