Three years for road rage killing.

[toycollector10]

Some old dude scratches up your car (or bike) so you beat him to death.

It's now very doable. Three years, out in two or less. Then you can get on with your life.

http://msn.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10600302&ref=rss

"Justice Potter said she did not take into account O'Brien's prior convictions for male assaults female and threatening to kill in 2001".



Just what the hell is going on?

[Forest]

A sad story for everyone involved.

What kind of gutless wonder would beat a 78 year old man?

[P38]

Yep .... pretty sad aye!

This just reinforces my theory that if you want to kill someone in NZ dont Murder them.

Either get drunk and run them down with your car in a carpark/party etc or enter into a road rage incident with them and bash their head in.

Either way your gonna get 3-4 yrs of luxury living, but if you behave yourself you'll only serve 2/3rds of that at the most.

And we call this Justice........... Yeah Right!

[XRVrider]

That aint manslaughter, thats murder!

NZ has officially gone soft, they should string the fecker up, we dont need to be paying for this scum to be in prison. Bring back the death penalty I say, although some will say thats ridiculous, it really should be an equal penalty to the crime.

[YellowDog]

28 year old beats up 78 year old.

Cannot comprehend the lack of respect.

Parents may have done everyting right however this boy failed in the basics of life.

[Molly]

Too many examples of people losing their lives to fuckwit scumbags or careless, pissed-up motorists only to get home detention or some other bullshit sentence.

I don't have an answer. I'm just fucked off with it all.

[p.dath]

... rambling mode on ...
Its easy enough to say the justice system has gone soft, and criticise. But I find myself asking what is an appropriate sentence? If I was the judge, and I had the power, what kind of sentence shall I give out?

This 28 year old has a prior conviction for assault and threatening to kill. I bet that there have been plenty of other incidents, they just didn't result in charges. So the 28 year old probably has an anger problem.

I would like to ask the family what they consider to be a fair sentence. it would be good to take into consideration those who were closest to the victim.

Hmm. Maybe measuring this using the social cost of death would be best. If I recall, ACC says the "social cost" of a fatal accident is about $2.4 million (could be wrong, but that should be close enough).

So it would seem reasonable that the perpetrator should repay the social cost back to society, or suffer a social expense of $2.4 million, to "balance" out the damage done.

So I think I'll charge them with a social bill and when it gets to zero they can get out.

I recall incarceration costs about $50k/year. So $2.4 million would require a lot of time. So its clear they would need to do something while incarcerated to improve the value equation.
They could do some anger management courses in this case. Perhaps participate in some enterprise arranged by the prison that generates either cash, or more desirably produces a desirable social outcome (e,g. manufacture meals for "meals on wheels" for the elderly).
Perhaps they could undertake re-training or education, so when they got out they had a trade or knowledge that could be directly applied. That could be quite valuable in a social sense for the country.
Perhaps they could agree to allow youth offenders visit them, and explain what they have lost (freedom, etc) to try and deter others from criminal acts.

Really, it would come down to how hard they are prepared to work to re-pay the debt to society as to how long they spend in jail.

... rambling mode off ...

[ynot slow]

Deport the bastard.I don't care if he's a friggin kiwi citizen we don't need these thugs,heard he was nuiean or tokalaun,deport the ......t

[Genestho]

... rambling mode on ...
Its easy enough to say the justice system has gone soft, and criticise. But I find myself asking what is an appropriate sentence? If I was the judge, and I had the power, what kind of sentence shall I give out?

This 28 year old has a prior conviction for assault and threatening to kill. I bet that there have been plenty of other incidents, they just didn't result in charges. So the 28 year old probably has an anger problem.

I would like to ask the family what they consider to be a fair sentence. it would be good to take into consideration those who were closest to the victim.

Hmm. Maybe measuring this using the social cost of death would be best. If I recall, ACC says the "social cost" of a fatal accident is about $2.4 million (could be wrong, but that should be close enough).

So it would seem reasonable that the perpetrator should repay the social cost back to society, or suffer a social expense of $2.4 million, to "balance" out the damage done.

So I think I'll charge them with a social bill and when it gets to zero they can get out.

I recall incarceration costs about $50k/year. So $2.4 million would require a lot of time. So its clear they would need to do something while incarcerated to improve the value equation.
They could do some anger management courses in this case. Perhaps participate in some enterprise arranged by the prison that generates either cash, or more desirably produces a desirable social outcome (e,g. manufacture meals for "meals on wheels" for the elderly).
Perhaps they could undertake re-training or education, so when they got out they had a trade or knowledge that could be directly applied. That could be quite valuable in a social sense for the country.
Perhaps they could agree to allow youth offenders visit them, and explain what they have lost (freedom, etc) to try and deter others from criminal acts.

Really, it would come down to how hard they are prepared to work to re-pay the debt to society as to how long they spend in jail.

... rambling mode off ...
Oh man. Who is the victim in a court case? The state, or the crown, there is no victim in that court room.
Social cost of a fatal crash is 3.8 mill per death.
Incarceration is around 100 grand per year.

Don't forget this dude gets discount for the time it takes to get to court.
Guilty pleas score discount too.
I have a question which I won't ask here! :crazy:

It won't be long and the family will have to state their case to the parole board.

[XRVrider]

... rambling mode on ...
Its easy enough to say the justice system has gone soft, and criticise. But I find myself asking what is an appropriate sentence? If I was the judge, and I had the power, what kind of sentence shall I give out?

This 28 year old has a prior conviction for assault and threatening to kill. I bet that there have been plenty of other incidents, they just didn't result in charges. So the 28 year old probably has an anger problem.

I would like to ask the family what they consider to be a fair sentence. it would be good to take into consideration those who were closest to the victim.

Hmm. Maybe measuring this using the social cost of death would be best. If I recall, ACC says the "social cost" of a fatal accident is about $2.4 million (could be wrong, but that should be close enough).

So it would seem reasonable that the perpetrator should repay the social cost back to society, or suffer a social expense of $2.4 million, to "balance" out the damage done.

So I think I'll charge them with a social bill and when it gets to zero they can get out.

I recall incarceration costs about $50k/year. So $2.4 million would require a lot of time. So its clear they would need to do something while incarcerated to improve the value equation.
They could do some anger management courses in this case. Perhaps participate in some enterprise arranged by the prison that generates either cash, or more desirably produces a desirable social outcome (e,g. manufacture meals for "meals on wheels" for the elderly).
Perhaps they could undertake re-training or education, so when they got out they had a trade or knowledge that could be directly applied. That could be quite valuable in a social sense for the country.
Perhaps they could agree to allow youth offenders visit them, and explain what they have lost (freedom, etc) to try and deter others from criminal acts.

Really, it would come down to how hard they are prepared to work to re-pay the debt to society as to how long they spend in jail.

... rambling mode off ...


A social bill? Anger management courses? Repay society for taking a life? You should be a judge.

There is no way to pay this back. These fixes are an example of "going soft". Understand what you are thinking here... however, the guy killed someone by force, he should spend longer in jail, or pay the debt with his life. That's fair isnt it?

[Molly]

I have a question which I won't ask here! :crazy:

I hear ya.

[mynameis]

He was here from the Islands studying.

Wonder if the family can appeal the decision or if it's final?

[oldrider]

He was here from the Islands studying.

Wonder if the family can appeal the decision or if it's final?

They can always have a "referendum" and force the authorities to ignore them! :brick:

This country sucks, I thought this National lead government had a priority on fixing crime and punishment deficiencies!

This guy was complimented, not punished! :argh:

[Thaeos]

He should be imprisoned for 15/20 years and then deported. At least that would be a more suitable sentence than THREE YEARS. geez.......

And on the death penalty thing, I think it would be pretty crap having state-sponsered murder in our country. It's just a horrible idea ... and actually, what does it do?? It doesn't really punish the criminal.

If they are dead, then they aren't repaying anything or giving back to society or being punished/suffering. They're just gone ...

Better to keep them locked up and have to work for the duration of their sentence. Or something like that. Not very well thought out atm but it's pretty much how I feel about it.

[Dargor]

Do nz judges have there fingers up there ass or is there some other reason people always get off so light.

[tomobedlam]

Do nz judges have there fingers up there ass or is there some other reason people always get off so light.

There is defiantly a reasons why people get off so light. You most probably won't like it.

The Judge constantly has to juggle the issue of popular option of the public and what works from a corrections put of view.

Considering the time between his last conviction and the circumstances of this offense he would be considered low risk. Remembering that it was the victim falling back and hitting his head that cause the fatal injury. Of course the offender is responsible for that, but the Judge would have taken the fact that, that part was unintentional into consideration when sentencing.

When these cases come up the argument the sentence needs to be a deterrent to others is put forward. Unfortunately harsh sentences do not work as a deterrent to others

Nor do people learn from spending more time in prison. Going to prison actual increases peoples likelihood of re-offending.

Judges are well aware of this when they are sentencing and take it into consideration. It's a bloody hard job they can't lock them up forever and they know the longer they spend in prison the more likely they are to re-offend when they are released.

It certainly doesn't seem like justice for the victim and his family

I myself am a strong advocate for early intervention. So we can avoid getting to this point in the first place

[MisterD]

There's a difference between "beating someone to death" and punching someone so that they fall over and smash their head on the kerb and that kills them isn't there?

I still think the sentence is too light, but a lot of the language used in the press doesn't seem to match the actual events...

[mynameis]

They can always have a "referendum" and force the authorities to ignore them! :brick:

This country sucks, I thought this National lead government had a priority on fixing crime and punishment deficiencies!

This guy was complimented, not punished! :argh:

Referendum? On what? Is there any appeal process in this case within our justice system? Can the family appeal the decision and take it to a higher court? Criminal case.


There's a difference between "beating someone to death" and punching someone so that they fall over and smash their head on the kerb and that kills them isn't there?

I still think the sentence is too light, but a lot of the language used in the press doesn't seem to match the actual events...

There is a difference but the outcome is still the same. The old man died. They distinguish it with intent and motivation. His motivation wasn't to kill. (So they would have said when he pleaded guilty).

However as a grown up sane adult you need to take responsibility of your actions and the consequences that come with such unnecessary violent acts, something the sentence doesn't teach the offender at all.

The coconut is going to have a good time in prison for a year at our taxpayer's expense then come back out into the community where he will probably be a nuisance for the next 20 years, again at the society and taxpayer's expense.

[Crasherfromwayback]

[QUOTE=p.dath;1129431815 So the 28 year old probably has an anger problem.
[/QUOTE]

You don't say.

[The Pastor]

cAPTAIN OBVIOUS STRIKES AGAIn!


Driving in Auckland could be frustrating but O'Brien's actions were "totally disproportionate" to the incident, she said

[marty]

If the 3-strikes legislation was in force, the judge would have HAD to take notice, and the bad guy would be on a long stretch right now.

As an aside, this judge has had sentences reduced on appeal after giving people sentences that were 'too long', so maybe she was nervous about this one - but imho she got it wrong.

[firefighter]

I vote in 2 years when he is released we wait for him and beat him to death.

You know, accidentally hit his head with a wrench.......

That's fair innit'?

[Genestho]

:argh:

Not meaning to take this off topic, but regarding this system...


This is what NZ is up against in trying to make changes to a system for betterment, last weekend we had Judith Collins come in and address some of the families of NZ's violent crime cases over 20 a year span...about how they are willing to make changes, and discussed the issues.

Boy I recon she's gotta backbone that lady.

I will suggest this is why the public have an unfair perception of those battling to change the system based on their experiences...

http://www.voxy.co.nz/national/sensible-sentencing-trust039s-reform-agenda-fuels-victim-hatred-says-rethinking/5/25589#comment-5952

Oh, and it wasn't a Rally (which smacks of an angry mob - NOT how it was at all!), as Kim has suggested.

It was a conference (and amongst other things) Speakers, Agenda, a schedule - to work out how to make the justice system more efficient, quicker, and victim friendly addressing advocacy.

Intelligent people having objective conversations - looking at the problems, and suggesting the solutions - based on inconsistancies across a myriad of issues experienced.

We also had victim support in and discussed how to work together, and efficently to support 'victims' (really hate that word) and have information available.

Kim Workman - to my knowledge has never attended these conferences to see what they're about, and furthermore rejected an invite to last years conference. Quite strange for a bloke who professes to know what victims need, and often speaks on their behalf, usually negatively.

Not quite sure of this guys agenda - but it appears that he spends his time writing articles - knocking victims, who are using sheer courage and experience to change things for NZ.

Knocking the huge team walking beside, work tirelessly for free - The Mcvicars invested part of their farm into SST and are unpaid for their time!
Achieving small victories for justice.

[ManDownUnder]

testicular removal... stat!

[Crasherfromwayback]

testicular removal... stat!

He can't have any already mate. No semi well built 28 year old that bashes an old man has balls.

[mynameis]

If the 3-strikes legislation was in force, the judge would have HAD to take notice, and the bad guy would be on a long stretch right now.

As an aside, this judge has had sentences reduced on appeal after giving people sentences that were 'too long', so maybe she was nervous about this one - but imho she got it wrong.

Yeap, he did 150 hours community service in 2001 for threatening to kill and assaulting a female.


I vote in 2 years when he is released we wait for him and beat him to death.

You know, accidentally hit his head with a wrench.......

That's fair innit'?

He will be eligible for parole after serving on third of his sentence and could be out as early as next year.

It's almost a little break and a holiday for him.

[mynameis]

So if Clayton would have followed Sophie while she drove and got in a road rage with her and killed her he would not got 18 years aye.

Could have been out in a year 17 years less :eek5:

[firefighter]

He will be eligible for parole after serving on third of his sentence and could be out as early as next year.

It's almost a little break and a holiday for him.

Then that's when we get him.....as he walks out the gate.

[Swoop]

He can't have any already mate. No semi well built 28 year old that bashes an old man has balls.
Also, drives (drove) a piece of crap, wankermobile bmw...

[Crasherfromwayback]

Also, drives (drove) a piece of crap, wankermobile bmw...

Doubt it...driving a Beemer means you've got a really big willy. I know this...cause I used to have a long wheelbase 7 series!

The Jag I've got now means I also know how to use it!:whistle:

[White trash]

Doubt it...driving a Beemer means you've got a really big willy. I know this...cause I used to have a long wheelbase 7 series!

The Jag I've got now means I also know how to use it!:whistle:
As long as you're prepared to "use it" slowly seeing as it wont get out of second gear :whistle:

[Crasherfromwayback]

As long as you're prepared to "use it" slowly seeing as it wont get out of second gear :whistle:

$4500.00 later and I've got lots of cool gears now thanks mate!

[Patrick]

Some old dude scratches up your car (or bike) so you beat him to death.

It's now very doable. Three years, out in two or less. Then you can get on with your life.

http://msn.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10600302&ref=rss

"Justice Potter said she did not take into account O'Brien's prior convictions for male assaults female and threatening to kill in 2001".



Just what the hell is going on?

Another example of how the system fails.... again.....


A sad story for everyone involved.

What kind of gutless wonder would beat a 78 year old man?

And a woman in 2001....?


Deport the bastard.I don't care if he's a friggin kiwi citizen we don't need these thugs,heard he was nuiean or tokalaun,deport the ......t

+1. All rights as a NZ citizen removed. He can piss off now....


Oh man. Who is the victim in a court case?

Unsure if this is a P/T or not.... :innocent:

The victim is the 78 year olds family.... but I think you knew that...?:whistle::msn-wink:

[Beemer]

28 year old beats up 78 year old.

Cannot comprehend the lack of respect.

Parents may have done everyting right however this boy failed in the basics of life.

That's it in a nutshell - no respect for anyone they perceive to be older or weaker than they are. Can you imagine him trying this if a huge Islander had clipped his car? Or a cop?

Total over-reaction in my opinion. Sure, get out and yell at them if they have hit your precious car, but to physically attack them is beyond belief. He would have posed very little threat to the guy and it sounds like he was trying to apologise anyway.

He would have got more time if he'd been done for burglary most likely.

[oldrider]

28 year old beats up 78 year old.

Cannot comprehend the lack of respect.

Parents may have done everyting right however this boy failed in the basics of life.

Being old does not command respect, being respectable commands respect!

Being old commands consideration similarly to that extended to little children!

Some old bastards are bloody "disrespectful" but hey, they are not really much of a threat to anyone any more, are they? :whistle:

Please be gentle with me! :eek5:.........:lol:

[Patrick]

Some old bastards are bloody "disrespectful" but hey, they are not really much of a threat to anyone any more, are they? :whistle:

Please be gentle with me! :eek5:.........:lol:

He was trying to apologise...

I think you quoted the poor old fella at the end there....

[howdamnhard]

Yep .... pretty sad aye!

This just reinforces my theory that if you want to kill someone in NZ dont Murder them.

Either get drunk and run them down with your car in a carpark/party etc or enter into a road rage incident with them and bash their head in.

Either way your gonna get 3-4 yrs of luxury living, but if you behave yourself you'll only serve 2/3rds of that at the most.

And we call this Justice........... Yeah Right!

And then they still have the cheek to say a strong message has been sent regarding road rage ...... Yeah right! Makes me livid just thinking , the whole law system is Fucked up in this country.:angry2:

[Genestho]

Unsure if this is a P/T or not.... :innocent:

The victim is the 78 year olds family.... but I think you knew that...?:whistle::msn-wink:

Oh come on.

The CROWN ie "society" is who the offender becomes indebted to in court. Not the victims family. Thus the victim has little to no impact on sentences.

At a time when they need it the most, usually waiting from 6-18 months for the case to begin - victims Impact statements are often censored - you must know that?

One chap after asking what would happen if he read the original, was told he'd get two warnings, so pushed his original statement until threatened with contempt of court!!!!

Another - and you may remember this, had to publish through media his original after the sentencing.


They rarely get a say till it's all over, and the media are waiting for comments.

And don't start me on the pre sentencing Restorative Justice regime another wee discount gem.