New Zealand justice system

[Maki]

Does anyone else find the workings of the New Zealand so called justice system strange? A man who breaks a baby's legs get's home detention. A man who uses a lethal weapon (car) to run a person over get's a fine and some community work.

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/14709638/auckland-investment-banker-ordered-to-pay-20-000-for-traffic-altercation/

A person who ran off with some money that a bank gave to him by mistake gets 4 years and 7 months.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10829357

Does this make any sense? You would think that crimes involving assault and grievous bodily harm to a victim were more serious than taking money given to you by mistake by bank. You could say that the bank's shareholders are victims but what is losing a few $ compared to having your legs broken?

[The Lone Rider]

People that hurt kids should get an instant execution.






:done:

[mashman]

Nope, the justice system is working fine and protecting that which is most highly valued by todays society and punishing accordingly.

[MIXONE]

People that hurt kids should get an instant execution.






:done:

There would be no shortage of people willinng to pull the trigger either.:ar15:

[oldrider]

Does anyone else find the workings of the New Zealand so called justice system strange? A man who breaks a baby's legs get's home detention. A man who uses a lethal weapon (car) to run a person over get's a fine and some community work.

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/14709638/auckland-investment-banker-ordered-to-pay-20-000-for-traffic-altercation/

A person who ran off with some money that a bank gave to him by mistake gets 4 years and 7 months.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10829357

Does this make any sense? You would think that crimes involving assault and grievous bodily harm to a victim were more serious than taking money given to you by mistake by bank. You could say that the bank's shareholders are victims but what is losing a few $ compared to having your legs broken?

Crime prevention Justice and corrections are (IMHO) this countries poorest performing public service, nearly always performing below what the owners (the general public) expect and yet the politicians still prefer to fuck around with comparatively trivial issues! :brick:

Yes, I agree with you that the punishments do not "appear" to be equal to the crimes committed! It makes me mad too! :angry2:

[Kickaha]

A man who uses a lethal weapon (car) to run a person over get's a fine and some community work.

Nah it's ok, the guy was rich so that makes it ok

My first thought on watching that on the news was what a fuckwit that judge was

[Zamiam]

This country doesn't have a justice system and therein lies your mistake. Its a legal system and generally he who has the most money and therefore can afford the best lawyer wins UNLESS you're some poor under priviledged minority who's mum spoke to too harsely in which case you can't be found responsible for anything as you're the TRUE victim.

[scumdog]

Don't get me going....:shutup:

[Scuba_Steve]

The justice system is not infalliable nor is justice it's goal

[mashman]

Don't get me going....:shutup:

go on, go on, you know you wanna

[pzkpfw]

Don't get me wrong, I do think the bastards who hurt the kids ought to have very nasty things happen to them, but, I was thinking about this topic the other day and I figured there was an element of repeatability in the punishment.

That is, if people got the idea that money was easy to steal, they'd all be doing it - because lots of people have access to money to do dodgy things with, and morally they'd see it as a lesser crime. So the punishment needs to really make it not worthwhile.

Whereas, on the other hand, most people wouldn't hurt kids. There's not a lot that the punishment is going to do to prevent the hurt because the bastards that do, don't stop and calculate how much "time" they'd get for what they are about to do.

Or to put it another way:

If there were no punishment for hurting kids, most of us still wouldn't hurt kids.

If there were no punishment for stealing cash off banks, lots of people would think "I'm having some of that!".

I do think the punishment should fit the crime, but punishment needs to be about more than revenge or "pay back".


Still, I'm with the "shoot 'em" crowd. Some people are broken, and can't be fixed.

[Winston001]

Here's how it works: Parliament legislates a maximum sentence for every criminal offence. The Courts then have to find a way to fix sentences across the whole gamut of struggling humanity who appear before them. Offences which range from a slap through broken limbs to permanent bodily harm. Then there's fraud, theft, drugs...just bad stuff.

The offenders range from mentally retarded through personality disorders to dysfunctional humans you'd cross the street to avoid. Plus the opportunists, the average bloke who is broken by temptation.

The Supreme Court and Court of Appeal periodically issue guidelines to help lower court judges with sentencing. But apart from that judges are on their own. Geoff Hall (my old Crimes lecturer) writes a continually updated book on "Sentencing" and it's the bible for lawyers and judges. $800 and its yours - plus $250 updates.

If you step back from the headlines and view cases across a range, you'll find the sentences are roughly consistent. Not the same, not equal, but similar. Judges are human just like the offenders and sometimes mercy is shown.

[Winston001]

Does anyone else find the workings of the New Zealand so called justice system strange? A man who breaks a baby's legs get's home detention. A man who uses a lethal weapon (car) to run a person over get's a fine and some community work.

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/14709638/auckland-investment-banker-ordered-to-pay-20-000-for-traffic-altercation/

A person who ran off with some money that a bank gave to him by mistake gets 4 years and 7 months.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10829357

Does this make any sense? You would think that crimes involving assault and grievous bodily harm to a victim were more serious than taking money given to you by mistake by bank. You could say that the bank's shareholders are victims but what is losing a few $ compared to having your legs broken?

Personally I don't find the system strange but then again I've been in it for 30 years. As said above you have to look at a range of similar cases to see the consistency and that isn't really possible for most of us.

Lets do an analysis: the first one http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10826832. Breaking a 4 month child's leg. Awful. First thing - he plead guilty, unlike many of these animals who deny culpibility. So that's a tick. Secondly he was young, immature, and unable to cope but tried his best - all confirmed by the child's mother who wasn't afraid to leave the child with him.

The judge got to 2 years imprisonment at which point home detention (prison at home) becomes an option. Maybe she was wrong - but she clearly worked through the whole sentencing structure and wanted the guy to keep his job. Maybe he should have been imprisoned but would he, his girlfriend, his son, or society be better off...??

[Winston001]

A man who uses a lethal weapon (car) to run a person over get's a fine and some community work.

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/14709638/auckland-investment-banker-ordered-to-pay-20-000-for-traffic-altercation/

A person who ran off with some money that a bank gave to him by mistake gets 4 years and 7 months.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10829357

Does this make any sense? You would think that crimes involving assault and grievous bodily harm to a victim were more serious than taking money given to you by mistake by bank. You could say that the bank's shareholders are victims but what is losing a few $ compared to having your legs broken?

In the run-over case you overlook the order that he pay $20,000 reparation to the victim. Go to any District Court for a month and see how often a sum that large is ordered. Very rare.

Plus this guys reputation and I suspect his job with Forsyth Barr is ruined. No-one in the finance industry are going to want to touch such an idiot.

The bank fraud case is a good example of how money crimes are treated. Lightly. I'd have started at 7 years if I was sentencing him - farg, $4 million still missing!! I suspect the Triads or Macau casinos have it and he's afraid to say in case he doesn't survive prison.

[Banditbandit]

Nope, the justice system is working fine and protecting that which is most highly valued by todays society and punishing accordingly.

Exactly !!!! Hurt people - get home D ... steal property ... get locked up for a long time ...

[Banditbandit]

Here's how it works: Parliament legislates a maximum sentence for every criminal offence. The Courts then have to find a way to fix sentences across the whole gamut of struggling humanity who appear before them. Offences which range from a slap through broken limbs to permanent bodily harm. Then there's fraud, theft, drugs...just bad stuff.

The offenders range from mentally retarded through personality disorders to dysfunctional humans you'd cross the street to avoid. Plus the opportunists, the average bloke who is broken by temptation.

The Supreme Court and Court of Appeal periodically issue guidelines to help lower court judges with sentencing. But apart from that judges are on their own. Geoff Hall (my old Crimes lecturer) writes a continually updated book on "Sentencing" and it's the bible for lawyers and judges. $800 and its yours - plus $250 updates.

If you step back from the headlines and view cases across a range, you'll find the sentences are roughly consistent. Not the same, not equal, but similar. Judges are human just like the offenders and sometimes mercy is shown.


There was an interesting example somewhere back in the 1970s -80s when there was a big outcry against "light sentences" ... A district court judge accepted an invitation to address a Rotary Club on this issue - he took some examples of crimes and circumstances (with names removed) to the meeting, divided the people up into groups and asked each group to put the appriopriate sentence on the case he gave them.

In ever case the Rotary Club members, with all the circumstances in front of them, put lesser sentences on the criminals than the judges had handed out ...

[Katman]

The bank fraud case is a good example of how money crimes are treated. Lightly. I'd have started at 7 years if I was sentencing him - farg, $4 million still missing!! I suspect the Triads or Macau casinos have it and he's afraid to say in case he doesn't survive prison.

I'm more inclined to think it's buried in a hole somewhere.

Hell, I'd go to prison for 4 and a half years (probably out in 1 and a half) if I knew there was 4 million waiting for me outside.

[jim.cox]

Its a LEGAL system

Not a justice system

They're not related

[Road kill]

Not that I believe it could be true,but I read that some suit and a few of his mates resently ripped off 14,500 people for most of their life savings and only got 9 months home D.

Not only that,,,but he also decided to take an overseas holiday while waiting for the appeal against his huge an unjust sentence.

Respect for our justice system,,,,yeah right.

[Maki]

The lesson seems to be that if you are poor and steal from the rich, in this case a huge bank, they will make you suffer for it big time. If however you are rich and steal from poor people, the life savings of pensioners for example you can expect to be treated with silk gloves and get home detention, same as if you break someone's legs on purpose.

[oneofsix]

The lesson seems to be that if you are poor and steal from the rich, in this case a huge bank, they will make you suffer for it big time. If however you are rich and steal from poor people, the life savings of pensioners for example you can expect to be treated with silk gloves and get home detention, same as if you break someone's legs on purpose.

Nothing new there, in ancient Greece;
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office.
Aesop
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/aesop109735.html#wyq0awvlKrHbWFTz.99

Slowly we improve things, we no longer hang the petty thief nor deport them even though some would still like to, and we hold those in high positions to more account, wished we could hang some of them.

[Winston001]

If however you are rich and steal from poor people, the life savings of pensioners for example you can expect to be treated with silk gloves...

Mmmm...not really. For doing that, 7 year prison sentences were given today to directors and managers at Capital and Merchant Finance. http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/capital-merchant-finance-directors-jailed-gb-127349

Plus similar sentences for Rod Petrecivic (piece of filth) and others at Bridgecorp.

[Winston001]

Its a LEGAL system

Not a justice system

They're not related

No, its both but we all know what you mean.

FYI the law is concerned about logical rules which apply equally to all. The law is about certainty not fairness.

That might sound harsh but in practise judges do what they can to be fair.

There is a whole vast study of the law, called jurisprudence, which extends back to the ancient Greeks. Its a kind of philosophy and the greybeards get into algebra interpreting legal case decisions. :facepalm:

So what I'm saying is that the whole law=justice=fairness debate has gone on for centuries and will continue as our laws evolve. Lawyers police politicians and judges get just as frustrated as the rest of us.

[Winston001]

A man who uses a lethal weapon (car) to run a person over get's a fine and some community work.


Does this make any sense?

I started this post in annoyance at Judge Raoul Neave who has been taking some stick for his sentencing comments on this case.

I was appalled - because he's not stupid - but appeared to be exactly that.

Initially it was because I was astonished at what the Judge said as reported on the TV news...


"Indeed I have wondered at some length whether or not if this had been an encounter between two teenage boys on the backstreets of Manukau whether we would be here today."




Then I looked further...

....the comments were taken out of context by the ankle-deep mental midgets who call themselves journalists. FFS! What actually happened is the judge observed that this case had been high profile, far beyond its importance, and a disproportionate amount of prurient public interest had been generated by the media.

In other words TV/newsprint guys and gals - would you be here if this was a typical Manukau driving/street fight/yadda yadda case?? No you wouldn't. You wouldn't even bother to report the case.

Pathetic.

Not that you'll find this analysis anywhere.