A Parallel Universe Exists?

[Lou Girardin]

TV reported the aftermath of the Pender murder trial in ChCh. Pender killed a guy armed with nunchucks that had assaulted his girlfriend and was threatening to kill him, shooting him with a crossbow.
The dead guys mother said that her son was a gentle person who never used violence.
So why was he beating up women and threatening to kill someone?
Why wasn't he at home making a cuppa for his loving mum?
It seems that Pender was no angel either, but at least another clear message has gone out that if you're seriously threatened by some thug, there's sufficient commonsense shown by some juries that you may defend yourself effectively and not be convicted.

[Colapop]

He did or didn't get convicted? I saw the original report when the triasl started and I thought he should have got off. That's no excuse for killing someone but you gotta be able to defend youself - especially if you know they're coming for you.

[thehollowmen]

He did or didn't get convicted? I saw the original report when the triasl started and I thought he should have got off. That's no excuse for killing someone but you gotta be able to defend youself - especially if you know they're coming for you.

He got off.

I'm really worried now because they thought of classing crossbows as firearms last year. I own a few (sporting and collectables) and shoot, but I won't get a gun license. I guess this is ammo for the politicals..

[Colapop]

My old man shot a guy with a crossbow who was burgling his gear shed. Police just told him off basically - the guy was a local gang member and they'd (the police) wanted him for awhile. Got him fitted up on threatening to kill, burglary, assault, resisting arrest........ Man he copped it (sorry bad pun) and got a crossbow bolt in the leg.

[spudchucka]

I get the feeling that there is a lot more to this story than we will ever know. However, I also feel it was the correct decision not to convict. The mother of the dead guy was an interesting character, professing her son to be a nice, gentle lad.

[ManDownUnder]

Who was it recently posted "Tis better to be tried by 12 of your peers than carried out by 6"...?

Very true

[Krayy]

So the guy comes at the defandant with some Nunchukas, and he's got time to get his crossbow, find a bolt, cock the crossbow, load the bolt into it, aim and fire??? :nono:

What's wrong with this picture? :Pokey:

[k14]

So the guy comes at the defandant with some Nunchukas, and he's got time to get his crossbow, find a bolt, cock the crossbow, load the bolt into it, aim and fire??? :nono:

What's wrong with this picture? :Pokey:
Nah i think from what i read in the paper the other day, the guy that got shot came round to teh guy that shot him's house with nun chuks etc and was threatening them. So the guy went into the house and got his crossbow with bolt and came out to try and get them to go away. Then the guy with the nun chucks advanced at the guy with the crossbow and then he shot him in the chest. I think he still should have been done for something, it kinda sets a precedence for future cases. Its a hard one to call but we don't want nz turning out the same as the states.

[Bartman10]

It sounds like the whole lot of them are criminals.

Who cares if one gets shot and the other goes to jail.

[bungbung]

Who was it recently posted "Tis better to be tried by 12 of your peers than carried out by 6"...?

Very true

Sounds like the East Flatbush Project "tried by twelve", or one of the remixes.

Lyrics here: http://www.ohhla.com/anonymous/flatbush/rm_bside/tried_by.est.txt

[Colapop]

It sounds like the whole lot of them are criminals.

Who cares if one gets shot and the other goes to jail.

I subscribe to the concrete theory of justice - chuck 'em all in a large concrete tank and le't 'em fight it out the last one standing's the only you have to spend a bullet on.

[jrandom]

Its a hard one to call but we don't want nz turning out the same as the states.

fooey, that's not going to happen in your or my lifetime.

on teh face of it this case was cut and dried, the dead guy turned up presenting a lethal weapon and making threats, the defendant readied a lethal weapon of his own and used it when dead dude refused to back down. textbook case involving self defense as a defense against a murder charge within NZ's laws. the cops did the right thing by charging the shooter, and the jury obviously understood the law correctly when they acquitted him. the wheels are turning smoothly.

nz will not turn into murka until the population is allowed to buy and carry around nun chuckers, crossbows and AR-15s willy-nilly at their own discretion. not likely any time soon.

[Badcat]

So the guy comes at the defandant with some Nunchukas, and he's got time to get his crossbow, find a bolt, cock the crossbow, load the bolt into it, aim and fire??? :nono:

What's wrong with this picture? :Pokey:

EXACTLY what i was thinking.
surely the guy doesn't leave a loaded, cocked crossbow in his house.
pretty hard to say it was "impulse" when you have to load and tension the bow first, isn't it?

[jrandom]

surely the guy doesn't leave a loaded, cocked crossbow in his house.

er

why not?

nothing illegal about that far as I know. it's not a firearm.

if you moved in the somewhat criminal circles that this lot appeared to then you might think that having a lethal weapon handy was a good idea, too.

[Badcat]

er

why not?

nothing illegal about that far as I know. it's not a firearm.

if you moved in the somewhat criminal circles that this lot appeared to then you might think that having a lethal weapon handy was a good idea, too.

well, if you can't think why not, i'm not dropping by your place anytime soon.
K

[jrandom]

well, if you can't think why not, i'm not dropping by your place anytime soon.

well, true, I mean... my place is not the place to come bearing weapons and mouthing threats, really. not a healthy activity.

but why would you drop by with _that_ in mind?

[Badcat]

well, true, I mean... my place is not the place to come bearing weapons and mouthing threats, really. not a healthy activity.

but why would you drop by with _that_ in mind?

dude (ess) - don't get me wrong.
i'm not a violent man.
i was being flippant.
i do that.
sorry.

K
<still very excited - new bike here in the next day or so>

[Ghost Lemur]

A factor which seems to be missing from this discussion is it wasn't just the dead guy there threatening him. He had two accomplices with him (who took off leaving their mate to die - nice eh?). They were convicted of (IIRC) assault, and illegally entering a property (or whatever it's called).

Personally, I think it all went as it should. I think it was right for him to be charged, I also think it was right for him to be aquitted.

As for him having time to cock the bow, it can be looked at from the otherside too. The dead guy was also given time to leave the property, instead he called the defendants bluff and payed the price.

[Lou Girardin]

EXACTLY what i was thinking.
surely the guy doesn't leave a loaded, cocked crossbow in his house.
pretty hard to say it was "impulse" when you have to load and tension the bow first, isn't it?

Self defence as a defence does not require impulse, you just have to believe your life is threatened and defend yourself. If someone stands there swinging his nunchucks while you load and fire a crossbow, he deserves to die.
However, one report said the crossbow was loaded and hidden in a bush!

It wouldn't have been a pleasant death though, apparently he walked up the road bleeding out till he collapsed.

[judgeshock]

Yes i think there is more to this story than we will ever know and unfortunately we only see the side the media like to portray to get there ratings up. :mellow:

[Wolf]

It wouldn't have been a pleasant death though, apparently he walked up the road bleeding out till he collapsed.
So he had time to contemplate his folly before he expired, then.

So far as justifiable use of deadly force goes, the deceased had made death threats and he was armed with a weapon capable of smashing someone's head into a pulp. If he was within 6.5 metres at the time he was shot, then there is every possibility he could carry out his threat in under a second and a half.

The fact that he advanced on someone carrying a lethal weapon after making threats of death is a clear case for a potentially lethal response.

[marty]

he should have just shot him in the leg. that would have slowed him down

[Big Dave]

dude (ess) - don't get me wrong.
i'm not a violent man.
i was being flippant.
i do that.
sorry.

K
<still very excited - new bike here in the next day or so>


The internet is never having to say you are sorry.

[Colapop]

Yes i think there is more to this story than we will ever know and unfortunately we only see the side the media like to portray to get there ratings up. :mellow:
Unfortunately an all too common occurance

[El Dopa]

Here's the version I heard.

Crossbow guy was in an on/off relationship with a woman for three year. Fairly tempestuous by all accounts.

They break up, he goes off the rails a bit, goes round her house and breaks a window, or some such fairly minor damage. She phones him up and gives him an ear bashing, asks/demands money to pay for repairs. His injured masculine pride kicks in and he tells her to come and get it if she want it that bad.

So far, so depressingly mundane.

However, instead of her turning up at his house, three of her friends (large, male) turn up at crossbow guys house, all tooled up. Croosbow guy grabs his crossbow and tells them to back off.

High testosterone levels all round, male pride threatened, no-one backs down. Result: One dead nunchuck wielder.

It's a difficult one. If it was me, I'd probably have shot the guy with few qualms. Better than being on the receiving end of a serious beating.

But then I'd be trying to live my life in such a way that i never end up in that situation.

In my opinion, he shouldn't have been done for murder, but should probably have been convicted of manslaughter (he did after all kill someone). But he had the opportunity to plead guilty to that, and gambled on being found innocent of a greater charge of murder, and won.

[onearmedbandit]

Manslaughter is accidental death, Pender took that option away from the jury by signing a statement saying he intended to kill or discharge the weapon despite the consequences. So the jury could only decide between a conviction of murder or acquital.

Anyway, impossible for any of us to cast judgement, we're not privy to all the information.

[spudchucka]

Manslaughter is accidental death, Pender took that option away from the jury by signing a statement saying he intended to kill or discharge the weapon despite the consequences. So the jury could only decide between a conviction of murder or acquital.

Anyway, impossible for any of us to cast judgement, we're not privy to all the information.
If he had made a statement saying he intended to kill the guy then he would have been convicted. For self defence to apply the persons intent could only be to use force to stop the other person from harming them. The intent is to stop the other persons actions, not to kill them. Section 48 (self defence) applies if the force used is proven to be necessary and reasonable in the circumstances. If this is the case the accused can't be convicted.

[Colapop]

Manslaughter is accidental death, Pender took that option away from the jury by signing a statement saying he intended to kill or discharge the weapon despite the consequences. So the jury could only decide between a conviction of murder or acquital.

Then if he signed a statement saying that doesn't prove intent, thus making it murder? He, CB (crossbvow guy) intended to harm DG (dead guy). If CB did not show intent then I would have thought that it would have to be manslaughter. Self defense is one thing, when you find an intruder with a knife and you kill him, but showing intent means it was premeditated.
But it's all done with now anyway so it's a moot point.

[Lias]

From what I heard, those 3 guys came to the property, there was some sort of altercation outside, in which nunchuks were waved, shit was said, and crossbow guys(CG) sister was assaulted by nunchuck guy(NG). CG runs inside, grabs his crossbow, comes back outside tells NG to fuck off, NG waves his nunchuks a bit more and refuses to leave, CG shoots him.

[Lou Girardin]

he should have just shot him in the leg. that would have slowed him down

Did you see the bolt? It had reverse hinged barbs, an ugly looking thing.
It would've taken out the femoral artery with the same ultimate result.

[Lou Girardin]

Pender and his brief took a gamble and refused the option of a manslaughter verdict. It was murder or acquittal. The jury gave him the benefit of the doubt.
A big risk, but it paid off.
But I think his karma will catch up to him too.

[El Dopa]

If he had made a statement saying he intended to kill the guy....

And how many people are going to be dumb enough to put that in their statements? (Yes, I'm sure there are some you could tell us about, but that's not my point).

[El Dopa]

Anyway, impossible for any of us to cast judgement, we're not privy to all the information.

Thats the reason I clearly stated it as an opinion, and added the word 'probably'. :niceone:

[onearmedbandit]

Okay maybe my terminolgy was incorrect, but as Lou said he waived the option of manslaughter, he did sign a statement that he intended to fire. So the jury were forced into either murder or self defence, not accidental death.

[Pixie]

He got off.

I'm really worried now because they thought of classing crossbows as firearms last year. I own a few (sporting and collectables) and shoot, but I won't get a gun license. I guess this is ammo for the politicals..
They are going to come down hard on MSSACB's
(military style semi-automatic crossbows)