I think I'm going to become a vigilante

[marty]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10443086

i don't see the media jumping on this travesty. what a soft cock sentence

[Hitcher]

So what do you think a sentence for manslaughter should be?

[xwhatsit]

So what do you think a sentence for manslaughter should be?

`This sentence is for manslaughter.'

[deanohit]

Stupid bastard!commited all those offences an then kills a woman(accidently) then trys to get off the charges by lying.Fucken scum!

[Hitcher]

`This sentence is for manslaughter.'

Exactly my point. Five-and-a-half years plus an extra three loss of license. Nobody proved that a more severe crime had been committed. Build a bridge.

[marty]

with the aggravating factors that are apparent in this case, a start at 14 years.

on their own, legislative penalties (maximum):

manslaughter - life imprisonment
dangerous driving causing injury - 5 years/$10000 fine
drivng disqualified (3rd or subsequent offence) - 2 years/$6000 fine
perverts course of justice - 7 years.

how does 5 1/2 years do justice to Ms Ashton?

[Hitcher]

how does 5 1/2 years do justice to Ms Ashton?

How does a sentence of any duration do "justice" to her? She's dead. She wouldn't be if some nong hadn't decided to do what he did, but he's going to be locked up for a while to reflect on his actions. Be careful not to confuse justice with revenge. And the available penalties aren't cumulative.

[JimO]

5 1/2 years means 3 at the most the driving ban will be over when the scum gets out

[MadDuck]

Turning off the power to an overweight hippo...thats your career gone matey

Hitcher please elaborate on "Nong"

[Hitcher]

Hitcher please elaborate on "Nong"

nong /nɒŋ/ –noun Australian and New Zealand Informal.
a foolish, incompetent person.

[marty]

sometimes hitcher, revenge has to be served, as punishment. of course ms ashton doesn't care what he gets. we should. i'm no SST busybody, but i would be totally fucked off if my daughter was killed by a disqualified, probably over the limit, speeding clown, then he gets 5 1/2 years, in exchange for the rest of my daugther's life.

[MadDuck]

I guess I should elaborate given my harse views on a number of posts regarding the death of the "fat woman". She was damn fat and so was her family. We were skinny by comparison.

As a kid I was there. My father chose to walk out and leave us to our own devises. Mum couldnt afford to feed us (shes dead now) . But she kept the power on god bless her.

My ole ma could afford a bottle of vodka once a week but ALWAYS made sure us kids were fed even after taking us to the food bank against her will. And she was a proud woman and that was tough for her.

Were the media there for us 20 years ago...SHIT no! They didnt want to know us. Did i survive ...hell yeah and so did my brother we both have degrees now and dont look back.

So this BS has really got my heckles up. Ok rant over ...

[marty]

5 1/2 years doesn't come close to addressing most of the below:


7 Purposes of sentencing or otherwise dealing with offenders

(1)The purposes for which a court may sentence or otherwise deal with an offender are—

(a)to hold the offender accountable for harm done to the victim and the community by the offending; or

(b)to promote in the offender a sense of responsibility for, and an acknowledgment of, that harm; or

(c)to provide for the interests of the victim of the offence; or

(d)to provide reparation for harm done by the offending; or

(e)to denounce the conduct in which the offender was involved; or

(f)to deter the offender or other persons from committing the same or a similar offence; or

(g)to protect the community from the offender; or

(h)to assist in the offender's rehabilitation and reintegration; or

(i)a combination of 2 or more of the purposes in paragraphs (a) to (h).

[MadDuck]

30 hours waiting at A&E for some treatment ...whos is accountable for that

Oh shit a tax paying member of society...thats who

[MadDuck]

nong /nɒŋ/ –noun Australian and New Zealand Informal.
a foolish, incompetent person.

I am ever amazed at your grammer ... thanx for that

[Fatjim]

Be careful not to confuse justice with revenge.
Vengeance, or revenge is an integral part of justice, one of many. Vengeance helps the victim to "Build a bridge" to get over it.

Unfortunately in the modern NZ, Justice is mainly about restoring the criminal to as normal life as possible, and forgets the other aspects of justice.

[xwhatsit]

sometimes hitcher, revenge has to be served, as punishment. of course ms ashton doesn't care what he gets. we should. i'm no SST busybody, but i would be totally fucked off if my daughter was killed by a disqualified, probably over the limit, speeding clown, then he gets 5 1/2 years, in exchange for the rest of my daugther's life.

Piss off, there's no way revenge has any part in the justice system. There's certain elements of the older more conservative population in NZ that (as Hitcher wrote) confuse justice with revenge. It's bullshit. The number one priority of any justice system should be to stop offenders from offending again, i.e. rehabilitate them. A monstrous prison sentence for manslaughter (which is not murder) does nothing but encourage resentment and disrespect of the justice system. Look at the US -- home of the life life life imprisonment -- yesirree, not many murders over there, are there?

Oh yes; and the last part of your post, about how you'd be totally fucked off if he squished your daughter -- that's precisely why the victim plays no part in sentencing.

[Laava]

3 yrs driving ban. That'll learn 'im! He will be all hunkered down in his cell thinking about all that driving he could be doing if only he hadn't been banned!
I like the maori word 'Utu', it has a much more PC ring to it. Like it's cultural and therefore permissable! Still, our prisons are full of these cretins and we all have to pay for that too. Meh!

[candor]

Yes to vigilantism - if its broke and you cant fix it just go the alternate route why not, That's actually the "heaviest" sentence in recent times for this sort of BS. Likely only got it due to all the recent publicity about DUI.

NZ has the lightest garden variety DUI causing injury/death sentences in the first world.

Our five max for DUI or dangerous compares to most Oz States tenner. Uk is similar. Europe is tougher (and has lower road crime due to respect for legal consequences) and the States is tougher again. They value innocents lives.

Manslaughter gets resorted to here as in above case only if there are many aggravating factors - or if many people die and public outrage will not stand for the typical wrist slap.

My mothers recidivist DUI killer who nearly killed his own kids in the crash he caused too, got nine months jail for it. He had also "obstructed justice" via witness interference (bashing I should say). And had appeared in court forty days before killing on another charge relating to DUI too.

I heard today he has just been recalled to do a little more of his time, for possibly doing it again not a few weeks after serving his nine months and getting parole. I knew he'd d it again, but the parole board is made up of bleeding heart IDIOTS. Checkout the Burton case.

As the SST said today - how nice of helen to visit the power cut family and snub the company workers. So when will it be time to visit parolees victims?

In some US States DUI causing death is murder one. It has been established to Supreme Court level that as no-one could today be unaware that drink or drug driving kills, there is an element of premeditation (equals MURDER).

I concur.

In many ways DUI killing is worse than murder, it affects strangers who had no chosen relationship with the devo, it is usually more painful than murder for the victim.

The long term effects on families are shown in twenty year studies to be equivalent to those on homicide victims - with spousal and parental suicide rates greatly raised for six years.

The body is typically more messed up which would qualify "murderers" in NZ for extended sentences under the home invasion law.

A purpose of the law should be to deter in this area. Average sentences of six months to a year for the typical recidivist DUI killer with a half decent lawyer have no deterrent element. Would they deter anyone here?

If I wanted to kill someone I would reach for a car and do it on road. It would be well worth the penalty. Well worth it. I feel these sentences would encourage me - just like our old murdersentences would have beforethey got a bit more real lately thanks to the SST.

Why wouldn't I worry - because the McCarten family report put out by victim support re the killing of the toddler by a foreign speeder at a service station revealed that Judges are NOT PERMITTED to consider or weight much the degree of harm to victims in sentencing for "driving offences / traffic offences (which DUI is). They must primarily consider how far the THE STANDARD OF DRIVING departed from a decent one.

Our sentences ae not just non vengeful, they are also non sane. An amnesty, a truce is declared on road crime by Couts - makes you sorry for the cops who do their bit really.

Recent :gob: include
- a year for a DUI killing of a 77 year old on his mobility scooter which amounts to six months with automatic parole
- 150 hours community service for a famous muso who was stoned as per his heavy user norm when he smashed car parked off the road killing a Maori guy and near killing his mate as they rested up in that car trip responsibly.
- three months for drink and drug driving recidivist who head oned a teen couple of highschool swethearts giving one severe brain damage and putting the girl in a wheelchair while removing her ability to ever have kids.

Before these killers and life destroyers reached this point they typically received MANY non vengeful ?rehabilitative sentences. It soooo works.

With boy racers they start hard, it gets some result. With DUi drivers softly does it all the way - even when they kill usually.

This so sane humane (tui) kind of justice system has resulted in a three fold increase in kids under fifteen killed in DUI crashes over the last five years - highest rate in world or OECD anyway.

There has also been a twenty six percent increase in convictions for DUI causing injury or death in the last two years (stat is in answers to recent Parliamentary questions asked by Chester Borrows if you want to check this)!

Our penalties are seriously out of order and ineffective. Evidence has caused other countries to adopt different sentencing structures. This current free for all directly impacts on every road users chance of becoming road kill.

Kiwi bird - high road kill odds. Oz States where sentences double ours on average - much lower. Know the system before you judge the system please.

What is reported in the news only scratches the surface and is often not representative of typical court experiences. Heavier sentences like this one are highlighted (and usually winged about by victims). They're not typical.

The genuinely light more typical sentences are usually not zoomed in on.

[Skyryder]

Be careful not to confuse justice with revenge.

An interesting distinction you have made. If indeed there is a distinction.

Justice is the process the that society engages, with it's laws to enact revenge. By that definition there is a difference of process (justice) and result (sentence)

However justice may also be determined in such a manner that guilt has been proved by 'due process.' On this basis justice is the end game.

There is also a third way of looking at justice. That is by way of an approppiate sentence for the crime that has been perpertrated.

Using this as a basis I would say that five years for manslaughter, giving all the facts that I have read on this, is that justice has not prevailed. This sod should have had the book thrown at him. Sometimes revenge is an approppiate response as it should have been in this case.

Skyryder

[Toaster]

5 1/2 years means 3 at the most the driving ban will be over when the scum gets out

Nah.... he will get out on parole well before then.

(Commonsense would hope the driving ban starts from his release date.... but hey, this IS wet-pants politically correct NZ justice we are talking about here.)

[Lias]

Be careful not to confuse justice with revenge. And the available penalties aren't cumulative.

Justice and revenge are interlinked. It's why I refuse to call our current "legal" system a justice system, because their is no justice in it.

Any true justice system is based on an eye for an eye. Personally I'd be quite happy to see the death penalty for drunk driving causing death.

[Street Gerbil]

From my brief experience with New Zealand and local law enforcement, I have to conclude that around here manslaughter is a misdemeanor punishable by having to say "I am sorry" and only if the judge is in a bad mood.

[Grahameeboy]

sometimes hitcher, revenge has to be served, as punishment. of course ms ashton doesn't care what he gets. we should. i'm no SST busybody, but i would be totally fucked off if my daughter was killed by a disqualified, probably over the limit, speeding clown, then he gets 5 1/2 years, in exchange for the rest of my daugther's life.

Like H says revenge does not change what happened..........yeah I'd be devasted if this happened to my Daughter, however, I'd me more interested in dealing with my grief and getting on with life rather than self pity which to me is selfish.....

[Grahameeboy]

Justice and revenge are interlinked. It's why I refuse to call our current "legal" system a justice system, because their is no justice in it.

Any true justice system is based on an eye for an eye. Personally I'd be quite happy to see the death penalty for drunk driving causing death.

Saying that any true justice is based on an eye for an eye is something I just cannot agree with plus if say a drunk driver kills someone how does a sober justice = an eye for an eye.......

We all make mistakes.....and okay someone may die because of that mistake but in most drunk driving situations it was a foolish mistake and an eye for an eye just does not work for me......but agree that repeat offenders should serve some jail time maybe because they are the same as a loaded gun...and need to be removed from society for a while to avoid them killing someone and having time to think.

Plus an alcoholism is a mental disorder so that has to be taken into account too

[candor]

Utu. The offender has created a debt. They should be encouraged to pay up. Its not revenge at all. If I had offended I would feel small and I would require every effort from myself to make things better for the victim - both for their sakes and mine. I've seen maori friends go and seek punishment when its deserved - even offeing to take the victims anger (physically) if it will make victim feel better. That is right and that is human and honorable.

I don't believe my Mothers killer should have the right to refuse to talk to me - its no good for him (shown by his recent recidivism) or us.

The injustice systems divides the involved parties - makes it between offender and state only. In some ways the state needs to butt out. It has no business preventing human to human resolutions when serious shit happens, and prevents taking of responsibility in most cases.

[Lias]

Saying that any true justice is based on an eye for an eye is something I just cannot agree with plus if say a drunk driver kills someone how does a sober justice = an eye for an eye.......

It doesn't have to be a literal eye for an eye, but when it comes to killing I believe that most crimes resulting in the death of another person should be death penalty crimes.

You admit a driver is a loaded gun, If someone got drunk and started shooting people on the motorway, they'd get a FAR harsher sentence than drunk drivers currently get.

Anytime someone goes out and commits an action that a reasonable person believes is likely to cause death to others, and whcih does in fact lead to a death, the offender should die. If someone punches someone once and they fall over and die, fair enough no death peanlty because its not reasonable to expect someone to die from one punch. But getting in a car and driving drunk? Setting hire to a building you know has people in it? Shooting into a housefull of people? These are all actions which if they lead to a death should result in the offenders life being taken by the state.

NZ must wake up and re-introduce the death penalty, introduce harsher sentences, introduce harsher prisons (Bread, water, hard labour!) and stop focusing on the criminals rights and focus on the rights of the victims and their families.

I see our latest massively over budget prisons have underfloor fucking heating.. WTF most people cant even afford that for their houses! Yet these scumbags in prison get it. Prisoners do not deserve heating.. They do not deserve TV, phones, internet access, libraries, schoolrooms, etc. They desrve subsitence level food, a roof over their head, and that is all. Prison should be a place of suffering , not enjoyment and relaxation and "rehabilitation".

As the song goes.. "We need stronger government, bring back capital puynishment!"

[Grahameeboy]

It doesn't have to be a literal eye for an eye, but when it comes to killing I believe that most crimes resulting in the death of another person should be death penalty crimes.

Then it is not an eye for an eye then.

You admit a driver is a loaded gun, If someone got drunk and started shooting people on the motorway, they'd get a FAR harsher sentence than drunk drivers currently get.

By loaded gun I mean repeat offenders.

Anytime someone goes out and commits an action that a reasonable person believes is likely to cause death to others, and whcih does in fact lead to a death, the offender should die. If someone punches someone once and they fall over and die, fair enough no death peanlty because its not reasonable to expect someone to die from one punch. But getting in a car and driving drunk? Setting hire to a building you know has people in it? Shooting into a housefull of people? These are all actions which if they lead to a death should result in the offenders life being taken by the state.

Drunk driving is a bit different because alcohol is a depressent so people think they can do what they want etc. Setting fire to a building is a more sober thought with the added psychological pathologies.

NZ must wake up and re-introduce the death penalty, introduce harsher sentences, introduce harsher prisons (Bread, water, hard labour!) and stop focusing on the criminals rights and focus on the rights of the victims and their families.

I guess all are victims but in different ways. America shows what happens when you have the death penalty, doesn't deter and innocent people get are executed......Bain being a perfect example....he would be dead now

I see our latest massively over budget prisons have underfloor fucking heating.. WTF most people cant even afford that for their houses! Yet these scumbags in prison get it. Prisoners do not deserve heating.. They do not deserve TV, phones, internet access, libraries, schoolrooms, etc. They desrve subsitence level food, a roof over their head, and that is all. Prison should be a place of suffering , not enjoyment and relaxation and "rehabilitation".

True but they are still kept from the outside world. Personally, what would you prefer, a prison with under floor heating (probably a security step) with Sky or living at home with no under floor heating and Sky?

As the song goes.. "We need stronger government, bring back capital puynishment!"

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

[98tls]

Saying that any true justice is based on an eye for an eye is something I just cannot agree with plus if say a drunk driver kills someone how does a sober justice = an eye for an eye.......

We all make mistakes.....and okay someone may die because of that mistake but in most drunk driving situations it was a foolish mistake and an eye for an eye just does not work for me......but agree that repeat offenders should serve some jail time maybe because they are the same as a loaded gun...and need to be removed from society for a while to avoid them killing someone and having time to think.

Plus an alcoholism is a mental disorder so that has to be taken into account too Agreed entirely......problem is there not removed......a few years ago the powers that be said 3 strikes and your out,great....it just hasnt happened....sure they lock em up 6.7.8. times later.....not good enough.

[Steelhorse]

The death penalty is to final and quick and bad if the wrong person gets fried, vivisection would be somewhat of a deterant

[MSTRS]

Mans laughter. More than likely.

[marty]

Saying that any true justice is based on an eye for an eye is something I just cannot agree with plus if say a drunk driver kills someone how does a sober justice = an eye for an eye.......

We all make mistakes.....and okay someone may die because of that mistake but in most drunk driving situations it was a foolish mistake and an eye for an eye just does not work for me......but agree that repeat offenders should serve some jail time maybe because they are the same as a loaded gun...and need to be removed from society for a while to avoid them killing someone and having time to think.

Plus an alcoholism is a mental disorder so that has to be taken into account too

you sound like a nice guy grahame, but your comments are a little too idealistic for reality.

drink driving is not a foolish mistake. it is an action that took a deliberate decision. have you ever mistakenly driven after drinking? ever mistakenly done 120km/h in a 50? mistakenly driven when disqualified?