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

**short-circuit** · 27th July 2009, 20:32

Originally Posted by Usarka

I have a problem with the proposed law change. He tried a defence and it failed, and now National are using Labour's patented knee-jerk^TM law making policy.

The only reason her character was torn to shreds was because *we* fed the tv news rating machines and watched every last second of his defence.

The hundreds of thousands of people who paid so close attention to this trial are just as guilty for smearing her character.

Agreed - voyerism at it's worst. But the adversarial justice system is itself a failure, it's archaic and it opens the door for abuses of this kind.

**_Shrek_** · 27th July 2009, 20:42

Originally Posted by Usarka

I have a problem with the proposed law change. He tried a defence and it failed, and now National are using Labour's patented knee-jerk^TM law making policy.

The only reason her character was torn to shreds was because *we* fed the tv news rating machines and watched every last second of his defence.

The hundreds of thousands of people who paid so close attention to this trial are just as guilty for smearing her character.

we didn't follow it all, but you are right about the knee-jerk, in this case the law did work, as the jury found the AH guilty of murder as they should have, as for smearing her character I don't think it has even thow the defence tried

**boostin** · 27th July 2009, 21:09

Wasn't it John Key saying something along the lines of "The test is if the law is working, if its working fine then it doesnt need removing/adjusting". That was in regards to the new anti-smacking laws.

Seems to me that provocation is working just fine. Leave it alone.

**oldrider** · 27th July 2009, 22:09

Originally Posted by Usarka

I have a problem with the proposed law change. He tried a defence and it failed, and now National are using Labour's patented knee-jerk^TM law making policy.

The only reason her character was torn to shreds was because *we* fed the tv news rating machines and watched every last second of his defence.

The hundreds of thousands of people who paid so close attention to this trial are just as guilty for smearing her character.

Agreed, actually the law worked, the Judge and Lawyers need to be censured if there has been misuse of the "provocation" clause and it can be established as such!

Murder is gory at the best of times, therefore for the truth to out, gory must be addressed.

The process just allowed the act of murder to continue on and on and on, at the victims expense and she had no defence against it!

Emotionally, I feel the defence lawyers acted in an obscene manner and the Judge allowed them to exploit "provocation" beyond acceptable limits. (JMHO)

**mstriumph** · 27th July 2009, 22:36

Originally Posted by jrandom

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

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.

Any sort of pain could be provocation methinks - but whether any resultant murder would be justifiable or not would be up to the skills of his lawyer, the extent to which the jury could be swayed by it and, probably, a dozen other variables.

On a personal level, that lawyer would have to work damn hard to make me believe he could emotionally 'lose it' 200 times

however - i've worked with some REALLY shitty people and abuse isn't confined to PERSONAL relationships soooooooooooooooo

anyone got the contact number of a really skillful scumbag - sorry - lawyer??

**mynameis** · 15th September 2009, 18:47

18 years eh.

Long enough? Too short? Too long a sentence, whatya thoughts?

**sil3nt** · 15th September 2009, 18:50

Why even release these nut jobs back into the community. Prison is only going to make him even more fucked up than he is.

**Naki Rat** · 15th September 2009, 18:53

Based on the likelihood that he won't survive 18 years inside due to either self harm or someone earning the bounty on him, it is 'enough'.

**Headbanger** · 15th September 2009, 18:54

I suggest we calculate the cost of keeping him imprisoned for life, Give me half of that amount, I'll kill him and dispose of the body.

In hindsight they should have called me in before the trial, could have saved millions of our money and no one would have to see this cunt made into a celebrity.

**tomobedlam** · 15th September 2009, 19:16

Originally Posted by mynameis

18 years eh.

Long enough? Too short? Too long a sentence, whatya thoughts?

I don't like his chances of getting parole even when he is eligible to apply, with it being a high profile case and the brutally of the murder. Also hopefully in 18 years time the parole people will understand that some people should never be released

**ital916** · 15th September 2009, 19:32

I wonder if culprits of such hideous crimes would think twice if they knew that a cushy jail cell was not waiting for them but death in the same manner that they inflicted upon their victim.

In this case it would require clayton weatherston to be stabbed 216 times.........imagine the guy with the clicker counting them.

**tomobedlam** · 15th September 2009, 19:35

Originally Posted by ital916

I wonder if culprits of such hideous crimes would think twice if they knew that a cushy jail cell was not waiting for them but death in the same manner that they inflicted upon their victim.

In this case it would require clayton weatherston to be stabbed 216 times.........imagine the guy with the clicker counting them.

the quick answer to that is no

**firefighter** · 15th September 2009, 19:42

I know if I was a family member I would be waiting the 18 years for him to be released, and i'd have told him that in my victim statement which the family read to him.

I'd have told him, in 18 years time, I will be waiting for your release, you have'nt gotten away with anything.