Three years for road rage killing.

**toycollector10** · 29th September 2009, 19:31

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/ar...600302&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** · 29th September 2009, 20:08

A sad story for everyone involved.

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

**P38** · 29th September 2009, 20:09

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** · 29th September 2009, 20:11

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** · 29th September 2009, 20:23

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** · 29th September 2009, 20:29

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** · 29th September 2009, 21:10

... 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** · 29th September 2009, 21:17

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** · 29th September 2009, 21:25

Originally Posted by 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 ...

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!

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

**XRVrider** · 29th September 2009, 21:28

Originally Posted by 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 ...

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** · 29th September 2009, 21:37

Originally Posted by T.G.W

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

I hear ya.

**mynameis** · 29th September 2009, 21:49

He was here from the Islands studying.

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

**oldrider** · 29th September 2009, 22:34

Originally Posted by mynameis

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!

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

This guy was complimented, not punished!

**Thaeos** · 29th September 2009, 22:37

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.