Phobia lets death driver avoid jail

[Sanx]

so therefore, its ok to let 100% guilty murderers live [like the examples scummy gave, and ill include the dick in the wheelchair for good measure] IN CASE someone gets it wrong, even when its 200% obvious that that person did murder that person for no good reason? i can understand that mistakes have been made in the past, but with the advances in forensics and dna and the like, those mistakes are less and less. eventually, mistakes wont happen at all. then what?

Who defines 100% guilty? And what happens when someone has been tried, convicted and much later evidence comes out proving their innocence or giving an explanation for their behaviour. At what point do you decide that this isn't going to happen?

[Genestho]

This particular case being so close to my heart, I feel sick for Tara's family.

While the law says there is no proof of intent to kill, I feel the only difference between murder by gun and murder by car with a drunk behind the wheel is that cars, and booze are accessible to all.

There will be no followup to see this woman is following her home d sentence or her four years loss of license.
I know this, because the man who killed my man and his friends, was not monitored.

I have had the only real and fair outcome.
The man who killed three people and himself and put three little children through hell that day, and left 5 children without parents, had his judgement passed in "Guzzi" Court.

The only winners in this case.. are the lawyer and this woman with agrophobia.

While these people killed by drunk drivers might not be classed as murdered as we know it, my humble opinion is that these people have all been murdered, its only the law that says theres no proof of intent to kill.

What an absolute preventable waste of lives.

[James Deuce]

so therefore, its ok to let 100% guilty murderers live [like the examples scummy gave, and ill include the dick in the wheelchair for good measure] IN CASE someone gets it wrong, even when its 200% obvious that that person did murder that person for no good reason? i can understand that mistakes have been made in the past, but with the advances in forensics and dna and the like, those mistakes are less and less. eventually, mistakes wont happen at all. then what?

People put far too much faith in "forensics" and "dna" because it all works nicely on CSI and you can zoom in on a digital image and instead of pixels you see a sharper version of the original image.

We all share bits of identical DNA. It is REALLY easy to get it wrong and it is repeatedly wrong. The more convinced we are that technology will fix things, the less likely that will prove to be true.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...ical_look.html

http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...ical_look.html

[Flatcap]

Nothing wrong with capital punishment, as long as it is applied in a just manner to everyone apart from myself and people I care about

[scumdog]

Makes it pretty straightforward to choose a method of bloody vengeance against those who have wronged you, eh?

Just gotta be a bit smarter about it than that dumbfuck coconut who drove into the crowd.

Lately know of two cases involving three deaths and total punishment (barring the disqualy bit) was two years home d.

Really sends a massage eh???

[Bikernereid]

In the UK a bloke and his wife who just defrauded an insurance company of £250,00 have just got 6 years each!!

I would rather have a drunk driver who kills get 6 years and the fraudsters home detention. The whole world is going mad and I as someone who wants to work in the prison service is astounded at the bullshit decision of the judge in the drink driver case.

If she is that ill why not place her in a psychiatric unit to get the help she 'supposedly' deserves. I have to ask the question 'who was the psychiatrist that diagnosed her with these mental health issues?'

[mstriumph]

...............* Agoraphobia

A fear of open spaces, going outside or being away from a place of safety. Also an abnormal fear of being helpless in an embarrassing or inescapable situation.

i thought that we jailed people as punishment specifically to MAKE them helpless in an embarrassing /inescapable situation?

obviously not

leniency like this is counterproductive though ----- if victims families feel they are not getting justice through the courts who could blame them from seeking it personally, by other means?

[mstriumph]

..........We all share bits of identical DNA................

nooooooooooooooo i don't SHARE any common old DNA .............. i'm a PRINCESS i tell you!!

[Her_C4]

i thought that we jailed people as punishment specifically to MAKE them helpless in an embarrassing /inescapable situation?

obviously not

We do not put them in jail to punish them further. It is the policy of the gubbmit to ensure that offenders are removed from society with a view to habilitating (note I did NOT use the word REhabilitation) not to inflict further punishment (that is the removal from society is deemed to be punishment enough).

If people have issues with this approach then I strongly suggest lobbying for legislative change and empowering Corrections to manage offenders in a more 'appropriate' manner.

[riffer]

I don't get it.

Why exactly is it that the Police can't go for manslaughter?

[James Deuce]

I don't get it.

Why exactly is it that the Police can't go for manslaughter?

Because they'll never in a million years be able to prove that the person behind the wheel intended to perform a violent crime. Road Traffic Offenses that include death and injury have been deemed "non-violent" traffic accidents and cannot be tried under the auspices of the Crimes Act without specific proof that inflicting violence was at the core of driver's intent.

The legal definition of Manslaughter in NZ does not include road deaths, unlike many other countries where manslaughter charges are common and sentences are in the 5-20 year band in length and if those people ever get to drive again, their vehicle often bears identifying marks like a different colour license plate.

At present if the Police bring a manslaughter charge instead of an excess breath alcohol charge, the person in the hot seat is likely to get off altogether. Until the definition of manslaughter is broadened to include road deaths this will always be the case.

In the meantime ACC continue to point out that they cover everyone in the event of an accident, the ACC minister is herself a convicted drunk driver, and people with 20 or more convictions for driving under the influence keep getting their bloody license back, irrespective of how many people they injured maimed or killed.

[riffer]

Because they'll never in a million years be able to prove that the person behind the wheel intended to perform a violent crime...

Good point. But a quick search reveals the following (emphasis is mine):

MANSLAUGHTER - The unlawful killing of a human being without malice or premeditation, either express or implied; distinguished from murder, which requires malicious intent.

It also differs from murder in this, that there can be no accessaries before the fact, there having been no time for premeditation. Manslaugbter is voluntary, when it happens upon a sudden heat; or involuntary, when it takes place in the commission of some unlawful act.

The cases of manslaughter may be classed as follows those which take place in consequence of: 1. Provocation. 2. Mutual combat. 3. Resistance to public officers, etc. 4. Killing in the prosecution of an unlawful or wanton act. 5. Killing in the prosecution of a lawful act, improperly performed, or performed without lawful authority.


EDIT: Further searches reveal that this definition is not strictly followed in NZ. Sensible Sentencing Trust have an interesting article on the subject.

I wasn't aware our definition was so shameful in this respect.

[BIHB@0610]

And then, get a load of this tragedy of creation masquerading as a human being:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sundaynews/4632481a15620.html

A recidivist drunk driving psychologist, working under contract to ACC around the North Island, was allowed to keep his car after his THIRD conviction, because taking his Audi off him would cause undue hardship to his family and staff. FFS!!! How is 12 months' loss of licence and 250 hours community service going to deter him from getting behind the wheel again, after drinking? Does 'the system' want him to run more people off the road and be dependent on ACC for years? Is ACC on some "client creation" scheme?? Physician, heal thyself!!

[Scorpygirl]

If this lady had "agrophobia" in the true sense of the word she would have been too scared to go out of her house let alone drive her car for any length of time. I am sick and tired of people claiming "mental illness" to get away with crime.

[Bikernereid]

+1 on the agrophobia. As for the "mental illness" they can be tested by psychologists and psychiatrists and if found to be mentall ill they should be referred to a psych unit!! If she was that ill why did the judge not try to provide her with the help she supposedly needs whilst also keeping her off the roads!!

If this lady had "agrophobia" in the true sense of the word she would have been too scared to go out of her house let alone drive her car for any length of time. I am sick and tired of people claiming "mental illness" to get away with crime.