Manslaughter charge for bloke who killed tagger

[wbks]

Nah he just posted a picture of a rabid pitbull next to a man with his face ripped of for the sheer joy of it...

[scumdog]

Fuck him, He stabbed a kid to death.

He can burn in hell.

The lesser conviction is disgraceful.

Hardly looks like he meant to kill the little prick, I mean one stab and then runs off and leaves the twat still on his feet??

Obviously the white middle-class working man failed murder 101 eh...

AND if the dead twat had got the upper hand I bet HE would have got off with manslaughter - even if he stabbed whitey a dozen times.

[Hitcher]

Goodness me, I find myself agreeing with Skyrider.

I too fail to see how somebody who left their property with a lethal weapon and intent to use it could be convicted of manslaughter and looking at home detention, while somebody else who left home with a lethal weapon and no proven intent to use it could be convicted of murder and looking at serious jail time. The Sensible Sentencing Trust's position on each of these two crimes astounds me. I am unclear as to whether the SST values property higher than human life, is racist, or both.

[scumdog]

Goodness me, I find myself agreeing with Skyrider.

I too fail to see how somebody who left their property with a lethal weapon and intent to use it could be convicted of manslaughter and looking at home detention, while somebody else who left home with a lethal weapon and no proven intent to use it could be convicted of murder and looking at serious jail time. The Sensible Sentencing Trust's position on each of these two crimes astounds me. I am unclear as to whether the SST values property higher than human life, is racist, or both.

I gather there was an admission he 'intended to use' the knife??
As in 'to kill' as opposed to 'frighten' or 'defend'???

Or in idbs words 'have I misread the post'?

[BMWST?]

You raise and interesting and perhaps a valid point.


But where one veiw is expressed there is always the counter arguement.

As there was no intended victim other than a 'random' one it could be argued that any victim of a drive by shooting may at best get off a murder conviction with a manslaughter one as the indaviuals death coube argued as accidental. If this did happen then it would be a mockery of the justice system and on that basis I agree that a murder conviction would be the appropiate and only verdict of any drive by shooting. But and say but with some hesitation I make the assumption that the target of the drive by shooting would have been an adult. On this basis I still hold my original opinon that Jhia's death was an accident as she was not of an age to be the intended victim. On this basis I still hold the view that a murder conviction with the ganga's is at odds with a manslaughter conviction of the buisnessman who was also charged with the murder and in active pursuit of the victim with a knife.

Still your point is taken.

Skyyrder

utter utter bullshit....they had gone home,they had picked up a .303,they had driven back to that house with a premeditated intent on shooting someone...thats MURDER....the emery /tagging thing is one instants reaction .....he picks up the knife on impulse to chase the taggers....which turns to shit when they turn on him...

[Hitcher]

utter utter bullshit....they had gone home,they had picked up a .303,they had driven back to that house with a premeditated intent on shooting someone...thats MURDER....the emery /tagging thing is one instants reaction .....he picks up the knife on impulse to chase the taggers....which turns to shit when they turn on him...

Both scenarios "turned to shit". Weapons were carried in both, for reasons best known to those who carried them. There were deaths in both scenarios -- one as the result of a rifle being discharged at a house, the other we are supposed to believe as the result of a tagger throwing himself onto a knife. I believe that these are the same crime, with significantly different outcomes in terms of the sentences our justice system has handed down.

[PrincessBandit]

Both scenarios "turned to shit". Weapons were carried in both, for reasons best known to those who carried them. There were deaths in both scenarios -- one as the result of a rifle being discharged at a house, the other we are supposed to believe as the result of a tagger throwing himself onto a knife. I believe that these are the same crime, with significantly different outcomes in terms of the sentences our justice system has handed down.

I normally don't disagree with things you post Hitcher, but I think there is quite a big difference superficially between the two cases. The drive by shooting was clearly premeditated - you don't go home, pick up a rifle for no reason, and return to your place of intended crime. If the group of them had been firing rounds on their own property and the wee girl and her family had happened to be on an adjoining piece of land with a shot gone astray then yes there is the case for manslaughter perhaps. People don't go home for a rifle complete with loaded rounds just to scare someone. (Totally different if you're on a farm and have a loaded rifle in my book before the bloke who shot the quad bike thief gets brought up).
It is completely convincing that Emery grabbed his fishing knife, going into the dark unknown, not being sure how many could be out there, only knowing he was sick and tired of his community being trashed and perhaps he could be proactive in showing that people aren't afraid to defend it. Let's face it - almost anything could be argued to be a lethal weapon if the circumstances turn sufficiently to shit.

[sinned]

I believe that these are the same crime, with significantly different outcomes in terms of the sentences our justice system has handed down.

And I am comfortable about that.

[98tls]

Hardly looks like he meant to kill the little prick, I mean one stab and then runs off and leaves the twat still on his feet??

Obviously the white middle-class working man failed murder 101 eh...

AND if the dead twat had got the upper hand I bet HE would have got off with manslaughter - even if he stabbed whitey a dozen times.

How apt,just returned from a Sunday session with a few mates at the local boozer,got a bit out of hand,had a group of Maori blokes talking about the very thing,no problem apart from the fact it was all we could hear as one of them was pretty loud with the racist stuff,i went to the bar when my round this fucker puts his arm around me and asks "how are you my brother" i replied "my brother died years ago" and this new found brother assumed the warrior stance (gene thing they tell me) before i had a chance to waste my newly bought jug on his head he disappeared from view as a mate had grabbed his rather long pony tail and gave it a yank,in fact such a yank as to send him backwards into a back flip which resulted in him making a mess of our table,chaos ensued ending in "my toothless brother and his tribe" calling me a racist..........go figure.Fuck him,the sooner(if ever) the rest of NZ wakes up the better off we will all be.

[wbks]

Leave them alone. Like you said, its the warrior gene!
Btw where the hell was all this going on. Australia?

[98tls]

Leave them alone. Like you said, its the warrior gene!
Btw where the hell was all this going on. Australia?

Na mate small town NZ.Thank fuck said warrior had a customary pony tail or things may well have ended in a different way.

[marioc]

wtf Australia...you havin a laugh?
In other news if you go around fucking peoples shit up and someone goes postal at you...then this is what might happen.
A bit like riders who think they are bulletproof and end up in the ground.
Its natural selection at work once again.
Suprised the old bill have not stitched him right up though.

[wbks]

Nah they just sounded quite a bit like (ok sorry for this pretty racist coment) more than a few of the maoris over in aus ive been around. always talking about being maori and maori stuff. Pretty bold over there, too. This is way off topic anyway. But yea maybe i'm a little less "aww that bastard we are all young some time" then some people because the guy that got stabbed is not much younger than me but i think if you screw with other peoples stuff then you get what you're dealt for that. So in otherwords tough shit too bad you didn't get a stern talking to instead. Especially the gangster tagging type clowns. Like fucking rats

[SARGE]

I got no respect for taggers or scum of the earth, but just because he is a businessman I dont see how the above factors could result in a manslaughter charge, he took a knife to seek revenge and he got it, its murder plain and simple...........what did you say, he had no intent? BS a knife was taken in anger to fight not to cut a cake

i often take a defensive weapon outside with me when i hear something dodgy ...ballbat.. powerbar.. Kabar..dont know how many will be outside and what drugs they may be on.... yea.. i'll do some time and i'd wear it as a badge of honor that i was defending my family and my "castle"

lock him up, I dont know any reasonable people that cant put a knife into another human, he is not a reasonable person in my view and derserves the full force of the law.

im a reasonable person.. quite capable of doing it and have done on several occasions.. its not fun the first few times.. then it becomes clinical where you start looking for the fastest quietest way of doing it..


From Wiki

A Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal concept derived from English Common Law, which designates one's place of residence (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as one's car or place of work) as a place in which one enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack. It then goes on to give a person the legal right to use deadly force to defend that place (his/her "castle"), and/or any other innocent persons legally inside it, from violent attack or an intrusion which may lead to violent attack. In a legal context, therefore, use of deadly force which actually results in death may be defended as justifiable homicide under the Castle Doctrine.

Castle Doctrines are legislated by state, and not all states in the US have a Castle Doctrine. The term "Make My Day Law" comes from the landmark 1985 Colorado statute that protects people from any criminal charge or civil suit if they use force - including deadly force - against an invader of the home.[1] The law's nickname is a reference to the famous line uttered by Clint Eastwood's character Dirty Harry in the 1983 film Sudden Impact, "Go ahead, make my day."

This legal doctrine is often linked to the rights of homeowners to bear arms, as defined in the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller.

[marioc]

Stabbed a few punters in your time then?
You sound like you have seen some shit.
Special forces?