Gunshop employee charged

**ManDownUnder** · 6th October 2006, 11:04

Originally Posted by SARGE

i'm good for a few bux man .. lemme know

I know - and cheers. Let me know if you hear anything before I do (re him going through court/needing to defend himself).

**Sniper** · 6th October 2006, 11:05

Ditto here....

**Bloody Mad Woman (BMW)** · 6th October 2006, 11:23

Armed Robber Escapes Preventive Detention

Newsroom Agency Story11:44am, 6th October 2006

A serial armed robber has escaped a sentence of preventive detention, but has been told by a judge it was a "pretty close call".

Laurence Minhinnick, 47, was being sentenced for the armed robbery at a Christchurch supermarket, during which over $220,000 was taken.

His criminal history of four other armed robberies meant he was eligible for preventive detention.

The Crown submitted he would re-offend unless jailed indefinitely although Minhinnick submitted he would be too old to commit crimes when released.

In the High Court at Christchurch, Justice Graeme Pankhurst told Minhinnick an infinite jail term was not appropriate and sentenced him to 11 years jail, with a minimum term of 6.5 years.

Minhinnick gave the judge the thumbs up as he left the court, calling out "see you in six-and-a-half years".

(c) NewsRoom 2006

Excuse me - he escaped preventive detention - what does this mean? Another one that needs to be removed from the gene pool.
Crims certainly get VIP treatment in this country. The gullible judge would also believe the tripe that he will be too old at 53.5 years to re-offend?? FFS

**scumdog** · 6th October 2006, 12:09

Originally Posted by Bloody Mad Woman (BMW)

Excuse me - he escaped preventive detention - what does this mean? Another one that needs to be removed from the gene pool.
Crims certainly get VIP treatment in this country. The gullible judge would also believe the tripe that he will be too old at 53.5 years to re-offend?? FFS

I'm older than him - and I don't offend!!

**Swoop** · 6th October 2006, 12:12

Originally Posted by scumdog

... and I don't offend!!

Hmm, some posts here become marginal though...

**McJim** · 10th November 2006, 14:59

I've just heard through the grapevine....allegedly he's going to be prosecuted. It's farking wrong - probably cost $60K

**ManDownUnder** · 10th November 2006, 15:09

Originally Posted by McJim

I've just heard through the grapevine....he's going to be prosecuted. It's farking wrong - probably cost $60K

Cheers - keep me posted. That's not even a dollar per licence holder...

**Virago** · 10th November 2006, 15:13

Originally Posted by McJim

I've just heard through the grapevine....allegedly he's going to be prosecuted. It's farking wrong - probably cost $60K

That sucks.

It just confirms the way the law works in NZ - there is NO right of self-defence in this country (unless of course you're a police officer).

**ManDownUnder** · 10th November 2006, 15:31

Originally Posted by Virago

That sucks.

It just confirms the way the law works in NZ - there is NO right of self-defence in this country (unless of course you're a police officer).

It also makes sure people are held accountable for their actions. I have no problem with that aspect of it. The issue I have is with him being stressed out emotionally, and financially in the meantime.

At the far end, I wonder if he'll get any compensation... I'm willing to bet he doesn't... and THAT is where's it's wrong - in my book.
MDU

**Hitcher** · 10th November 2006, 16:53

Originally Posted by Virago

That sucks.

It just confirms the way the law works in NZ - there is NO right of self-defence in this country (unless of course you're a police officer).

For fuck's sake. The guy used a firearm to shoot another guy in the gut. At face value that is a criminal act. We only know what we have read or heard in the media or through the ever-reliable "grapevine". Those may or may not be all of the relevant matters. Let the Courts decide whether he is guilty or not.

**MattRSK** · 10th November 2006, 17:27

I hope he gets hung out to dry!

**Virago** · 10th November 2006, 19:33

Originally Posted by Hitcher

For fuck's sake. The guy used a firearm to shoot another guy in the gut. At face value that is a criminal act. We only know what we have read or heard in the media or through the ever-reliable "grapevine". Those may or may not be all of the relevant matters. Let the Courts decide whether he is guilty or not.

Which is always the police view when deciding to prosecute - "Let the courts decide".

Unfortunately, justice in this case doesn't come cheap.

It's the hypocrisy that bugs me. If a cop was in the same scenario, you could be certain no prosecution would result.

The problem is that any measure of reasonable force used in self-defence by normal citizens, will result in prosecution.

His only mistake in the eyes of the law? Not accepting his legal duty to allow himself to be hacked to bits by a machete-wielding nutter. How dare he....!

**Hitcher** · 10th November 2006, 20:16

Originally Posted by Virago

If a cop was in the same scenario, you could be certain no prosecution would result.

What a load of crap. Constable "X" was prosecuted in the Stephen Wallace murder trial. The Mokau cop was prosecuted for driving under the influence to get to a road accident scene. There are numerous other examples of Police officers being prosecuted for crimes, including capital offences.

And as for the last bit, people are allowed to use "reasonable force" to protect themselves and others. Even then, a case may go to Court for a determination as to what constitutes "reasonable".

**McJim** · 10th November 2006, 20:24

Don't want to sound like a whinger but back home if the crown or police feel the need to prosecute it's on the understanding that they will reimburse you for legal costs, loss of earnings etc. if you are found to be innocent.

I'm reading between the lines here but it sounds like you don't get fully compensated for being found innocent in this country - surely this can't be true...have I really emigrated to the 3rd world? I thought Dover was just joking.