Graeme William Burton in custody

[riffer]

Manifestly, the Parole Board were collectively incompetant. So do you consider that the family of the dead man (who suffer for the Board's dereliction) , and society (who also suffer) should simply say "Oh dear , what a pity, never mind , let's just carry on" ?

Why should the Board not be held accountable for its actions? If a mechanic is incompetant and assembles your car wrongly, so that you crash and kill someone, the mechanic can be found guilty of manslaughter (it has happened). Why should not the Board members be thus charged? Would you say that the family of the man killed as a result of that mechanics negligence had no right to be angry at him?

Completely missing the point here.

You see, there's a set formula. If you say all the right things, you get through. Pure and simple.

It's not the Parole Board's fault. They simply follow the law as written.

A better example would be if a mechanic followed Toyota's guidelines for rebuilding of brakes, and the brakes failed. Then Toyota would be at fault.

[GSX-RJIM]

That arse hole is so lucky the cop was an armed defender who could shoot really well, a General Duty Cop would have more than likey killed him as it is easyer to shoot to kill than aim for a leg.

[Maha]

the cop was an armed defender

Armed Offender i think you will find.....

[James Deuce]

Manifestly, the Parole Board were collectively incompetant. So do you consider that the family of the dead man (who suffer for the Board's dereliction) , and society (who also suffer) should simply say "Oh dear , what a pity, never mind , let's just carry on" ?

Why should the Board not be held accountable for its actions? If a mechanic is incompetant and assembles your car wrongly, so that you crash and kill someone, the mechanic can be found guilty of manslaughter (it has happened). Why should not the Board members be thus charged? Would you say that the family of the man killed as a result of that mechanics negligence had no right to be angry at him?

As I've said before the Parole board are as hamstrung by the sentence as the Judge is by the law in regard to dishing out the sentence. The parole board has to go by the original sentence which at the time did not include minimum non-parole periods.

Burton's lifestyle, attitude, and drug habit are not the parole board's fault. This is just moving the responsibility for the crime along the tree and away from the person who has committed them. Even that Sensible Sentencing, McVicar loony has tried to direct blame away from the parole board. If Burton's sentence has run, the parole board have no rights in law to keep him in. They can only release early.

Everyone has the right to be angry. No one has the right to demand the death of another human being as retribution for another death. We give that away in return for the mutual benefits of society and rule of law. If you want the law changed you have the right to petition a political party to make that policy party policy and implement it as law via the means available to any society governed by a rule of law and an election process.

[Steam]

a General Duty Cop would have more than likey killed him as it is easyer to shoot to kill than aim for a leg.

I think the bobbies on here have confirmed they would have been aiming at the COM, the Centre of Mass, and just hit him in the leg by mistake. They took multiple shots before hitting him, so it doesn't sound like it was intended to be a fancy wounding shot.
Maybe it's good they didn't kill him, because now he has to be in prison the rest of his life with only one leg, and the others will more likely mock him forever.

[James Deuce]

That arse hole is so lucky the cop was an armed defender who could shoot really well, a General Duty Cop would have more than likey killed him as it is easyer to shoot to kill than aim for a leg.

He was shot by a General Duties cop, with a Glock, at a range of 20-25m. Bloody good shooting. Contrary to popular opinion, no organisation trains its armed officers to shoot at limbs. It is impossible to do so reliably. The part of the body that moves least when in motion is the torso. That is what they will have been aiming for.

Steam - only 3 rounds were fired, shared between two officers. One of those officers is a stellar shot.

[Maha]

Contrary to popular opinion, no organisation trains its armed officers to shoot at limbs. It is impossible to do so reliably. The part of the body that moves least when in motion is the torso. That is what they will have been aiming for.

So it was piss poor shooting really wasn't it?....if they would have been aiming for the Torso and got the leg, dang even i could have done that....

[Scouse]

That arse hole is so lucky the cop was an armed defender who could shoot really well, a General Duty Cop would have more than likey killed him as it is easyer to shoot to kill than aim for a leg.

Do you live on a farm..?

[Ixion]

As I've said before the Parole board are as hamstrung by the sentence as the Judge is by the law in regard to dishing out the sentence. The parole board has to go by the original sentence which at the time did not include minimum non-parole periods.

Burton's lifestyle, attitude, and drug habit are not the parole board's fault. This is just moving the responsibility for the crime along the tree and away from the person who has committed them. Even that Sensible Sentencing, McVicar loony has tried to direct blame away from the parole board. If Burton's sentence has run, the parole board have no rights in law to keep him in. They can only release early.

Everyone has the right to be angry. No one has the right to demand the death of another human being as retribution for another death. We give that away in return for the mutual benefits of society and rule of law. If you want the law changed you have the right to petition a political party to make that policy party policy and implement it as law via the means available to any society governed by a rule of law and an election process.

Entirely incorrect.

From the website of the parole Board (http://www.paroleboard.govt.nz/nzpb/aboutus/paroleeligibility.html)

Eligibility for parole is determined under the Parole Act 2002. Eligibility for parole is no guarantee of release – it simply means an offender is entitled to a hearing in front of the Board.

..

Under the Criminal Justice Act 1985:

• Offenders serving short-term sentences (one year or less) had to be released after serving half of their sentence.
• Offenders serving long-term sentences (more than one year) but not classified as Serious Violent Offenders become eligible for parole after serving one-third of their sentence.
• Offenders classified as Serious Violent Offenders do not become eligible for parole, but must be released after serving two-thirds of their sentence (this is known as an offender’s Final Release Date), unless they are the subject of an order under Section 107 of the Parole Act to keep them in prison. ...
• Offenders serving sentences of life or preventive detention become eligible for parole after serving 10 years, unless they have been given minimum a non-parole period by the Judge sentencing them. If they have been given a minimum non-parole period, they become eligible for parole once they have reached that point.

As a life prisioner Burton's release on parole was discretionary to the board. They were not "hamstrung" in any way. They could have said "No way , you are a menace". Instead they said (quote from the Parole Board's decison)

...
As will be seen the Board has come to the view over the past nine months that Mr Burton’s potential risk to the safety of the community is not considered to be undue taking into account the efforts made to address his offending and his proposed release plan.
..

Obviously, Mr Burton's risk to the community was very undue indeed. The absence of a non-parole period is completely irrelevant.

The Board cocked up. Badly

Members of the board are required (Under the Parole Act 2002) to have

...
the ability to make a balanced and reasonable assessment of the risk an offender may present to the community when released from detention; and
..

Manifestly, the Board failed that requirement. They should be held accountable for their negligence , or incompetance.

And I consider that I do indeed have the right to demand that a worthless parasite be removed from my community. I don't care what happens to him, if he can find somewhere else to go to , good for him. But I see no reason why I should work to support him, or accept his presence in our society. Whether Burton qualifies as a human being is debateable. I do not consider him worthy of treatment as human.

[jimbo600]

So it was piss poor shooting really wasn't it?....if they would have been aiming for the Torso and got the leg, dang even i could have done that....

I doubt it mate. G17s are not particularly accurate over 25m. Quite hard to get a good shot over that distance, even in a nice controlled range environment. Add to that the stress of confronting a rampaging twat with a shotty, and possibly two bushmasters, plus the stress of having to actually shoot a person. Jeez I'm surprised there wasn't more rounds discharged. Personally I thought the guys did pretty bloody good.

[James Deuce]

So it was piss poor shooting really wasn't it?....if they would have been aiming for the Torso and got the leg, dang even i could have done that....

A handgun is not an accurate weapon. If you aren't familiar with a handgun you'd be lucky to hit atmosphere let alone the target.

There are a variety of grades for accuracy and competency is gained at metre ranges in single figures. 20-25m is a dream shot for a practiced pistol shooter with a Glock.

[James Deuce]

Entirely incorrect.

Only if you consider that you have made a decision without knowing the original sentence, the terms of the sentence, the caveats applied to the sentence, and changes made to the terms of Burton's sentence over the course of his incarceration.

[Scouse]

And I consider that I do indeed have the right to demand that a worthless parasite be removed from my community.

Ah but it's not in your's and my community, it's in Jim's community so all good keep the scum away from Auckland but unfortunatly we will prolly have to be host to it in Parimurimu.

[Ixion]

Only if you consider that you have made a decision without knowing the original sentence, the terms of the sentence, the caveats applied to the sentence, and changes made to the terms of Burton's sentence over the course of his incarceration.

I have made no descision , except the obvious one that his release was disastrous.

You stated that the Parole Board were "hamstrung" because his original sentence had no minimum non parole period.

I have shown that to be entirely incorrect. The board were not "hamstrung" in any way, and the absence of a non parole period was completley irrelevant.

[imdying]

So it was piss poor shooting really wasn't it?....if they would have been aiming for the Torso and got the leg, dang even i could have done that....

Bahahhaha, you could hit a man, in the torso, who is waving a shotgun at you, from 25 metres with a Glock 17? Pass us a Tui mate...