Why bother with Courts ?

**buggerlugs** · 15-12-2011, 07:51 AM

http://www.news.com.au/national/teen...-1226222459805
What a joke and it is getting worse by the day..............

Streets · 15-12-2011, 09:52 AM

Not good for my blood pressure

Geez Louise · 15-12-2011, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by News.com.au

A VIOLENT teenager who almost killed an Australian war hero on a Melbourne street will serve no jail time.
The thug, who cannot be named for legal reasons, will instead be sent back to his home state to serve a supervision order.

Eighteen months ago, he launched an unprovoked attack on Scott May, who drove armoured personnel carriers in treacherous war zones in Afghanistan.

Mr May was awarded a Silver Commendation Medal for trying to save a wounded US Army nurse during a mortar attack while serving in Iraq.

But he came closest to death walking along Elizabeth St when the thug slashed open his face with a box-cutter in an unprovoked attack

The police spent 18mths trying to get this to go to court...for what??

If this is the respect the guys who serve our country are shown....Geez it makes me mad!!! Won't say what I really want to say, the swear filter will block me!

mcnews · 15-12-2011, 11:23 AM

Anyone with half a brain should know that in court what the poor fellow who was slashed did before he was slashed vocationally should bare no relevance on the proceedings. Seriously, are people that stupid?

Geez Louise · 15-12-2011, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnews

Anyone with half a brain should know that in court what the poor fellow who was slashed did before he was slashed vocationally should bare no relevance on the proceedings. Seriously, are people that stupid?

Well I must be stupid because I think it has significant relevance!

mcnews · 15-12-2011, 11:52 AM

Trust me it does not. (ten years in ADF, have the medals but not the chest to pin them on) That bit in the paragraphs is largely also not relevant, but it seems you think that ADF people are somehow to be seen as special in general walks of life, they do a job they choose to do and yes given perhaps a little respect and if the attack was provoked due to the attackers hatred of the ADF then it would perhaps bare some relevance. But as that is not the case it bares no relevance. There are plenty of drunk, obnoxious, wife bashing bullies in uniform also thus having such a chosen vocation should not be seen as a right to sainthood. Such talk is a slippery slope and also someone's blind cheering patriotism generally just hides a vacuous being ala the old saying 'Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel'. As in lots of very, very bad things have been done in the name of blind but largely false patriotism, much like religion..

mcnews · 15-12-2011, 11:58 AM

What you are essentially saying is because the victim was ADF the attackers deserves more punishment than if he had done it to you, your son or daughter, your mother or father....

MAD · 15-12-2011, 12:03 PM

Unless the guy was involved in a parade, or in uniform, at the time then his previous employment bears no relevance.
Should the mugger ask for employment history before cutting someones face?
Am I more worthy of a face slashing because I haven't served in Afganistan?

Geez Louise · 15-12-2011, 12:08 PM

No. What I am saying is, in every court case, the persons past is relevant and should be highlighted. Are you saying that it shouldn't be the case for everyone who appears before the courts? Everyone, attacker and victim just walk in and their past is not relevant? Of course it is!!

I also think that, the armed forces do not get the respect they deserve. Did he choose that career path, obviously yes. Did he ask to be sent to a war zone....probably not!

At the end of the day, you are correct, it is the news sensationalising it because of the victims service to the country but in this instance, I don't have an issue with it. Should they publish what good other victims do when they print a story? If you read victims stories, you will find that they do.

End of the day, the guy that did this was a thug and deserves to be punished!

My thoughts on it.

Cheers
Col

MAD · 15-12-2011, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geez Louise

No. What I am saying is, in every court case, the persons past is relevant and should be highlighted. Are you saying that it shouldn't be the case for everyone who appears before the courts? Everyone, attacker and victim just walk in and their past is not relevant? Of course it is!!

I also think that, the armed forces do not get the respect they deserve. Did he choose that career path, obviously yes. Did he ask to be sent to a war zone....probably not!

At the end of the day, you are correct, it is the news sensationalising it because of the victims service to the country but in this instance, I don't have an issue with it. Should they publish what good other victims do when they print a story? If you read victims stories, you will find that they do.

End of the day, the guy that did this was a thug and deserves to be punished!

My thoughts on it.

Cheers
Col

Where the hell do you come up with the idea that the armed forces don't get enough respect, from this article? And who in their right mind would sign up to the ADF, crossing their fingers they wouldn't go to war?

The kid did not know he was a war veteran, therefore it bears no relevance on his decision to make the attack.

It's ridiculous to think that this kid should be dealt with any harder just because it turned out that the bloke he attacked was in the ADF.

I rate plenty of people above myself, but I don't think I should receive any less 'justice', if the same were to happen to me, just because there are better people above me.

I think respect and justice are getting confused here. They are not linked in any way, shape, or form.

LTDHO · 15-12-2011, 12:24 PM

Regardless on the victims background, he or anyone should be randomly slashed.

ltd_on20s · 15-12-2011, 12:33 PM

i wonder if eye for an eye justice in this case, would make a lot of other muggers think twice.

i suggest....5 people go through eye for eye justice, and within 3 months i reckon i can promise a reduction in crime.

mcnews · 15-12-2011, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LTDHO

Regardless on the victims background, he or anyone should be randomly slashed.

Agreed. It is not human.

Fev · 15-12-2011, 01:31 PM

I hope he got the chance for him and his friends to kick the crap out of that kid!!

Rodp · 15-12-2011, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geez Louise

No. What I am saying is, in every court case, the persons past is relevant and should be highlighted. Are you saying that it shouldn't be the case for everyone who appears before the courts? Everyone, attacker and victim just walk in and their past is not relevant? Of course it is!!

For a victim chosen at random, their background unknown to the attacker, bares no relevance to the case.

Rodp · 15-12-2011, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LTDHO

Regardless on the victims background, he or anyone should be randomly slashed.

I'm hoping you meant shouldn't!!

Geez Louise · 15-12-2011, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodp

For a victim chosen at random, their background unknown to the attacker, bares no relevance to the case.

I agree the attacker didn't know who the guy was or what he did for a living, what I am saying though, is that when it comes before a court, of course it is relevant what the victim and accused did in their past.

Past history of BOTH people should be known. What if the guy that got attacked, was known to have a criminal record? What if the guy that attacked him had a police record as long as your arm and was known to police but was never offered help?

Are you guys seriously saying that a persons past or what they do or don't do within the community shouldn't be taken into account??

Sorry but I will agree to disagree. You have to know past history to assist in making a judgement call before a sentence or assistance for help etc is passed.

That was the point I was trying to get across. Nothing more, nothing less.

Cheers
Col

mcnews · 15-12-2011, 02:12 PM

If there was no question that the attack was unprovoked what the victim did vocationally is not relevant.
For the same reason that before a jury etc. previous history is not shown of the accused as it will immediately prejudice their chances in court to a jury.
In sentencing that history can then be taken into account.

**Grunter** · 15-12-2011, 02:16 PM

I wonder what the courts would hand out if a 43 year old walked up to a 17 year old and slashed their face?

mcnews · 15-12-2011, 02:20 PM

Hopefully something similar. Although I for one belive a 43 year old that did it deserves a stiffer penalty as if you are 43 years old and capable of doing that you have got to be a complete and utter mental case. There might be some doubt that the 17 year old will always be a mental case, but a 43 year old with still no grasp on reality to know doing such a thing is just plain subhuman is more likely to be beyond help.

MAD · 15-12-2011, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geez Louise

I agree the attacker didn't know who the guy was or what he did for a living, what I am saying though, is that when it comes before a court, of course it is relevant what the victim and accused did in their past.

Past history of BOTH people should be known. What if the guy that got attacked, was known to have a criminal record? What if the guy that attacked him had a police record as long as your arm and was known to police but was never offered help?

Are you guys seriously saying that a persons past or what they do or don't do within the community shouldn't be taken into account??

Sorry but I will agree to disagree. You have to know past history to assist in making a judgement call before a sentence or assistance for help etc is passed.

That was the point I was trying to get across. Nothing more, nothing less.

Cheers
Col

In uniform, or if it is advertised, the person should be respected more than Joe Public. In plain clothes they are just another person on the street.

Justice should be applied equally to everyone.

wrongwaynorris · 15-12-2011, 02:28 PM

Vermin like this , jelly backed lunatic left wing judges and bottom feeding criminal defence lawyers are why this country should have a star chamber .

mcnews · 15-12-2011, 02:36 PM

The bloke is vermin, no doubt about it.

Judges are by and whole, I think, very smart and well reasoned individuals.

Some in the criminal defence profession no doubt do pander to the lesser element in society but in the same breath someone has to do it and their client is entitled to a defence.

Although walking up to someone and slashing their face is as far as I see it, completely indefensible.

I like to think there is a good balance in the end but for unprovoked violence I do believe penalties should be incredibly stiff. There is no excuse.

Compared to what motorists have in the way of penalties, that are draconian and the law made in such a way that there is basically no defence for the driver, on the other hand I find disgusting and many steps too far.

atec77 · 15-12-2011, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buggerlugs

http://www.news.com.au/national/teen...-1226222459805
What a joke and it is getting worse by the day..............

name and shame , and tried for gbh with some time in detention , about 3 years for a start

Rodp · 15-12-2011, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geez Louise

I agree the attacker didn't know who the guy was or what he did for a living, what I am saying though, is that when it comes before a court, of course it is relevant what the victim and accused did in their past.

If they have a past history of offending, absolutely.. beyond that is irrelevant. What does it add or detract from the case if the victim is a decorated member of the ADF as opposed to a hot dog vendor from Mount Druitt?

bungarra · 15-12-2011, 06:47 PM

Just goes to prove the war on crime is lost.

ltd_on20s · 15-12-2011, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bungarra

Just goes to prove the war on crime is lost.

we are "civilised" now.

we don't use capital punishment on pedophiles and rapists anymore. because we are civilised.

we don't chop hands off repeat thieves. because we are civilized.

we don't kill drug dealers, because we are civilized.

in actual fact, being "civilized" has actually caused us more grief.

74_XB_Ute · 15-12-2011, 09:40 PM

I don't think I read anywhere in the news report that this guys decorated past was used as a method to incarcerate the attacker. I think it's just the irony that this bloke who has survived some obviously nasty circumstances overseas has come home to Australia to only come within a whisker of some serious injuries on the apparent safe streets. Afganistan....RPG's, AK's, IED's, Mortars, Car Bombs...phew...survived it!......Australia....boxcutter...damn it! Kinda ironic really!

Ben73 · 16-12-2011, 02:52 PM

I agree that past employment of the victim should not judge the harshness of the attackers punishment.
Whether they attack a homeless person or a office worker or a lawyer or anything else, the punishment should be the same.

This scum bag should get some jail time to think about his stupidity.

XR6_661 · 16-12-2011, 03:54 PM

I'm not defending the attacker in any way shape or form, what he did shouldn't be excused at all.

But am I the only one who see's the picture of the veteran with a 2inch long cut on his face with practically a band aid over it...Hardly came close to death I'm thinking.