Friday, March 27, 2009

How to get away with a crime

There'll be tumbleweeds blowing through here soon - n0thing to keep the readers away like having a dry piece of historiography as your only post for 36 hours.

Anyway, normal service is resumed with a tough-on-crime post. I watched 3News' usual emotion-laden blather passing for reportage about Some-ridiculous-crim-kid-name Broughton's sentencing last night (Stuff's story here), and wondered how his earlier victim Zara Schofield must feel about the fact that he's essentially been let off for his attack on her.

How else could you describe our practice of giving concurrent sentences? This little weasel got a minimum 12.5 years for murdering Karen Aim. Zara Schofield gets to sit there and watch how the mere 6 years he got for failing in his attempt to murder her (incompetence rewarded, how very NZ) is made concurrent with the longer sentence, ie the only sentence he'll actually serve is the one he got for Karen Aim.

I feel like we've let Zara Schofield down. Stupid-name Broughton, a broken thing that's obviously lost or simply never had whatever it is that makes us human, should be serving a sentence for her before he even starts serving the one he got for Karen Aim - giving him concurrent sentences is simply a message to Schofield that she doesn't count, and a message to Broughton that the last crime for which you get caught is the only one for which you'll be punished.

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

Time to face facts: Garrett is right.

People like Broughton should be shot out of hand.

I mean, when the likes of the listener are saying: 15% unemployment, 50% cut in incomes, 50% at least cut in home values why the fuck am I being taxed to pay for Broughton's food, lodging, healthcare, flatscreen TV, underfloor heating, etc etc etc

either or pays for himself - in cash, in advance - or he gets a 9mm to the back of the head.

Anonymous said...

"How to get away with a crime"

Oh - I thought you meant: this story:

Clark gets UN job

PM of NZ said...

'Stupid-name ...'

PM,

So unlike your usually very reserved non-imflammatory demeanour to use such a derogatory term.

Must have touched a nerve. I too have often wondered about concurrency.

If the scrotes that often present in our courts had their multiple sentences already gathered in their careers of crime appended maybe we would not require a three strike law.

Most would already be incarcerated for their natural life and more.

An aside, my full admiration to Mr. Aim. A true gentleman even after having to endure a horrific event. He really shows us how to publicly manage his tragic loss at this villain's hands.

Anonymous said...

Welcome to the dark side Milt.
DavidW

erikter said...

Why do we waste time with this piece of scum? he deserves nothing but to be shot or incarcerated for life.

He'll be free in a few years time ready to resume his miserable criminal life. Maori scum that deserves to be wiped out.

Pique Oil said...

Sometimes the USA gets the odd thing right. They issue concurrent sentences of two hundred years and we all look and laugh. What they are doing though is making it near impossible to get out, even though a lawyer with no scruples (I am sure there is a redundancy in there somewhere) may get one sentence reduced.
Zara Schofield has been told by the system that her survival was an aberation of no value.
Mr Aim showed us all how to behave with dignity. a shame that many of us are unable to learn from him.

Anonymous said...

We have a LEGAL system in NZ NOT a JUSTICE system and certainly NOT a system that respects the MORALS and ETHICS of the majority of the citizens

Our EMPLOYEES in Wgtn are singularly out of touch and out of order.

We need to remind them they are charged with setting the system to reflect the majority views not those of a few limp wristed hadn wringing wastes of oxygen

gd

Anonymous said...

You get away with anything when you are brown,the judges except the fact that you the BRO and you are THICK ie stupid and give the sentance, that the cussie bro understand. ps insideout and sideways is the new cap way with the thick bro DUH

Psycho Milt said...

Mr Aim showed us all how to behave with dignity. a shame that many of us are unable to learn from him.

Many of them right here on this thread, for instance.

PM of NZ: I unhesitatingly admit it to be simply a personal prejudice of mine that giving a child a stupid and bizarrely-spelled name is to mark them as a future criminal. No stats whatsoever I can offer to back it up, but I remain convinced. Do note though that I imply no causal relationship between name and criminality - merely the bigoted assumption that the kind of NZers likely to give their child a stupid and bizarrely-spelled name are the kind likely to produce a future criminal.

thedavincimode said...

Milt

This isn't just your personal prejudice. Its a proven scientific fact, generally referred to as "boy named Sue syndrome".

As for concurrent sentences, you are not alone. The other curiosity is the way in which our parole laws operate. Why do we need a three strikes policy? I don't understand why an equivalent result can't be achieved by re-jigging these rules. eg, for this kind of crime; cumulative sentence. Repeat offending, perhaps within stipulated time-frames, then you serve some or all of the time you didn't do the on the last one anjd progress to non-parole sentences. Is someone able to explain why we can't do this? It just seems to me that three strikes adds more law when we don't need to if we have existing machinery that can be changed.

Anonymous said...

I think the syndrome of stupid first names being linked to future earnings potential is covered off in Freakonomics, which suggests that people with overtly "black" names do much worse economically.

So I think there is empirical evidence to suggest that you are right:

stupid spelt wrong first name = unemployable bum = potential crim

It is also reflected in the behaviour of teachers (and fellow pupils - assuming the kid actually turns up) towards the kids, which affects their opportunities from the get go - names matter.

Anonymous said...

Justice, what justice? A slap in the face to the victims, the families, thw whole of NZ. Our lawmakers, politicians and judges just prefer the crims, and this proves it.

Sally said...

I have to ask myself is this crim-kid the result of socialist governments that increased their power play through the early propagandising of children advancing left-wing theorising as facts?

Since the 70s, peace studies, i.e. pacifist theorising with its not so subtle anti-American attitudes, the exaggerated threat of environment disasters and nuclear doomsday scenarios - let alone radicalised attitudes to treaty issues, feminism, and capitalism - have been taught as facts - thanks to neo-Marxist theorists within the education bureaucracy.

Anonymous said...

have to agree with sally

perhaps the poor kid is really a victim of societies inherent racism, and is merely externalising the social pressures that have been brought to bear on him by the meta narrative of being polynesian in Taupo?

Or he is a vicious little thug who never got taught self control or that actions have consequences.

either way scum, and yes the social engineering in education where self responsibility isnt as important as self-actualisation is part of the problem.

wonder why we havent had the grieving mother on, saying that her boy is really a good boy? parents are as much to blame as anyone here.

Anonymous said...

on another note, where is everybody? has the spat with fairfacts caused the site to melt down?

chfr said...

I have to agree, what has happened to this blog. It is rapidly becoming a "was must read for me"

Adolf get over what ever it was you had your knickers in a knot over and please resume posting.

On another note thank you PM for some thoughtful commentry in the last few posts.

WAKE UP said...

Pity you can't bring the same rigour and attitude to WW2 Milt.

Anonymous said...

Murder runs in his family. A close relative of his shot a local vet in the back many years ago. He's out now.

WAKE UP said...

Anonymous (whichever one you are): no matter what agreements or disagreements I have in debate with Psycho Milt, I find your comment following mine totally out of order, and I disassociate myself from it completely.

Anonymous said...

WAKE UP form a support group ie get over it? (not who you think)

WAKE UP said...

I have no idea who you are (and don't want to know) and your follow up comment is as reprehensible as the previous one.

My position stands - I will have nothing to do with anyone who thinks attacking the person is winning the debate.