About those judges…..

NZ Herald:  ‘He subjected his newborn baby to months of torture, biting through her earlobe, twisting her toe until it snapped, fracturing her ribs and femur and gouging the soles of her feet with his fingernail. But he will not spend any time in prison…’

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to About those judges…..

  1. KG says:

    Still travelling. Home later today.

  2. The Gantt Guy says:

    The scum was reported to be “remorseful”. Let’s hope his conscience gets the better of him and he does the only honourable thing left.

    And BTW, where was the “mother” when this was going on?

    • Katie says:

      Bet you the “mother” was whoring around and stoned out of her mind.

    • KG says:

      “Conscience”, Gantt? You think he knows how to spell the word, or the meaning of it?

    • mawm says:

      GG – remorse? You’ve got to be joking. These scumbags have never ever taken responsibility for anything because society has always given them a free ride for every single wrong decision or bit of bad behavior. The judges are just part of that society that will forever be making excuses for them because of their colour.

      • Darin says:

        If he were the type to feel remorse he would have never done what he did from jump.Hang’m high.

  3. starboard says:

    Unfortunately just another daily event in the sewer thats New Zealand. FFS what does it take to get locked up now days :rant ! Fancy doing that to a 4 week old baby…you :censor arsehole. :gunner

  4. Barry says:

    Nevin Dawson is as awfully hopeless at being a judge as john key is at being “prime minister” of NZ

  5. AMartinez says:

    Glad too see it’s not only the Good ol’e USA that’s gone bat shit crazy!

  6. Benares says:

    I remember when Home Detention was first introduced in 2002, how all the liberal fuckwits said:
    – It was not a soft option.
    – If the conditions of H.D. were broken it was straight off to prison.
    – It would NEVER be used for violent criminals.
    – It would NEVER be used for sexual criminals.
    – It would NEVER be used for serious drug criminals.
    – It would NEVER be used for organised crime and gang criminals.
    – It would significantly reduce re-offending/recidivism by criminals.
    – It would allow criminals to remain positively engaged with their families/whanau/community/iwi, etc.

    So how well did that work out:
    – It IS a very soft option, in fact criminals regular ask for H.D. in preference to not just prison but other community based sentences like Intensive Supervision or Community Work.
    – 71% of all criminals break at least one condition of their H.D. but any sanctions are non-existent to piss weak. Of the 13,000 known violations of H.D. only 37 have been given prison sentences.
    – Repeat serious multiple violent criminals were given H.D. within one year of introduction and today it the absolute MAJORITY (52%) of all violent criminals receive H.D.
    – Sexual criminals are today regularly given H.D.
    – Class-A drug makers and suppliers started being given H.D. within two years of introduction.
    – Gang members were given H.D. within one of introduction and today are regularly given H.D. to their own fortified gang bases!
    – As for recidivism and reducing criminal behaviour or re-offending I’ll let people judge for themselves.

    So what positives did come out of the introduction of H.D.:
    – The private contract monitoring companies are making an absolute mint.
    – The Government saved $3-4 billion dollars.

    But surely our politicians and Parliament would never abandon their sworn duty to protect peaceable and law-abiding citizens from violent evil thugs and criminals just to save few dollars while cynically enhancing their liberal do-gooder reputations? Surely not.

    Thanks Labour (with support votes from the Greens and NATIONAL f.f.s.) for introducing Home Detention, it’s truly a (fiscal) success!