Serial Killer Released on Parole

Forums › Off topic › Serial Killer Released on Parole

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2024768 29-May-2018 13:27

A killer should never have more rights that their victim(s). Once a person like this is sentenced and found guilty, they should lose their rights as a normal NZ citizen (permanently).

Varkk

643 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2024817 29-May-2018 13:59

He did lose a lot of rights, he was incarcerated. Now he is being released on parole with additional restrictions imposed by the parole board. He can be recalled to jail at any time should the parole officer feel he is breaching his conditions or showing risk of re-offending.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2024822 29-May-2018 14:01

Varkk:

He did lose a lot of rights, he was incarcerated. Now he is being released on parole with additional restrictions imposed by the parole board. He can be recalled to jail at any time should the parole officer feel he is breaching his conditions or showing risk of re-offending.

He still has more rights than his victims. He lost some of his rights for a while. Victims lost all of their rights forever.

tripper1000

1618 posts

Uber Geek

#2024911 29-May-2018 15:31

I think the fundamental problem is concurrent sentencing. The convict has received a 66% discount in that they get a 3 for 1 deal. Murder 1 human, serve 20 years of a life sentence, murder 3 humans, serve 20 years of 3x life sentences. Unarguable not fair, and now we are arguing weather or not it is just.

Another problem with concurrent sentencing when coupled with collateral free bail - there is little to no disincentive for the suspect to repeat the crime prior to conviction as at worst they'll enjoy a 2 for 1, 3 for 1, or 10 for 1 deal.

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2024982 29-May-2018 16:29

I assume these days it would be Periodic Detention? Which means indefinite, which might suit this criminal. The issue is he got what the law gave out decades ago, you cant re argue it now, no matter how unjust it may be.

Earbanean

945 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2025012 29-May-2018 16:57

tdgeek:

I assume these days it would be Periodic Detention? Which means indefinite, which might suit this criminal. The issue is he got what the law gave out decades ago, you cant re argue it now, no matter how unjust it may be.

I think it's called Preventative Detention

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2025016 29-May-2018 17:06

Earbanean:

tdgeek:

I assume these days it would be Periodic Detention? Which means indefinite, which might suit this criminal. The issue is he got what the law gave out decades ago, you cant re argue it now, no matter how unjust it may be.

I think it's called Preventative Detention

Yes, thats it, thanks.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

Lias

5589 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2025029 29-May-2018 17:41

tdgeek:

I assume these days it would be Periodic Detention? Which means indefinite, which might suit this criminal. The issue is he got what the law gave out decades ago, you cant re argue it now, no matter how unjust it may be.

Periodic Detention was another name for Community Work (or at least one type of it).. Once upon a time Community Service (as a sentence) referred to the type of community work where you go volunteer at the salvation army or something along those lines, and Periodic Detention was when you had to go to the probation depot for a day. You turned up early on a Saturday if you were gainfully employed, rolls got checked, you got lectured then jumped in vans and headed out to do gardening/painting/etc at schools, kindies, maraes etc. I understand they ran it most days of the week so that those unemployed could crank out the hours faster, with different days for different gang affiliations etc to avoid problems. According to Wikipedia when it was introduced back in the 60s it was from Friday night to Sunday night, and one evening a week, but when I did it back in 2001 it was just a daytime thing that amounted to a few months of spending my Saturdays engaged in manual labour.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup.

BTR

1527 posts

Uber Geek

#2025650 30-May-2018 13:08

Ok this talk of sentences based on laws at the time is nonsense. If that was thw cause why did the Governemtn apologise to people who were convicted of being homosexual in the past.....

Your arguement is invalid, times change and there should be nothing wrong with saying we got his sentence wrong and reassessing it. If a case can go back to trial i.e. retrial as the Bain case has multiple times for example why can we not reassess someones sentence?

A reassessment could work in the guilty parties favour or in the crowns favour. I have no issue with this.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2025656 30-May-2018 13:14

BTR:

Ok this talk of sentences based on laws at the time is nonsense. If that was thw cause why did the Governemtn apologise to people who were convicted of being homosexual in the past.....

Your arguement is invalid, times change and there should be nothing wrong with saying we got his sentence wrong and reassessing it. If a case can go back to trial i.e. retrial as the Bain case has multiple times for example why can we not reassess someones sentence?

A reassessment could work in the guilty parties favour or in the crowns favour. I have no issue with this.

This has no comparison to the David Bain case, that was a result of the Appeal process. There is no appeal taking place here.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2025670 30-May-2018 13:19

BTR:

Ok this talk of sentences based on laws at the time is nonsense. If that was thw cause why did the Governemtn apologise to people who were convicted of being homosexual in the past.....

Agreed and this is a very good point. Bad things were done under Apartheid for example. Perfectly "legal" at the time in South Africa. People were not immune to prosecution when laws/governments change. People still got tried for crimes against humanity. It should be no different in cases like this. I would love to see a central international criminal court for handling these kind of cases, one thats independent from government.

networkn

Networkn
32358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2025671 30-May-2018 13:20

MikeB4:

This has no comparison to the David Bain case, that was a result of the Appeal process. There is no appeal taking place here.

I agree it's not the same as the David Bain case, however, there is merit to the idea that the Crown can quash a conviction for something like homosexuality retrospectively, that in specific cases, where sentencing was inappropriate that sentences can be reviewed. As someone else pointed out, he got a 66% discount on his sentence, which today would be exceptionally unlikely. It would, however, open a massive and very likely massively expensive can of worms.

One thing I don't understand, is if someone is given a non-parole life sentence of 20 years, is there a point at which the crown is compelled to give weight to a parole? I presume there is something in place that prevents the crown from dismissing a parole option out of hand.

networkn

Networkn
32358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2025674 30-May-2018 13:25

MikeB4:

This has no comparison to the David Bain case, that was a result of the Appeal process. There is no appeal taking place here.

Is there a time limit to when the crown could appeal a sentence given to someone convicted? If there wasn't, to me this would seem be a reasonable case to test the waters at the least.

Even if this guy had been a model prisoner for 20 years, got an education, helped others and found religion, and was genuinely remorseful, I still don't think that would be an excuse for him to be let out.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2025678 30-May-2018 13:40

I am not saying I agree with the release, I do not know all the facts relating to the decision by the Parole Board to form an opinion either way. I hope it does not turn out to be a tragic mistake.

gzt

17159 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2025704 30-May-2018 14:48

MikeB4:
I am not saying I agree with the release, I do not know all the facts relating to the decision by the Parole Board to form an opinion either way. I hope it does not turn out to be a tragic mistake.

I don't know either but I'd guess the sentence is ending sometime soonish that and other factors they may have decided a supervised parole with conditions etc is a better scenaio than end of sentence releasing with $20 and a bus ticket or whatever they get at the sentence end.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7