Wednesday, May 01, 2013

Excusing thuggery

The Greens are promising to repeal the Three Strikes law because it's apparently rendering punishments too severe for the level of offending.

In this case a 20 year-old with 20 convictions was given his first strike for violent aggravated robbery in 2010. Now he has been given a second strike for two further charges of aggravated robbery. It would appear that some people think kicking and robbing people is small beer which didn't warrant a second strike (meaning any subsequent similar  conviction would receive the maximum sentence possible - 14 years.)

Greens justice spokesman David Clendon said: "Judges know the detail and context of each case, but they are hamstrung by this legislation that says no matter what the circumstances they must impose the highest possible sentence ...
"Fourteen years is a sentence for manslaughter, a sustained beating, an assault on a child or even attempted murder."
The Greens would "definitely" seek to repeal the law if they came to power, Mr Clendon said.

Just one name.

Philip Cottrell.

Violent aggravated robbery can easily result in significant physical or mental injury, even death.

And the judge who deals with this type of criminality daily says Whaanga's offending is escalating.

I'm relieved he has been sent to prison for two years with no parole and a very large incentive to stop being a dangerous thug when he comes out. I care more about his past and potential victims than his rights.


CorrectGuy said...

Couldn't agree more.

Plus with 2700+ crims on their first strike and only 17 on their second, anecdotally it would seem the law is having the desired deterent effect.

If this number differential holds up over the next couple of years it would show that the law has been a raging success.

Kiwiwit said...

You have to question the motives of people like David Clendon, who place the interests of violent thugs ahead of those of their victims and law-abiding society. You are seeing the same response in the US today in response to the Boston bombings - trying to explain away the Tsarnaev brothers' deeds with stories of how the older brother was not allowed to compete in a boxing tournament, as if this somehow justifies mass murder!

The truth is, these apologists' views are not motivated by humanity, but rather a desire to push the inhuman Marxist creed they all share.

Anonymous said...

I think Clendon should have this guy next door, or even better, living with him. But he won't because Greens are all about you doing it while they lap from the trough as managers of mediocrity.


Anonymous said...

why even three strikes, the perp already has twenty convictions for goodness sake. We have gotten so darn lenient. Hope the Greens never make it to power, I believe they are truly dangerous, Marxists through and through. They love the crims, ignore the victims.

Anonymous said...

Victims are victimized twice -first by the criminal and then by the courts with their slap on the hand punishments. This in turn means that anyone who can moves away from crime ghettos which become even more stigmatized etc. Is that what they want?

Manolo said...

Why would do-gooders make excuses for filth/scum like this young criminal?

Johnny said...

Fortunately, it's academic.

The prospect is founded on this premise: "The Greens would .. if they came to power".

How to make sure they don't. Own goal number one. May there be any more.

Paulus said...

Like Labour Greenpeace are soft on crime too.
Speaks for itself.