Legal Beagle by Graeme Edgeler

Read Post

Legal Beagle: David Garrett wins

95 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

  • Sacha,

    Meanwhile John Banks joneses for user pays under the guise of local self-determination. This should help dispel misconceptions that he's the Nat/C&R candidate rather than an Act one.

    The whole city should not fund free pools in one area and not in others. Why should a retired ratepayer in Orewa pay for free pools in Manurewa when they can't access them, even if they wanted to?

    Under this system, if your local board listens to what you and your neighbours say and decides to have free pools, then the subsidy will come from your local rates.

    Want a library - move to a rich suburb? Good footpaths - rich suburb. Social justice - another city.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16772 posts Report Reply

  • Just thinking,

    Who won the last Olympic Gold for Rugby?
    USA, USA, USA.

    Putaringamotu • Since Apr 2009 • 1147 posts Report Reply

  • Gareth Ward,

    this is where the life without without parole for second strike murder comes in – the normal sentence for murder is life

    Do you think this will lead to an adjustment in the sentences that judges hand down for murder on a second strike? Where they would have given life (with the expectation of parole), they will now give out a "lesser" absolute sentence knowing that parole can't be applied?

    Auckland, NZ • Since Mar 2007 • 1721 posts Report Reply

  • Just thinking,

    The mandatory nature seems redundant with our never release clause of Preventative Detention.

    It's aspects of a penal system that cross-over into mental health that seems sensible to me & only for the very few.

    So this is just gonna increase the prisoner numbers, costing so much more, oh and just prior to privatisation?

    Putaringamotu • Since Apr 2009 • 1147 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    So this is just gonna increase the prisoner numbers

    Only a few hundred more - but it looks like you're being all tough with teh crime. That's what matters.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16772 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler,

    The mandatory nature seems redundant with our never release clause of Preventative Detention.

    This is an all-too-common misunderstanding of preventive detention. A sentence of preventive detention is not never release - once in operation it acts in exactly the same way as a life sentence.

    Preventive detention is just a way of giving life sentences to those who commit offences that don't carry life sentences.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3009 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler,

    Only a few hundred more - but it looks like you're being all tough with teh crime. That's what matters.

    Umm, it's not just how it looks, they really are getting tough.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3009 posts Report Reply

  • Gareth Ward,

    Preventive detention is just a way of giving life sentences to those who commit offences that don't carry life sentences.

    Intriguing, thanks

    Auckland, NZ • Since Mar 2007 • 1721 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Tough with a few hundred, Graeme.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16772 posts Report Reply

  • 3410,

    Garrett says the new law will act as a *deterrent*, yet cost prisons an extra $25m?, $50m? (I forget) over coming decades. How does this add up?

    Auckland • Since Jan 2007 • 2618 posts Report Reply

  • simon g,

    Radio NZ (and other media) report that Dr Sharples is "appalled".

    Associate Corrections Minister Pita Sharples says increasing punitive measures does not solve the problem of crime and violence.

    He says the proposals will create huge disparities in sentencing and punishment which are completely out of proportion to the crime.

    Dr Sharples says it shows the Government is hide-bound by political rhetoric on crime and punishment that has no factual basis.

    So the Associate Minister of Corrections strongly opposes the Corrections policy of the government. So he will speak for the government in his portfolio, against the government, in his portfolio.

    This is in direct contravention of the confidence and supply agreement, so the Minister will have to resign. So he won't.

    I hope that's clear.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 782 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler,

    So the Associate Minister of Corrections strongly opposes the Corrections policy of the government.

    Although this is now being fronted by the minister of corrections, that is most likely because the minister of justice - who has responsibility for this bill - privately disagrees with it. This is a justice policy, not a corrections policy.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3009 posts Report Reply

  • simon g,

    This is a justice policy, not a corrections policy.

    The sun doesn't rise in the east, and set in the west. It doesn't actually move at all. But, you know ...

    The duck rule applies. It's about people in prison. It's a corrections policy.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 782 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler,

    It's not about people in prison. It's about people in court. People in prison are completely unaffected.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3009 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    I think this is an extrermely important point:

    Kim Workman, from lobby group Rethinking Crime and Punishment, agreed, saying the policy effectively transferred discretion from the judiciary to the police.

    "Under the proposed legislation, the police could for example, lay a charge of assault of aggravated injury against an offender, which is a three strikes offence. They could then plea bargain with the offender, and reduce the charge to aggravated assault, which is not eligible, on condition that the offender pleaded guilty to the lesser charge.

    Many of the problems in the gimmick-laden US justice system come down to the way police effectively do the sentencing via prosecutorial discretion.

    This is a horrible, horrible way to to go.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 18970 posts Report Reply

  • Just thinking,

    And with the legal aid service having a crushing blow recently, all you'll need is a rubber stamp.

    Putaringamotu • Since Apr 2009 • 1147 posts Report Reply

  • DeepRed,

    This is a horrible, horrible way to to go.

    This level of horrible, methinks?

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 4355 posts Report Reply

  • simon g,

    Graeme: "People in prison are completely unaffected."

    From the government's press release, yesterday:

    The regime is expected to create a gradual increase in the number of prison beds required. An extra 142 prison beds will be needed in the first 10 years. This will be taken into account by the Department of Corrections in its planning for future prison capacity.

    ...

    The impact on the New Zealand prison population is estimated at 56 additional beds after five years, 142 beds after 10 years, 288 after 20 years, 433 after 30 years and 725 after 50 years.

    etc.

    (quack, quack)

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 782 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler,

    again - that's because people who aren't in prison are being affected (by being sent to prison).

    Saying that this is about corrections policy is like saying a policy to provide completely free healthcare for everyone under 18 is a policy about senior citizens, because healthier children will live longer, and there will be more senior citizens.

    The effect of this policy on the corrections portfolio is entirely tangential.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3009 posts Report Reply

  • andin,

    It has to be deeper than that, or young people wouldn't be voting for them as well

    That would be the offspring I mentioned, influenced by their clueless parents.
    Humans are hugely suggestible and children even more so.
    We have to** learn/be taught** a massive amount of what we need to "survive". And when the definition of survival passed on is fucked, people become fucked.

    And then there was Helen & Co who coped a lot of flake, for no justifiable reason, just because people have the capacity to be capricious little shits.

    raglan • Since Mar 2007 • 1230 posts Report Reply

  • Idiot Savant,

    So, is the shift from "life with a non-parole period of 25 years" to "maximum sentence with no parole" sufficient to overcome the A-G's BORA concerns about disproportionate punishment?

    Palmerston North • Since Nov 2006 • 1660 posts Report Reply

  • Just thinking,

    This article backs my understanding of Preventative Detention, that being you prove yourself safe to the community in order to be released, whereas the mandatory system locks up the little fish with the big for longer but not potentially indefinately.

    "But Victoria University criminology Professor John Pratt said the proposed law change would let a third-time offender out after a fixed period, whereas imposing preventive detention would mean they could be kept in prison for the rest of their life if they were still deemed a risk. "

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3243404/Opposition-to-Govts-three-strikes-sentencing-policy

    Putaringamotu • Since Apr 2009 • 1147 posts Report Reply

  • James W,

    Graeme:

    6. Finally, the initial proposal of the Sensible Sentencing Trust and ACT's to include smacking as a strike offence has still been rejected.

    Those two groups wanted to include smacking? Why? I thought the SST didn't want smacking to even be an offence. Why would they want it to be a strike offence? For PR purposes?

    Since Jul 2008 • 125 posts Report Reply

  • FletcherB,

    Those two groups wanted to include smacking? Why? I thought the SST didn't want smacking to even be an offence. Why would they want it to be a strike offence? For PR purposes?

    +1

    I too thought it could only be so that you can complain some more about how unjust it was?

    West Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 794 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler,

    Those two groups wanted to include smacking? Why? I thought the SST didn't want smacking to even be an offence. Why would they want it to be a strike offence? For PR purposes?

    For incompetence purposes.

    They didn't know what they were doing. The SST's draft didn't even include attempted murder!

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3009 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.