this one's electric for a nice tingle at the end.
Ashamed to be Australian
- Thread starter VYBerlinaV8
- Start date
Prevention is better then the cure I think is wot he is sayin.
So what happens, you nut every bloke in case he may become a murderer or crook judge? And besides you don't need an elastrator, all you have to do is multiply them by nothing and they'll disappear.
what i'm saying, is that stupid people are breeding faster than smart people.
those that present their stupidity to a court of law are castrated for the greater good.
we're all moving into communist/socialist societies, so why delay the inevitable?
this is my fave so far.
you'd be surprised what things people do while drunk and then cannot believe they've done it.
obviously this is the first time they did this, and I highly doubt that this is the first time they got drunk (one of them was sober btw).
So yeah, in my eyes they are of good character, as none of their previous actions suggested they would do this.
Now if they do this second time, then they obviously wouldn't be judged as "being of good character".
Having been to university, married an engineer, and served in the Defence Force, I think I have plenty of experience at seeing the effects of alcohol.
As alcohol works primarily to lower inhibitions, people simply behave like their normal selves but exaggerated when they have alcohol. So if you like to be a bit of a prankster, when you're drunk, you'll be a huge prankster. Bit of a flirt becomes a huge flirt, and so on.And people with a violent inclination become violent.
But I don't believe that alcohol turns people who are fundamentally gentle into callous cold-hearted brutes.
They may not have had encounters with the legal system before, but I'd be willing to bet they've been in drunken fights before. If you know you have an aggressive streak which alcohol exacerbates, I maintain that you shouldn't drink.
We'll just have to agree to disagree, I suppose.
From the text of the article:
" ................Justice Martin’s grounds for these conclusions are astonishing. He notes character references in their favour, proving that many of them have friends and employers who think nice things about them. This hardly balances out what they did. He then scrapes the barrel in special pleading on their behalf, holding, for example, that Spears had never previously ‘come into contact with the criminal law’. Considering he was 18 at the time, this is hardly such an achievement. Hird, Kloeden, and Swain, on the other hand, despite their youth had previously had difficulties with the law. Yet Justice Martin was able to claim that this was ‘totally out of character’ for all of them, and also that they were ‘genuinely sorry’. Presumably he was able to judge their tremendous remorse from how they casually left the scene of the motionless man who soon died from their beating. This too was in their character. Or perhaps their remorse was manifested in the lies they worked on together to tell the cops. Or perhaps he judged their remorse in the fact that four out of five of them didn’t cooperate with the police at all, and the only one did when it was already apparent that they would be caught."
As I mentioned in my earlier post, there was a history suggesting that they were not of "good character" whatever that means beyond their work colleagues testimonials and the unbiased (not) Justice Martin.
Just because they hadn't actually committed a crime identical to the nature of this one, does not change the fact that some of them had run in's with the law before.
There is no excuse for such behaviour. There is a saying that goes.....you will learn the truth from children and from drunks.
Looks like the truth serum actually manifested what was inside of them anyway (drunk or otherwise) their venom and violent discrimination shone through
" ................Justice Martin’s grounds for these conclusions are astonishing. He notes character references in their favour, proving that many of them have friends and employers who think nice things about them. This hardly balances out what they did. He then scrapes the barrel in special pleading on their behalf, holding, for example, that Spears had never previously ‘come into contact with the criminal law’. Considering he was 18 at the time, this is hardly such an achievement. Hird, Kloeden, and Swain, on the other hand, despite their youth had previously had difficulties with the law. Yet Justice Martin was able to claim that this was ‘totally out of character’ for all of them, and also that they were ‘genuinely sorry’. Presumably he was able to judge their tremendous remorse from how they casually left the scene of the motionless man who soon died from their beating. This too was in their character. Or perhaps their remorse was manifested in the lies they worked on together to tell the cops. Or perhaps he judged their remorse in the fact that four out of five of them didn’t cooperate with the police at all, and the only one did when it was already apparent that they would be caught."
As I mentioned in my earlier post, there was a history suggesting that they were not of "good character" whatever that means beyond their work colleagues testimonials and the unbiased (not) Justice Martin.
Just because they hadn't actually committed a crime identical to the nature of this one, does not change the fact that some of them had run in's with the law before.
There is no excuse for such behaviour. There is a saying that goes.....you will learn the truth from children and from drunks.
Looks like the truth serum actually manifested what was inside of them anyway (drunk or otherwise) their venom and violent discrimination shone through
I don't think it's about 5 stupid men as much as it is about possibly showing the existing attitudes in our country, which led to original poster to choose the title he did for this thread.
It's about our (or my) dissapointment that a judge would act that way when the victim was aboriginal. Same reason it did not make the mainstream media when every day we get petty stories about real petty issues taking up space and time.
I find that dissapointing and unfortunate and think it would be nicer and better if that wasn't the case.
What would have been an appropriate punishment then?
I believe the sentence was a bit lenient. They should have got more years. It is not as bad as say the Anita Cobby rape and murder, that deserves life never to be released as do all those types of murders. But it's much worse than a general manslaughter charge. But I still believe these men probably didn't really mean to kill their victim. Not like the Cobby killers.
Whether the crime is regarded less important, less criminal because the victim is aboriginal? I wasn't sure, so I did a quick google search. I came up with this crime that seems a bit similar, alcohol involved, but the colours swapped,...
http://www.australian-news.com.au/Aboriginal_racist_murder.htm
Can't actually say I'd heard of that one either. Be interesting to find out how many years the perpetrators got? I have no idea?
There is just bad mungrels everywhere I reckon.
See ya's.
Last edited:
It is exactly this lack of, empathy and impartiality, from the judge that jumped out at me when reading the article.
Unfortunately the whole, leniency and slap on the wrist, prevades our society and I don't mean just the Australian society but a fair proportion of human society.
The US (some states at least) seem to have the right idea where siblings were jailed for 50 years and death for murdering a 3 year old and rendering a 10 year old a cripple. Unfortunately it doesn't fix the victims but at least neither perputrators will ever walk free again.
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/Oct-06-Fri-2006/news/10074483.html
Yet there is a case in England where 5, late teens up to 23 year old, males and females, over 5 days tortured, raped and finally killed a young mentally ill woman. The in this case sentence seems very in line with this NT judge showing a complete lack of empathy with the victim.
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Six-day+orgy+of+torture+that+ended+in+murder+of+woman.-a060539970
Last edited:
...
Hi TC,
About Bill Rowe from that article you linked
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=100226980607
About Bill Rowe from that article you linked
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=100226980607
Similar threads
