I can thimk of several much stronger words too, Cynical, but I'm mindful of the sensibilities of some of the older readers here...
Hi Craig Young - I am not sure if reprehensible is the right word to use, if Weatherston gets another chance to hurt Gilbert and Lesley Elliott. Is there not a stronger word than reprehensible? I agree with you but would like to use a stronger word.
Let's not excuse ACT's behaviour, either. Law and order party indeed! The Law Commission Report stated that the abolition of the provocation defence would probably lead to greater severity in homicide cases and more murder verdicts compared to manslaughter, yet they went ahead and voted against this significant advance in victims rights legislation.
As for the question of Clayton Weatherston, does anyone else find it reprehensible that this despicable ratbag will get another chance to torment Gilbert and Lesley Elliott before the courts? Haven't they suffered enough already?
Great news. In Tasmania after it abolished provocation as an excuse for otherwise murderous homicides, the severity of criminal convictions increased and there were more murder verdicts secured relative the lesser penalty of manslaughter. This is a great day for victims rights in this country.
Cynical - I happen to agree with your comments'. I was pointing out the obvious in regards to how the law stands now. I was on a jury few years back when provocation was used as a defence, and nobody had any doubt it, the trial led me to reflect on the tentative nature of justice and mercy. Our RIGHTS have become somewhat diluted - confused!
Kathy - perhaps I should ask the criminal first - that stabbing hurts me - how do you feel about that? Or, please get off my wife or daughter - they do not like what you are doing. How do you feel about that? O you poor man - here, let me help you. After that, I will ring the police. They might shoot your leg off but do not worry, you will be well looked after. I have already come to the realisation that I as victim do not have any rights so it cannot possibly get any worse. Go ahead, throw the book at me!
Cynical - Thanks! But I don't think self-defence permits you to kill - no matter what the circumstances.
It had to be abolished because some lawyers are unscrupulous and do not uphold Justice. If defending one home, one's family, surely that is self defence!
Well the defence of provocatation is now abolished thanks largely to the Weatherston case and this was the worst possible example of the defence of provocation. Is it then replaced with anything? Can a murder still be discounted to manslaughter or are all murders equal in the eyes of the law? Had one of Sophie's parents' managed to intervene and killed Weatherston could they not have pleaded PROVOCATION and (that would have been a fine example of the defence of provocation) would they have a valid defence now? Just wondering!!
