They were described as two of this country's most notorious sexual predators, their offending so heinous one of the victim's called it depraved, one's had PTSD and flashbacks since, one had attempted suicide twice.
The judge apparently choked back tears as he said, ‘The harm to the victims can only be described as profound.’
The judge 'described graphic details of some of the offending, which at times involved the use of beer bottles and a deodorant ball.' Yet given all that, what did the judge give them? Permanent name suppression - and a discounted sentence.
One offender got 11 months home detention, the other got seven months.
The victims urged the judge to lift name suppression, they said they felt like they had little value or worth and 'this victim blaming culture would never stop', but the judge upheld the suppression, based on the fact he felt the offenders met the category of extreme hardship - and would not be able to move on with their lives if their names were made public.
They had their sentences reduced due to their age at the time, with the judge saying ‘youth is relevant as it explains the lack of consequential thinking.’ What message does that send young offenders in our current climate of rampant youth crime?
That you have another excuse for your behaviour - you're too young to be thinking clearly. So despite the profound impact on the victims lives, the trauma, the flashbacks, the suicide attempts, the bravery in coming forward and going through this whole process, despite all of that, what are they left with?
How is there any justice served for them?
The judge was concerned about the offenders’ ability to move on with their lives, but what about the victims? How do they move on with their lives?
This is why so many victims of sexual violence and sexual offending never come forward. This is why they feel the system is broken and rigged against them.
How many times do we hear about the plight of the offender? Their background, their upbringing, their challenges? Why is that seemingly prioritised over and above the plight of the victims? These guys didn't even show remorse.
The judge said, ‘I am not convinced there is a high level of remorse, remorse needn't be extraordinary but it must be genuine. There is a lack of tangible evidence of this.’ So no remorse, but still a light sentence.
When the TV news crews filmed one of these guys leaving court he flicked the bird at them, had his middle finger up at them the whole way out. Does that indicate a chastened offender whose learnt the lesson or understands the gravitas of what they've done? Of course not.
It's just another guilty criminal who beat the system.
A system that is seemingly designed to favour the offender. It's a travesty not just for the victims, but for all the families involved in trying to hold predators to account.
What it says is - the crime committed against you may have ruined your life, but the justice system wants to make sure it doesn't ruin the lives of the offenders too.
I just don’t see how that's fair - or just. It feels like we have a justice system working backwards, where there's actually no justice at all.
Kate Hawkesby is a political broadcaster on Newstalk ZB - her articles can be seen HERE.
3 comments:
"Youth explained the lack of consequential thinking Presumably they were under 16, the proposed voting age.
You should have published the judge's name, Kate.
These guys need calling out and exposing for their terrible decisions.
They're supposed to be some of our most learned citizens but recent events have shown they're a bunch of highly paid, unaccountable woke virtue-signalers.
Just outrageous, Kate !!
This has happened several times previously - rapists getting home detention because of the judge "discounting" the sentence, so the poor offender won't be too hurt !!!
Post a Comment