Justice served
Aug. 17th, 2002 02:41 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
krazykitkatI started this lj thinking it would be about fandom, fic, basically a fun diversion...I've so far talked about Iraq and now the sentencing of a gang rapist in Sydney.
Justice was finally served yesterday and Judge Michael Finnane did his job.
55 years, 40 non-parole for the leader of 3 vicious gang rapes on 4 victims.
Yes, it's a harsh sentence. But this bastard is 20 years old, the offences committed when he was 18, and through 3 trials he hasn't shown the slightest remorse or contrition. In fact he showed absolute contempt for the proceedings and claimed that two of the victims had begged to perform oral sex on him.
The judge said that his lack of remorse and contrition was a large factor behind the severity of the sentence. The gang rapes were also highly planned and coordinated, these weren't some 'heat of the moment' actions.
The legal community are complaining that it isn't a proportionate sentence, that the average sentence for a single murder is 14 years.
That's misleading. There's murderers who've only killed one person in for life because of the depravity of their crime. Murder is effectively graded in severity for sentencing.
And there are 4 victims here in 3 separate attacks. Should he be sentenced as if there was only one attack? The victims were held for hours and repeatedly attacked.
Why can't there be crimes outside of murder that rank with murder in severity? As the judge said: "People talk about rape as a sexual crime, but in reality it's a crime of domination and contempt."
I understand the sense of proportion argument, but isn't it the legal community who are always saying that each case should be judged on its own merits? That the judge should have latitude? Isn't that what's happened here?
I won't lose any sleep for him. Maybe that makes me vindictive, but I honestly believe that his chances of rehabilitation are next to nil. Maybe it won't discourage others, but at least he won't be out there committing more
Justice was finally served yesterday and Judge Michael Finnane did his job.
55 years, 40 non-parole for the leader of 3 vicious gang rapes on 4 victims.
Yes, it's a harsh sentence. But this bastard is 20 years old, the offences committed when he was 18, and through 3 trials he hasn't shown the slightest remorse or contrition. In fact he showed absolute contempt for the proceedings and claimed that two of the victims had begged to perform oral sex on him.
The judge said that his lack of remorse and contrition was a large factor behind the severity of the sentence. The gang rapes were also highly planned and coordinated, these weren't some 'heat of the moment' actions.
The legal community are complaining that it isn't a proportionate sentence, that the average sentence for a single murder is 14 years.
That's misleading. There's murderers who've only killed one person in for life because of the depravity of their crime. Murder is effectively graded in severity for sentencing.
And there are 4 victims here in 3 separate attacks. Should he be sentenced as if there was only one attack? The victims were held for hours and repeatedly attacked.
Why can't there be crimes outside of murder that rank with murder in severity? As the judge said: "People talk about rape as a sexual crime, but in reality it's a crime of domination and contempt."
I understand the sense of proportion argument, but isn't it the legal community who are always saying that each case should be judged on its own merits? That the judge should have latitude? Isn't that what's happened here?
I won't lose any sleep for him. Maybe that makes me vindictive, but I honestly believe that his chances of rehabilitation are next to nil. Maybe it won't discourage others, but at least he won't be out there committing more