Grace Millane
-
@booboo said in Grace Millane:
@Crucial said in Grace Millane:
I said earlier in the thread that one explanation for his behaviour was that he was a narcissist and that now appears the case.
I see the Daily Mail has pulled the story with his name and photo from their site but it remains as a link on a google search. Cunning? Could claim that they published accidentally then removed quickly.
Really? Just went and found it a couple of minutes ago (mind you via google).
Are they covered by NZ name suppression laws? Or just by convention? And didn't we have that discussion earlier in the thread ... ?
Can't think why he needs name suppression.
He’s rumoured to be up on other charges so I guess they don’t want to prejudice the trial/s if that’s the case . Old overseas articles with his name and photo are still up though
-
@sparky said in Grace Millane:
The conduct of the defence is this trial was appalling.
Not convinced the courts gagging the free press from naming the accused did much good either.
Bullshit. Her actions are incredibly relevant. The defence also made it clear that they weren't blaming her.
-
@canefan said in Grace Millane:
@booboo said in Grace Millane:
@Crucial said in Grace Millane:
I said earlier in the thread that one explanation for his behaviour was that he was a narcissist and that now appears the case.
I see the Daily Mail has pulled the story with his name and photo from their site but it remains as a link on a google search. Cunning? Could claim that they published accidentally then removed quickly.
Really? Just went and found it a couple of minutes ago (mind you via google).
Are they covered by NZ name suppression laws? Or just by convention? And didn't we have that discussion earlier in the thread ... ?
Can't think why he needs name suppression.
I don't really understand why he needed name suppression in the first place. He's not a famous person, they didn't say it was to protect his family, I don't see why it mattered when the guy is no one of note and why this would affect him getting a fair trial
Probably because he is up on other charges. Also, if he didn't have name suppression the jury could be hugely biased.
-
@taniwharugby This one. Not Cindy, Little was ripping into them for it, which makes sense as Minister of Justice.
I had assumed defence counsel indicated an appeal but if other charges, that would explain why the reasons for suppression were also suppressed.
I know people often don't like appeals but I hope this case is appealed on a matter of law so a precedent can be set - currently we have limited direction on some of the issues raised, particularly consent in BDSM (as in, how much can be consented to), so I think something from the Court of Appeal would be useful.
-
@Crucial said in Grace Millane:
I said earlier in the thread that one explanation for his behaviour was that he was a narcissist and that now appears the case.
I see the Daily Mail has pulled the story with his name and photo from their site but it remains as a link on a google search. Cunning? Could claim that they published accidentally then removed quickly.
NOT MENTIONING HIS NAME
Daily mail still have articles mentioning his name and face, I'm pretty sure they named him months ago either way.
Technically (ref to internet) how can name suppression ever work, or can sites containing his name be somehow blocked from viewing in NZ? Just wondering.
Really feel for this girl's family, regardless of her sexual interests, she didn't consent to death, she ended up dead and ultimately he is responsible. -
@R-L said in Grace Millane:
@Crucial said in Grace Millane:
I said earlier in the thread that one explanation for his behaviour was that he was a narcissist and that now appears the case.
I see the Daily Mail has pulled the story with his name and photo from their site but it remains as a link on a google search. Cunning? Could claim that they published accidentally then removed quickly.
NOT MENTIONING HIS NAME
Daily mail still have articles mentioning his name and face, I'm pretty sure they named him months ago either way.
Technically (ref to internet) how can name suppression ever work, or can sites containing his name be somehow blocked from viewing in NZ? Just wondering.
Really feel for this girl's family, regardless of her sexual interests, she didn't consent to death, she ended up dead and ultimately he is responsible.Most people don't in NZ don't know his name, even though we could find out.
-
His name is not important. Scumbag sums up him and his actions.
Remember hers. She was called Grace Millane.
I couldn't care less about Ms Millane's alleged sexual preferences (which were a private matter). She was a kind and good young woman who didn't deserve to be killed. May she rest in peace.
-
-
@Mokey said in Grace Millane:
Read a few more articles today re further witnesses permitted by judge but not called by crown. Where is my shocked face that fuckstick had a history of lies, drunken violence and aggression towards women if they dared to say no thanks.
One of his flatmates said she was so scared of him she kept a knife under her pillow. Sadly Grace picked the wrong guy to swipe right to
-
@Mokey said in Grace Millane:
Read a few more articles today re further witnesses permitted by judge but not called by crown. Where is my shocked face that fuckstick had a history of lies, drunken violence and aggression towards women if they dared to say no thanks.
Yeah there was a story in the ferald about some ex flat mates of his (all woman) they were so freaked out by him in such a short amount of time they never wanted to be left alone with him. One said she resorted to having a knife on her when she went to bed.
Sounds like a complete piece of shit, Grace just couldn’t have picked a worse ‘man’ to be matched with. Hard not to think of it wasn’t her it would have been someone else.
Hopefully they see him as an ongoing risk and never release him. -
@Virgil One of the flatmates said exactly that. That if it wasn't Grace, it would have been another woman.
I just hope this is not going to be a scenario where he expresses 'remorse' and gets some sort of sentence reduction. It is completely clear from his history, and actions after murder that he causes destruction wherever he goes and neither regrets or amends his behaviour.
-
@hydro11 said in Grace Millane:
@canefan The thing is if this guy did plan to kill Grace, he could have prepared a lot better. The mad panic to dispose the body in some ways shows that it wasn't premeditated. If he wanted to strangle a tinder date to death, he could have thought up a better way to do it.
I still think it was the right decision. If he had called the Police after finding Grace dead then I think he would have gotten off with just manslaughter.
Not lived in NZ for years. What's difference now in minimum sentence between murder and manslaughter?
-
@pakman said in Grace Millane:
@hydro11 said in Grace Millane:
@canefan The thing is if this guy did plan to kill Grace, he could have prepared a lot better. The mad panic to dispose the body in some ways shows that it wasn't premeditated. If he wanted to strangle a tinder date to death, he could have thought up a better way to do it.
I still think it was the right decision. If he had called the Police after finding Grace dead then I think he would have gotten off with just manslaughter.
Not lived in NZ for years. What's difference now in minimum sentence between murder and manslaughter?
Manslaughter has no minimum sentence but has a maximum of life imprisonment. If sentenced to life, there is no specific minimum non-parole period unless the killer has at least 1 strike in which case minimum non-parole period is 20 years or 10 years if 20 would be "manifestly unjust". (I haven't seen anything to suggest the killer has a strike, but just in case)
Murder has a presumption of life imprisonment unless it would be "manifestly unjust" (that's a high legal bar to clear - it won't apply here) in which case the minimum non-parole period is 10 years. The judge can go higher if the judge thinks it warranted for the protection of the public and to further denounce the actions - the post-murder actions might well see the judge deciding that he needs to denounce them by increasing the minimum non-parole period.
If the killer has at least one strike, presumption is life without parole unless that would be "manifestly unjust", in which case minimum non-parole period is 20 years. Nobody has ever been sentenced to life without parole because judges have ruled that would be "manifestly unjust".
I have put "manifestly unjust" in quote marks because that's the term throughout sentencing legislation - judges normally interpret it to mean overly excessive in terms of sentence duration. In a recent case, a 27 year old got 20 years 9 months because life without parole would amount to 50+ years.
-
Tinder Lets Known Sex Offenders Use the App. It’s Not the Only One.
Match Group, which owns most major online dating services, screens for sexual predators on Match — but not on Tinder, OkCupid, or Plenty of Fish. A spokesperson said, “There are definitely registered sex offenders on our free products.”
-
Life with 17 years non-parole:
Good riddance.
-
-
