News Serious assault following last night’s game (2018 final)

Remove this Banner Ad

The sentence?
Often, in cases like this, on appeal, the Judge (I think appeals in this type of case goes to the County Court, correct me if wrong) will increase the original sentence to show that shytes like this should have quit while ahead. One can only hope that this happens in this case.
 
Without trying to get in the way of a good private school pile on, a man was convicted today fracturing a trainee paramedics eye socket in 2 places after following her for 10km in a road rage attack and received 300 hours of community service. Nothing private school about him. Not saying the wealthy don’t get a good ride in the courts, but their sentences aren’t overly soft given what others are receiving.
Was about to link this. Absolutely sickening. Female magistrate too
 
Without trying to get in the way of a good private school pile on, a man was convicted today fracturing a trainee paramedics eye socket in 2 places after following her for 10km in a road rage attack and received 300 hours of community service. Nothing private school about him. Not saying the wealthy don’t get a good ride in the courts, but their sentences aren’t overly soft given what others are receiving.
The judge accepted that Burke was suffering from genuine mental issues at the time. "Well, your Honour, I went to a private school and my Dad is a QC" shouldn't be an equivalent defense.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I cant stand this community service sentencing. At worst it should be community service + house arrest with regular drug/alcohol testing.

Dont want to clog up the jail system.. fine.. but at least restrict their liberties.
 
This whole notion of character assessments in sentencing just seems wrong to me - 'he's a good guy and has never done anything wrong', except for knocking someone unconscious and leaving them in the street.
 
The judge accepted that Burke was suffering from genuine mental issues at the time. "Well, your Honour, I went to a private school and my Dad is a QC" shouldn't be an equivalent defense.
I’m fairly sure one of the three is being treated for Bi-polar currently, which was used as a mitigating factor. Also, the road rage guy chased his victim for 10 kms before assaulting his victim, a young woman. Hardly a spur of the moment thing that got out of hand.
 
From my point of view the main issue that we see over and over again is not the intitial fight, but the afters that was never around when I was going out. I saw plenty of blues in my time but once a bloke was hit and went to the ground, the guy who hit him would be grabbed by his mates and held back saying the guy had had enough, I did it a few times atleast. Now these cowards jump in as soon as someones on the ground and lay the boots in, weak as p.ss in my book.

These are the guys that should have the book thrown at them, there will always be blues unfortunately, but once one guy hits the deck you grab your mate and take him away, normally hes calmed down after 20 seconds and you move on, anyone laying the boots into someone on the floor should be held to account, and if your not involved in the initial skirmish and you lay the boots in then double the penalty
 
I cant stand this community service sentencing. At worst it should be community service + house arrest with regular drug/alcohol testing.

Dont want to clog up the jail system.. fine.. but at least restrict their liberties.
If not already, an alcohol monitoring bracelet should be a sentencing option for any non-driving crime committed while having a BAC above 0.1.

Bracelet wearers can foot the costs as well, just as DDs cover the cost of their interlock devices.
 
The publicity of the case will have been one of the contributing factors that ultimately doomed them to jail sentences.


‘‘He [victim David Raeside] was on the ground and he has been beaten to a pulp and if that’s not enough, he’s then stomped on.’’
Graphic video filmed by a passer-by shows Dominic Walker, wearing a Richmond beanie, punch Mr Raeside 15 times and then stomp on his head three times, while Sam Walker repeatedly punches the other victim, Leonard Tricarico. Fitt goes between the two pairs, punching both victims.
The court heard the two parties had been drinking alcohol at the football in the hours beforehand and had a verbal altercation outside the Pullman Hotel, and Mr Raeside was kicked to the thigh. Mr Raeside and his friend then ran into a side street.

Prosecutor Nicholas Batten said Mr Tricarico and Mr Raeside later returned to Wellington Parade, where the Walker brothers were seated in a taxi.
Mr Tricarico grabbed Fitt and punched the taxi window. At that point, the brothers got out and the three younger men bashed the other two.
Mr Raeside, aged in his 60s, suffered bleeding to the brain and facial fractures, and Mr Tricarico, aged in his 40s, suffered a fractured wrist and bruises to his head and face.
In the video, one of the younger men screams: ‘‘You are going to f---ing die, I am going to f---ing kill you.’’

Yes it was the publicity that got them prison time :rolleyes:
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

‘‘He [victim David Raeside] was on the ground and he has been beaten to a pulp and if that’s not enough, he’s then stomped on.’’
Graphic video filmed by a passer-by shows Dominic Walker, wearing a Richmond beanie, punch Mr Raeside 15 times and then stomp on his head three times, while Sam Walker repeatedly punches the other victim, Leonard Tricarico. Fitt goes between the two pairs, punching both victims.
The court heard the two parties had been drinking alcohol at the football in the hours beforehand and had a verbal altercation outside the Pullman Hotel, and Mr Raeside was kicked to the thigh. Mr Raeside and his friend then ran into a side street.

Prosecutor Nicholas Batten said Mr Tricarico and Mr Raeside later returned to Wellington Parade, where the Walker brothers were seated in a taxi.
Mr Tricarico grabbed Fitt and punched the taxi window. At that point, the brothers got out and the three younger men bashed the other two.
Mr Raeside, aged in his 60s, suffered bleeding to the brain and facial fractures, and Mr Tricarico, aged in his 40s, suffered a fractured wrist and bruises to his head and face.
In the video, one of the younger men screams: ‘‘You are going to f---ing die, I am going to f---ing kill you.’’

Yes it was the publicity that got them prison time :rolleyes:

Can you read?

I said it was one of the contributing factors. Which is absolutely true, and which is a factor in sentencing (i.e. public interest and perception of justice being done). Nor would I seek to discount any of the above factors in any way whatsoever.

But no, you interpret me to mean other than what I said or intended. Can you explain why you would do that?
 
‘‘He [victim David Raeside] was on the ground and he has been beaten to a pulp and if that’s not enough, he’s then stomped on.’’
Graphic video filmed by a passer-by shows Dominic Walker, wearing a Richmond beanie, punch Mr Raeside 15 times and then stomp on his head three times, while Sam Walker repeatedly punches the other victim, Leonard Tricarico. Fitt goes between the two pairs, punching both victims.
The court heard the two parties had been drinking alcohol at the football in the hours beforehand and had a verbal altercation outside the Pullman Hotel, and Mr Raeside was kicked to the thigh. Mr Raeside and his friend then ran into a side street.

Prosecutor Nicholas Batten said Mr Tricarico and Mr Raeside later returned to Wellington Parade, where the Walker brothers were seated in a taxi.
Mr Tricarico grabbed Fitt and punched the taxi window. At that point, the brothers got out and the three younger men bashed the other two.
Mr Raeside, aged in his 60s, suffered bleeding to the brain and facial fractures, and Mr Tricarico, aged in his 40s, suffered a fractured wrist and bruises to his head and face.
In the video, one of the younger men screams: ‘‘You are going to f---ing die, I am going to f---ing kill you.’’

Yes it was the publicity that got them prison time :rolleyes:
Well compare it to the bloke who beat up a paramedic and got off.
 
Can you read?

I said it was one of the contributing factors. Which is absolutely true. Nor would I seek to discount any of the above.

But no, you interpret me to mean other than what I said or intended. Can you explain why you would do that?
Because the publicity of the case had nothing to do with sentencing if anything this article points towards the fact that they potentially could of got more than they were given at the time given the fact a Judge watching the footage recently and well after the media and public outcry around the case has died down said this

“Judge Tinney, who earlier sat with his mouth open as he watched graphic video footage of the bashing, told Walker’s lawyer, Ashley Halphen, they had a ‘‘significant win’’ when magistrate Duncan Reynolds imposed a 12-month jail term.”
 
Can you read?

I said it was one of the contributing factors. Which is absolutely true, and which is a factor in sentencing (i.e. public interest and perception of justice being done). Nor would I seek to discount any of the above factors in any way whatsoever.

But no, you interpret me to mean other than what I said or intended. Can you explain why you would do that?

How do you know it is “absolutely true”... are you a friend of the judge? The paramedic assault case got huge publicity but he got off... so publicity only matters sometimes?
 
Because the publicity of the case had nothing to do with sentencing if anything this article points towards the fact that they potentially could of got more than they were given at the time given the fact a Judge watching the footage recently and well after the media and public outcry around the case has died down said this

“Judge Tinney, who earlier sat with his mouth open as he watched graphic video footage of the bashing, told Walker’s lawyer, Ashley Halphen, they had a ‘‘significant win’’ when magistrate Duncan Reynolds imposed a 12-month jail term.”

Judges take various factors into consideration and often come to different conclusions. I would not take anything much from the article, which in no way provides an analysis of the previous sentences of either judge in enough detail to come to that conclusion (I would guess the sentencing remarks of the first judge would be quite a few pages).

Publicity should not be a factor in sentencing (http://www.judicialcollege.vic.edu.au/eManuals/VSM/53755.htm), but it can often be and I would suggest that this may have been one case in which this (to a greater or lesser extent) unavoidably played some role, given that judges are acutely aware of public reactions to their decision making and in particular want to avoid changes to their decisions on appeal.

Nevertheless, more salient factors such as dispositions they have to sentencing certain crimes either leniently or harshly can be more significant. This is a problem with our legal system, in my opinion, as even given sentencing guidelines you can still get very different responses from judge to judge.

It is hardly gone from the public view either, it is now sitting on top of The Age website and I expect it to remain there until the morning at least, barring some international incident.
 
Still smacks a bit of preferential treatment to me. I kind of doubt most offenders have the means to do this:

1st Judge: After hearing from your expensive lawyers, I sentence you to 12 months
Walker: I lodge an appeal
2nd judge: Boy you got a very light sentence
Walker: oh nvm then
 
Still smacks a bit of preferential treatment to me. I kind of doubt most offenders have the means to do this:

1st Judge: After hearing from your expensive lawyers, I sentence you to 12 months
Walker: I lodge an appeal
2nd judge: Boy you got a very light sentence
Walker: oh nvm then

Yeah, it's like they took a double or nothing bet on a coin flip, but we're told what the coin was going to land on (a loss) before it was tossed
 
Still smacks a bit of preferential treatment to me. I kind of doubt most offenders have the means to do this:

1st Judge: After hearing from your expensive lawyers, I sentence you to 12 months
Walker: I lodge an appeal
2nd judge: Boy you got a very light sentence
Walker: oh nvm then

No, that’s just the law working properly. The second judge is just saving the courts time by advising the appellant he’s wasting the courts time and that he might be better off reviewing if he really wants to appeal
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top