Advertisement

Rebecca Massey gets 10 years without parole

By 28 July 2011 52

The ABC reports that Rebecca Anne Massey has been sentenced to 16 years in prison (10 without parole) for carving up Elizabeth Booshand outside the Charnwood charcoal chicken in 2008.

Justice Gray said he had to mark the community’s abhorrence with the taking of life but also indicated Massey had good prospects for rehabilitation.

Please login to post your comments
52 Responses to Rebecca Massey gets 10 years without parole
#1
The Frots10:43 am, 28 Jul 11

LOL – 10 years…..?? Really…………….??

You have to be kidding, Justice Gray. The ACT community just continues to be rogered by the inadequate sentencing that seems to ouze from the courts here.

Just what is it that we need to do to get the message across that we have had enough of this? What is it that we need to say that will impress you lot enough to make the sentences stronger, longer?

Let us know what it is that we need to do…………..please!

#2
colourful sydney rac10:46 am, 28 Jul 11

The Frots said :

LOL – 10 years…..??

Really…………….??

You have to be kidding, Justice Gray. The ACT community just continues to be rogered by the inadequate sentencing that seems to ouze from the courts here.

Just what is it that we need to do to get the message across that we have had enough of this? What is it that we need to say that will impress you lot enough to make the sentences stronger, longer?

Let us know what it is that we need to do…………..please!

It is actually 16 years – that is actually quite a long sentence.

#3
Proboscus10:52 am, 28 Jul 11

Good prospects for rehabilitation? FFS she was on THREE Good Behaviour Orders when she got all stabby!!!

#4
colourful sydney rac11:02 am, 28 Jul 11

Proboscus said :

Good prospects for rehabilitation? FFS she was on THREE Good Behaviour Orders when she got all stabby!!!

This surprised me too, but to be fair I have not read the sentencing report, have you?

#5
Gungahlin Al11:07 am, 28 Jul 11

It’s 16 years. If there is no rehab then she stays at “her majesty’s pleasure” for the whole stint.

#6
Ben_Dover11:07 am, 28 Jul 11

The Frots said :

Let us know what it is that we need to do…………..please!

Vote out the soft left government we have both local and federal would be a good start.

#7
shirty_bear11:13 am, 28 Jul 11

Gotta say, I expected “Yay – a conviction”, not “Boo – too lenient”.

Yay – a conviction.

#8
colourful sydney rac11:22 am, 28 Jul 11

shirty_bear said :

Gotta say, I expected “Yay – a conviction”, not “Boo – too lenient”.

Yay – a conviction.

I thought the same thing. Tough crowd.

#9
p111:23 am, 28 Jul 11

I assume that now she has been convicted she’ll stop breaking her bail conditions?

#10
PBO11:24 am, 28 Jul 11

Watch for chicken sales to go up in Charnwood.

#11
john87_no111:30 am, 28 Jul 11

colourful sydney racing identity said :

The Frots said :

LOL – 10 years…..??

Really…………….??

You have to be kidding, Justice Gray. The ACT community just continues to be rogered by the inadequate sentencing that seems to ouze from the courts here.

Just what is it that we need to do to get the message across that we have had enough of this? What is it that we need to say that will impress you lot enough to make the sentences stronger, longer?

Let us know what it is that we need to do…………..please!

It is actually 16 years – that is actually quite a long sentence.

+1

Almost as long as the Norway shooter is facing for 86 deaths.

#12
The Frots12:01 pm, 28 Jul 11

john87_no1 said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

The Frots said :

LOL – 10 years…..??

Really…………….??

You have to be kidding, Justice Gray. The ACT community just continues to be rogered by the inadequate sentencing that seems to ouze from the courts here.

Just what is it that we need to do to get the message across that we have had enough of this? What is it that we need to say that will impress you lot enough to make the sentences stronger, longer?

Let us know what it is that we need to do…………..please!

It is actually 16 years – that is actually quite a long sentence.

+1

Almost as long as the Norway shooter is facing for 86 deaths.

16 years is the ‘head sentence’ – not the actual time to be served.

#13
colourful sydney rac12:21 pm, 28 Jul 11

The Frots said :

john87_no1 said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

The Frots said :

LOL – 10 years…..??

Really…………….??

You have to be kidding, Justice Gray. The ACT community just continues to be rogered by the inadequate sentencing that seems to ouze from the courts here.

Just what is it that we need to do to get the message across that we have had enough of this? What is it that we need to say that will impress you lot enough to make the sentences stronger, longer?

Let us know what it is that we need to do…………..please!

It is actually 16 years – that is actually quite a long sentence.

+1

Almost as long as the Norway shooter is facing for 86 deaths.

16 years is the ‘head sentence’ – not the actual time to be served.

What then, is the actual time to be served?

#14
The Frots1:15 pm, 28 Jul 11

colourful sydney racing identity said :

The Frots said :

john87_no1 said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

The Frots said :

LOL – 10 years…..??

Really…………….??

You have to be kidding, Justice Gray. The ACT community just continues to be rogered by the inadequate sentencing that seems to ouze from the courts here.

Just what is it that we need to do to get the message across that we have had enough of this? What is it that we need to say that will impress you lot enough to make the sentences stronger, longer?

Let us know what it is that we need to do…………..please!

It is actually 16 years – that is actually quite a long sentence.

+1

Almost as long as the Norway shooter is facing for 86 deaths.

16 years is the ‘head sentence’ – not the actual time to be served.

What then, is the actual time to be served?

It is based on the non-parole period, so if she is a good little girl then 10 years will see her out. Also take off that remissions for good-behaviour.

#15
Roadrage771:29 pm, 28 Jul 11

I immediately dropped into a high-energy roflcopter when I saw the words ‘Massey’ and ‘rehabilitaiton’ in the same sentence.

#16
colourful sydney rac1:50 pm, 28 Jul 11

The Frots said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

The Frots said :

john87_no1 said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

The Frots said :

LOL – 10 years…..??

Really…………….??

You have to be kidding, Justice Gray. The ACT community just continues to be rogered by the inadequate sentencing that seems to ouze from the courts here.

Just what is it that we need to do to get the message across that we have had enough of this? What is it that we need to say that will impress you lot enough to make the sentences stronger, longer?

Let us know what it is that we need to do…………..please!

It is actually 16 years – that is actually quite a long sentence.

+1

Almost as long as the Norway shooter is facing for 86 deaths.

16 years is the ‘head sentence’ – not the actual time to be served.

What then, is the actual time to be served?

It is based on the non-parole period, so if she is a good little girl then 10 years will see her out. Also take off that remissions for good-behaviour.

So, she has been sentenced to 16 years with a non parole period of 10. So how many years was the sentence? I will give you a clue the first digit is 1 and the second is 6.

#17
The Frots1:56 pm, 28 Jul 11

colourful sydney racing identity said :

The Frots said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

The Frots said :

john87_no1 said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

The Frots said :

LOL – 10 years…..??

Really…………….??

You have to be kidding, Justice Gray. The ACT community just continues to be rogered by the inadequate sentencing that seems to ouze from the courts here.

Just what is it that we need to do to get the message across that we have had enough of this? What is it that we need to say that will impress you lot enough to make the sentences stronger, longer?

Let us know what it is that we need to do…………..please!

It is actually 16 years – that is actually quite a long sentence.

+1

Almost as long as the Norway shooter is facing for 86 deaths.

16 years is the ‘head sentence’ – not the actual time to be served.

What then, is the actual time to be served?

It is based on the non-parole period, so if she is a good little girl then 10 years will see her out. Also take off that remissions for good-behaviour.

So, she has been sentenced to 16 years with a non parole period of 10. So how many years was the sentence? I will give you a clue the first digit is 1 and the second is 6.

And here I was thinking ‘condecending’ was actually a Greek parachutist!

Back to you then – so you are saying the actual sentence to be served is 16 years? (yep, that’s a 1 and a 6 together).

#18
colourful sydney rac2:08 pm, 28 Jul 11

The Frots said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

The Frots said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

The Frots said :

john87_no1 said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

The Frots said :

LOL – 10 years…..??

Really…………….??

You have to be kidding, Justice Gray. The ACT community just continues to be rogered by the inadequate sentencing that seems to ouze from the courts here.

Just what is it that we need to do to get the message across that we have had enough of this? What is it that we need to say that will impress you lot enough to make the sentences stronger, longer?

Let us know what it is that we need to do…………..please!

It is actually 16 years – that is actually quite a long sentence.

+1

Almost as long as the Norway shooter is facing for 86 deaths.

16 years is the ‘head sentence’ – not the actual time to be served.

What then, is the actual time to be served?

It is based on the non-parole period, so if she is a good little girl then 10 years will see her out. Also take off that remissions for good-behaviour.

So, she has been sentenced to 16 years with a non parole period of 10. So how many years was the sentence? I will give you a clue the first digit is 1 and the second is 6.

And here I was thinking ‘condecending’ was actually a Greek parachutist!

Back to you then – so you are saying the actual sentence to be served is 16 years? (yep, that’s a 1 and a 6 together).

*urgh* What I am saying is that she has been sentenced to 16 years.

#19
johnboy2:13 pm, 28 Jul 11

And What I go with is the non-parole period as it is much closer to the reality that will be served.

#20
colourful sydney rac2:28 pm, 28 Jul 11

johnboy said :

And What I go with is the non-parole period as it is much closer to the reality that will be served.

Sure, you can go with whatever you like, but she was sentenced to 16 years, which is all I have stated.

#21
johnboy2:33 pm, 28 Jul 11

colourful sydney racing identity said :

johnboy said :

And What I go with is the non-parole period as it is much closer to the reality that will be served.

Sure, you can go with whatever you like, but she was sentenced to 16 years, which is all I have stated.

Sure, whatever fantasies float your boat.

Shall we start believing in pixie money of mobile phone plans too?

#22
The Frots2:38 pm, 28 Jul 11

johnboy said :

And What I go with is the non-parole period as it is much closer to the reality that will be served.

+1 – and that’s what most people go with. The ‘head sentence’ is really the fantasy sentence – it is rarely served in full.

The reality is that she will serve either 10 years or even less than that. I’ll bet that’s the way she is looking at it too.

#23
colourful sydney rac2:44 pm, 28 Jul 11

johnboy said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

johnboy said :

And What I go with is the non-parole period as it is much closer to the reality that will be served.

Sure, you can go with whatever you like, but she was sentenced to 16 years, which is all I have stated.

Sure, whatever fantasies float your boat.

Shall we start believing in pixie money of mobile phone plans too?

How on earth is it a fantasy?
She was sentenced to 16 years – that is an absolute fact, yes she may get parole after 10 years, nowhere have I argued that she won’t.

#24
Tooks3:30 pm, 28 Jul 11

With time served, she’ll be eligible for release in about 7 years.

#25
The Frots3:37 pm, 28 Jul 11

Tooks said :

With time served, she’ll be eligible for release in about 7 years.

Thank God – some of us were apparently getting concerned Tooks that she’d have to serve the full 16 years! (that’s 1 plus 6 together!).

#26
colourful sydney rac3:52 pm, 28 Jul 11

The Frots said :

Tooks said :

With time served, she’ll be eligible for release in about 7 years.

Thank God – some of us were apparently getting concerned Tooks that she’d have to serve the full 16 years! (that’s 1 plus 6 together!).

Who was concerned that she would spend 16 years in jail?

#27
Jungle Jim4:04 pm, 28 Jul 11

I don’t usually jump in the middle of internet arguments, but I’d like to point out that CSRI was only (in my opinion) referring to the “sentence” she’s received, not the time that will / should / might be served.

I can see where The Frots and JB are coming from regarding the non-parole period, but CSRI is indisputably correct in saying that the sentence handed down is 16 years, regardless of how much she will actually serve.

#28
colourful sydney rac4:08 pm, 28 Jul 11

Jungle Jim said :

I don’t usually jump in the middle of internet arguments, but I’d like to point out that CSRI was only (in my opinion) referring to the “sentence” she’s received, not the time that will / should / might be served.

I can see where The Frots and JB are coming from regarding the non-parole period, but CSRI is indisputably correct in saying that the sentence handed down is 16 years, regardless of how much she will actually serve.

That is the nicest thing anyone has ever said about me on this forum, or life in general for that matter.

#29
The Frots4:08 pm, 28 Jul 11

Jungle Jim said :

I don’t usually jump in the middle of internet arguments, but I’d like to point out that CSRI was only (in my opinion) referring to the “sentence” she’s received, not the time that will / should / might be served.

I can see where The Frots and JB are coming from regarding the non-parole period, but CSRI is indisputably correct in saying that the sentence handed down is 16 years, regardless of how much she will actually serve.

I agree JJ – it is hard to dispute what the head sentence is. But the same Judge also sets the minimum term – in this case 10 years or as Tooks said, 7 with good behaviour and time served. This is considerably different to 16 years at the top.

#30
The Frots4:36 pm, 28 Jul 11

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Jungle Jim said :

I don’t usually jump in the middle of internet arguments, but I’d like to point out that CSRI was only (in my opinion) referring to the “sentence” she’s received, not the time that will / should / might be served.

I can see where The Frots and JB are coming from regarding the non-parole period, but CSRI is indisputably correct in saying that the sentence handed down is 16 years, regardless of how much she will actually serve.

That is the nicest thing anyone has ever said about me on this forum, or life in general for that matter.

Oh dear……………I’m starting to understand your posts a bit better now CSRI. I’m really sorry and sad now!

Follow
Follow The RiotACT
Get Premium Membership
Advertisement
The-RiotACT.com Newsletter Sign Up

Images of Canberra

Advertisement
Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.