Sleeping with a loaded shotty under the bed? Maybe it's time to move out of home?

Readers will be pleased to know the insecure nature of his gun storage was added to the charges.

On the downside he walks amongst us again!

http://www.courts.act.gov.au/supreme/sentence/view/1201/source/rss

HenryBG said :

…the accused conceded […], no one knew that the accused had any gun in the home
Is an appalling bit of thinking – the accused conceded no such thing, how could he? He stated it was his belief that nobody knew he had the guns, but they weren’t hidden and he had absolutely no way of knowing if his belief was actually a true fact, therefore he cannot possibly have conceded any such fact.
Garbage..

You would have to read the entire transcript of the trial to see whether he conceded that fact, you are just looking at what he said in the record of interview.

If the prosecution raised in their evidence that ‘No one knew the accussed had any guns in the house’, perhaps by both witnessess saying they did not know they were there, or by any other means, and the defence did nothing to challenge that statement then they have ‘conceded’ it.

Or the defence could have said, “We concede the following points- “

But really, why does it matter to you? You are too rich to be concerned with doing your duty or giving back to society anyway.

So, a couple Ks of taxpayers’ money spent so that the judge concludes what we all would have concluded.. and what happened next? all go home and have a nice day?!

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

‘Hi! I’m HenryBG. I like to tell judges how to do their jobs when I can’t even be arsed doing jury duty.’

Did that judge attend court for $96/day?

Could explain a lot.

‘Hi! I’m HenryBG. I like to tell judges how to do their jobs when I can’t even be arsed doing jury duty.’

dvaey said :

Para 43 seems to make a big leap from posession to use:

“43. The fact that three guns were kept under the accused’s bed in the verandah when, as the accused conceded – see the answer to question 305 in Exhibit A2, no one knew that the accused had any gun in the home, tends to corroborate the complainant’s complaint that the accused pointed a gun at his face when he was about to enter into the verandah. “

How does admitting to having guns under his bed, corroborate the threat story with such detail? I also found another interesting point at interview question 128:

…..
A 128 (The question is irrelevant) That allegation is a lot of s**t.

Surely if someone makes a statement beginning with ‘That allegation’, then the question or allegation that sparked that answer is very relevant?

Yes, I agree, especially paragraph 43, which takes two huge leaps of faith, something a careful judge would keep out of it.

…the accused conceded […], no one knew that the accused had any gun in the home
Is an appalling bit of thinking – the accused conceded no such thing, how could he? He stated it was his belief that nobody knew he had the guns, but they weren’t hidden and he had absolutely no way of knowing if his belief was actually a true fact, therefore he cannot possibly have conceded any such fact.
Garbage.

I reckon he was having a wank, his dad came in to tell him off and had an unpleasant weapon pointed at him and decided to teach his useless bogan son a lesson by making up a story about his carelessly-stored firearms.

Para 43 seems to make a big leap from posession to use:

“43. The fact that three guns were kept under the accused’s bed in the verandah when, as the accused conceded – see the answer to question 305 in Exhibit A2, no one knew that the accused had any gun in the home, tends to corroborate the complainant’s complaint that the accused pointed a gun at his face when he was about to enter into the verandah. “

How does admitting to having guns under his bed, corroborate the threat story with such detail? I also found another interesting point at interview question 128:

…..
A 128 (The question is irrelevant) That allegation is a lot of s**t.

Surely if someone makes a statement beginning with ‘That allegation’, then the question or allegation that sparked that answer is very relevant?

All hilarity aside, I legally own and use a number of firearms. I’ve spent a substantial amount of money on my firearms licence, club membership fees, permits to acquire, gun safes etc. If I screwed something up about all this I’d expect to be in deep trouble with the law.

On the other hand, this arsehat has three loaded firearms stored under his bed. While the threat to kill is a serious offence, I don’t see anything in the transcript about the (illegal?) ownership and illegal storage of these weapons. I don’t understand why that would be. Surely that would be a factor to be considered in this case?

Ahhh bogans.

“I went outside and I f***ing had a smoke and s*** and I came back in and my guns were f*g gone”

If I was an early human I would be thinking .. ‘all that f***ing evolution I went through, chasing bison with spears, moving from the tree to the ground .. it’s all been for nothing’