21 February 2007

Amber Jane Westin pleas guilty - MAXIMUM SENTENCE OF TWO YEARS

| Kerces
Join the conversation
35

[First filed: February 20, 2007 @ 16:10]

The ABC radio news is running a report that Amber Jane Westin has pleaded guilty to at least some of the charges against her.

In December her charge sheet stood at: culpable driving causing death, unlicensed driving, using an unregistered vehicle, using an uninsured vehicle, using a vehicle that had registration for another vehicle, using a vehicle with a number plate for another vehicle and failing to stop for police.

She had not previously been required to enter pleas for all of these.

UPDATED: The Canberra Times is reporting that due to pleading guilty in the Magistrate’s Court Ms. Westin can only be sentenced to a maximum of two years for her crimes.

Join the conversation

35
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

Is there a statute of limitations on resurrecting old threads?..This has to be some sort of RA record.

MonarchRepublic12:27 pm 29 Dec 12

Been on a zombie-thread resurrection bender overnight, Cleo?

cleo said :

It would cost the taxpayers more money to lock her up, plus children would be in foster homes, which is probably hard to find foster carers.

Im presuming she doesnt know who the fathers of her kids are if that is the case?

Lets hope it can get shfted to supreme court, with one of the NSW judges presiding, and we might see some sentencing that meets the expectations of the community. Oh well we can hope.

Condolences to the victim and her family,

It would cost the taxpayers more money to lock her up, plus children would be in foster homes, which is probably hard to find foster carers.

It isn’t the sentance that’s inaequate, it’s the charge! She hasn’t been charged with murder, manslaughter, or any of its derivatives, therefore she isn’t being sentanced for them – just for (to quote from the article):

“culpable driving causing death, unlicensed driving, using an unregistered vehicle, using an uninsured vehicle, using a vehicle that had registration for another vehicle, using a vehicle with a number plate for another vehicle and failing to stop for police”

None of these are charges that go outside a magistrate’s juristiction, which means none of them attract more than two years.

The main question is for the DPP – why aren’t the more serious charges available to pursue against Ms Westin?

How about a real sentence ?

We all know that putting her behind bars is going to do absolutely nothing to her, except learning ways of doing things a little bit better for next time she’s avoiding the police – thus making it harder or the ramifications more extreme.

If a judge passed a sentence of never to be paid social welfare payments ever again, surely that would change her attitude to life ?

It would certainly be impetus towards becoming a respectable member of the community and holding down a proper job, on account of if she ever lost that privelege (wage earner), her family would be footing the bills and not falling to a gumnut liability.

If it didn’t work, and led to her spiral downwards into a life of criminal intent, then who cares ? – she’ll get picked up in her own good time and suffer the consequenses in due course.

hmmms – I kind of like that idea… How many people would be receiving the dole if you excluded people with prior convictions ???

And Mutley, I have forgotten how long since someone was sentenced consecutively in this town. No chance whatsoever AJW will be.

Jebus, if she spends any time at all on remand they’ll count that towards her sentence, despite the fact it isn’t supposed to count….then again if she isn’t in custody after breaching her bail twice then there’s no chance of that either

If you are charged with murder the maximum sentence is life

Seems very light compared to what other similar situations down in Brackistan get.

I vote for the death sentence. It’s just putting back in place what social welfare has taken away from natural selection people!

James-T-Kirk1:37 pm 22 Feb 07

Sounds like somebody manipulating the system for their benefit.

Nothing wrong with that then!

i agree jb and yet another reason why i think the jury system shoudl be expanded and NOT reduced.

getting rid of juries is something professional lawyers have been working on for years.

because they are ‘experts’ and would rather not rely on the unwashed masses to decide the fate of people.

“What is the maximum term that Mauricio Rao (Cube stabber) is facing compared to AmberJane Westin?”

I’ll be very surprised if a jury is willing to convict him. Not on legal grounds, but on the emotional grounds which define why we keep a jury of our peers around to decide guilt and innocence.

But I await the outcome of the trial.

or Glenn Porritt.

What is the maximum term that Mauricio Rao (Cube stabber) is facing compared to AmberJane Westin?

Damn, damn, damn. Yes, I do.

Blood alcamahol is obviously dipping to dangerously low levels.

Hey mutley, I think you mean “consecutively”, not “concurrently”?

wow, the sentence in my post above is longer than the one she’ll get.

Sorry… I’ll go now… is it time for a San Mig lunch?

Adding to vg above, it is possible for magistrates to hand down concurrent sentences, so theoretically (let’s say somewhere where sentencing is taken seriously) she could get the max for each charge to which she has copped the guilty plea and be sentenced to serve them concurrently, which would give her a nice big holiday.

Never happen.

My understanding of it all is as above. Mags Court can only hand down a max of 2 years. Having said that I think I remember matters where they plead guilty in the Mags and then get sentenced in the Supreme. Both Courts in the ACT are as bad as each other.

I’m not 100% but I’m sure someone (whether it be the DPP or the Court itself) can object to it being heard in the Mags, and pop it up to Supreme. I’m guessing that some sort of deal was struck with her only pleading guilty if it was left in the Mags, hence saving the time/money for a trial.

That’s my understanding anyway, I don’t know directly of any deals.

Having said that, hang onto your collective hats Canberra, I sense another pathetically inadequate sentence coming. Preparing to say ‘I told you so’ some time soon

Absent Diane, if they couldn’t get David Eastman on stupid hat charges, I don’t think they’ll get anyone.

It’s not manslaughter because of the PC thugs/bleeding hearts.

I don’t think she’ll end up doing the time – she’ll cite her baby daughter to get out of it.

chrisjeanemery12:27 pm 21 Feb 07

Why isn’t it manslaughter?

30 years in my opinion.

I’m wondring – why isn’t manslaughter in there anywhere? Yes, I know culpable driving causing death is, but given that her culpable driving shows a high degree of negligence towards others lives, surely there’s more the DPP could be going for? Although it’s possible they are, but they’re separate charges that aren’t being dealt with in front of a magistrate.

Note – I haven’t done law for ten years, so I’m going on vague recollections here.

max 2 years for all that ? I’m sure she’ll get a suspended sentence.

I wonder how her avoidance of passive dope smoking is going???

VYBerlinaV8 now_with_added grunt9:02 am 21 Feb 07

What’s the bet she doesn’t do any time?

Absent Diane9:01 am 21 Feb 07

just once I want to see someone locked up for wearing a really stupid hat.

It’ll be interesting to see if there is a youtube bit like last time.

Did she throw rocks again?

One thing is for sure. It wont affect your membership of the Internet Anonymous Skank Brigade, Sammy …

Not sure how this will effect her membership of the Skank Alliance.

lol betty! awesome

Must be her week to use the family neuron

WOW, did someone lend her a brain?

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.