Glen Porritt a free man

roflmao said :

sometimes you can’t help stabbing/cutting people 57 times.

And, in my personal opinion, if you can’t manage this I’d like to see you removed from the community.

But that’s just my 2c.

are we trying to punish him for the physical act or the intent to kill her? he wasn’t in control therefore he couldn’t be criminally liable for the incident. look it up the criminal capacity. like children can’t be criminaly liable under the age of 8, or between the ages of 8-12 without being proven to have understanding of what they were doing. like this the mentally disabled, and this guy who had problems before he claimed insanity in court, need to be proven that they had criminal intent, understanding and knowlegde of what they were doing.

this guy flipped at his mum and couldn’t control his actions like any rational person, at the time he was irrational and INSAINE so please understand that there is no point for punishing someone who didn’t have intent or CONTROL over their actions.

you can laugh at it and think from a rational persons point of view “woops i slipped, again, again” or you can try put yourself in his shoes would you like to be punished for something you couldn’t help. and yes sometimes you can’t help stabbing/cutting people 57 times.

Yeah, Vg’s on the ball and it is bloody scary, considering the amount of kids roaming around with knives on the street.

Bollocks

Most stabbing deaths are the result of 1 or 2 stabs penetrating something essential, like the aorta. One decent stab or slice on/in the jugular or femoral arteries and good night sunshine before you know it. Many stabbing deaths look quite innocuous on a mortuary table. 1 maybe 2 puncture wounds has you scratching your head how someone could possibly die from something like that

You can die from a stab wound in less than 30 secs

AlpineViper said :

“I would argue that 57 cuts/stabs shows a complete brain snap… 2 or 3 I would argue shows deliberate intent (Make sure you got her!), though possibly temp insainity. 57 I would say his cheese slid right off his craker”
.

A little macabre, but you could also argue it the other way.
Most stabbing deaths are a result of bleeding to death, ie. it can take a long time to die from a stab wound, which is why most people suffer multiple stab wounds.

How much this murder was ‘frenzied attack’ and how much it was something else we shall never know.
.

peterh said :

Duke said :

Get ready to flame me people, but after reading all the reports it sounded to me like Porritt was a good guy pushed too far by a psychotic mother. Product of his environment is Porritt.

regardless, he could have:

a) moved away from her
b) moved away from her and barred her calls
c) moved away from her, barred her calls and not told her where he was living

this would have solved his problem.
not, and let me make this clear,
d) stab her 57 times.

Many valid points. The Judgment bears this out (it can be found here: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/act/ACTSC/2008/33.html)

I just read it & regardless of what we think of Justice Terry, I cannot belive that an experienced jurist gave any weight to Porrit’s tripe.

TTWBT?

Call me a sceptic, but Porritts early release wouldn’t have anything to do with “National Sorry Ranga Day” this weekend would it?

jakez said :

peterh said :

has his family come out and said that they are happy with the sentence? or did the say that when he was “inside”?

There may be a different opinion at play, now that he will be out.

regardless of his mental capacity at the time of the killing, he killed someone. If he is mentally ill, put him into a facility within a prison. There still are criminally insane sections in the prison system. in this instance, perhaps they should be used.

the fact that he packed up and p*ssed off suggests that he had a very good control of his mental faculties. a rational person would flee, a mentally ill person would probably not be able to make the connection that they had done wrong.

showing good behaviour in the prison does not make him better, he may still be ill. He needs treatment. If he comes back and re-offends, all the people saying that the sentence was fine, he is not going to do it again, well, I hope it isn’t one of your relatives.

personally, I think that it would be better that he receive an independent psych eval prior to being released.

You seem to have a lot of opinions on mental health. What qualifications or experience do you base these opinions on?

no quals, but i have worked extensively with troubled teens, and their parents over the years. I have had experience with psychologists, and have assisted friends that needed professional help, with a shoulder to lean on. i have been involved in youth insearch, the YMCA and several other organisations as well, they were dedicated to ensuring the best outcomes for mentally ill people. If Glen Porrit is deemed to be mentally ill, wouldn’t you prefer for him to receive treatment?

if he is not, what can we expect to be in place to rehabilitate and counsel him to reintegrate into the community?

Oh man, I’m not even reading the comments on this one, haha. I know they’ll be full of people shooting off at the mouth with no grasp of the facts of the case!

I’m glad Glen Porritt got the sentence he did. Here’s hoping him and his family can regain some normalcy in their life someday.

peterh said :

MRB said :

peterh, he didn’t actually live there, he had moved out about 12 months prior. He went to visit apparently…

but, if he had stopped at 2 or 3 stabs – he could have claimed he didn’t know what he was doing. mental illness, temporary insanity etc. 57, now, that is a definite sign that he knew exactly what he was doing, and kept on doing.
.

I would argue that 57 cuts/stabs shows a complete brain snap. One stab could POSSIBLY be an accident (and is one reason why you shouldnt wave knives around in anger, even if you have no actual intention of doing anything with it). 2 or 3 I would argue shows deliberate intent (Make sure you got her!), though possibly temp insainity. 57 I would say his cheese slid right off his craker after one final straw threw his brain into orbit. I mean, 57 swings with a knife? That would probably take at least 20 seconds of blind rage. Even if you really, really wanted to kill someone, surely like, 10 would be enough if you were still in a calculating frame of mind?

But hey, not a pyschologist.

peterh said :

has his family come out and said that they are happy with the sentence? or did the say that when he was “inside”?

There may be a different opinion at play, now that he will be out.

regardless of his mental capacity at the time of the killing, he killed someone. If he is mentally ill, put him into a facility within a prison. There still are criminally insane sections in the prison system. in this instance, perhaps they should be used.

the fact that he packed up and p*ssed off suggests that he had a very good control of his mental faculties. a rational person would flee, a mentally ill person would probably not be able to make the connection that they had done wrong.

showing good behaviour in the prison does not make him better, he may still be ill. He needs treatment. If he comes back and re-offends, all the people saying that the sentence was fine, he is not going to do it again, well, I hope it isn’t one of your relatives.

personally, I think that it would be better that he receive an independent psych eval prior to being released.

You seem to have a lot of opinions on mental health. What qualifications or experience do you base these opinions on?

Headbonius said :

This matter was heard before judge alone. One man acting on and applying his own set of social ideals and norms. This should never happen. Matters like this, like it or not Simbo should be heard before a jury. I suspect that there would have been a different outcome, as distasteful as that might be for you and your simple friend Justice Higgins.

Porritt was found guilty. That is the part a jury would have deliberated on.

has his family come out and said that they are happy with the sentence? or did the say that when he was “inside”?

There may be a different opinion at play, now that he will be out.

regardless of his mental capacity at the time of the killing, he killed someone. If he is mentally ill, put him into a facility within a prison. There still are criminally insane sections in the prison system. in this instance, perhaps they should be used.

the fact that he packed up and p*ssed off suggests that he had a very good control of his mental faculties. a rational person would flee, a mentally ill person would probably not be able to make the connection that they had done wrong.

showing good behaviour in the prison does not make him better, he may still be ill. He needs treatment. If he comes back and re-offends, all the people saying that the sentence was fine, he is not going to do it again, well, I hope it isn’t one of your relatives.

personally, I think that it would be better that he receive an independent psych eval prior to being released.

I’m generally a fairly black and white kinda person, who tends to agree with the idea that people who do bad things should be punished in one way or another. However in this case I really don’t know what to think. I don’t doubt that there was certainly some provocation there from the mother, but I also doubt that the offender truly lost control of himself. I think at some level he knew what he was doing, and I think he also knew that the situation would escalate to that point.

Given Higgins’ history, I would tend towards believing the sentence is too lenient and should be appealed. However, I don’t believe he should be locked up for the rest of his life and I think the fact the family are allegedly happy with the sentence speaks volumes.

I don’t think I’ve got a sunshine and lollipops view of the world (though I could be proved wrong – I’ve been accused of living in a bubble before) – just … I don’t know that simplifying the world to “good” and “evil” does anybody any favours either. Yes, people do evil deeds all the time. But to say therefore “oh, they’re evil, bin them” seems to me to be an abrogation of any kind of societal responsibility towards anything. It also suggests a fair bit of limited thinking – once you’ve declared they’re evil, you don’t have to think about them any more.

Given the entire rest of the family of the victim seem to be supportive of him – maybe, just maybe, they might know more about the circumstances than, I dunno, anybody else. I readily admit – I haven’t been in the court, and, goodness knows, given his family history (in particular his bloody awful, and publically recorded, relationship with his own son), Terry Higgins probably isn’t someone who should really be responsible for the societal disposition of anybody else either… but… there’s always the possibility that he got it right in this case.

Of course, if you’re right and Karma works, then Terry cna look forward to a couple of dozen knifings from a close family member sometime soon, I suppose.

this post proves that most humans have limited brain capacity

Simbo wrote “Given also that dear old mum apparently brought the knife to the fight, not Glenn, suggests that, gosh, maybe the victim ain’t a raving innocent in this case.”

Who made this assertion Simbo? That there was a fight that Mum brought the knife to? The accused, is the answer Simbo. Was there another version of events? Yes. Was there anyone to give evidence? No. So you stab someone 57 times and this makes you temporarily insane and liable for release? Where were Glenn’s horrific injuries that he surely would have ssutined in such an epic fight for survival? There weren’t any. Because someone does something so evil that you, Simbo, look at it and say……Jesus, someone must be crazy to do that – then they are?. People just can’t be bad? You obviously have the same “Sunshine and Lollypops” view of the world as Terrence Higgins.

This matter was heard before judge alone. One man acting on and applying his own set of social ideals and norms. This should never happen. Matters like this, like it or not Simbo should be heard before a jury. I suspect that there would have been a different outcome, as distasteful as that might be for you and your simple friend Justice Higgins.

I’d suggest the very act of stabbing someone 57 times, rather than, say, a perfectly effective 3 or 4, might suggest temporary insanity prevails. Given also that dear old mum apparently brought the knife to the fight, not Glenn, suggests that, gosh, maybe the victim ain’t a raving innocent in this case. Perhaps, gosh, the circumstances of the case are a bit more complicated than “oh my god, they’re letting a mass murdering psycho loose on the streets, someone save us!”

However, given that, well, this is an internet comment board and the ability to think things rationally over rather than to rush to instantaneous judgements has never been a big feature, I’m not spectacularly surprised about the way the conversation thread has gone…

Ingeegoodbee said :

…does the conga line of used butt-plugs have no end!

FFS, people, next you’ll be doing your own gas fitting, brake repairs, and minor surgery on your kids.

I am jet lagged and sleep deprived and obviously missed the relevance of your post…. have you experienced many used butt plug conga lines?

…does the conga line of used butt-plugs have no end!

FFS, people, next you’ll be doing your own gas fitting, brake repairs, and minor surgery on your kids.

We need a review of all decisions made by CJ Higgins… I recall he (or Grey) were torn to pieces a while back by a NSW Judge (?) regarding the quality of thier decisions.

For those who are taking the line of it’s a very hard job to hear a case like this or it’s not his fault he is crazy and didn’t mean it (I took a little liberty there) you might want to place yourselves in the naughty corner and reflect on the facts that are publically known (google them). This was another case of failing the community by Higgins.

Next time I find someone I really don’t like, remind me not to cross off the list “Stab them 57 times”, as it will be a complete accident that I didn’t really mean to do it because they were mean to me. At most I will get a 4 year suspended sentence! yay.

Maybe I should go into the knife selling business, I can see the people lining up now to stab anyone mean to the them.

No doubt the mother wasn’t a very nice person and caused him to have some issues, but what a joke. None of the issues were any excuse to stab her 57 times or reduce his intentinon to kill her, he even admitted the crime and that he should not have done it. Typical court system.

goddamn bleeding hearts make me wanna wrench. sure its a sad situation but when you kill someone there tends to be consequences. porritt can consider himself absolutely blessed he lives in such a civilised lefty-ruled country.

I would have imposed a light sentence (1-2 years) on top of time served. It is a very sad story – it is amazing what is apparently going on in suburban homes around the place.

The thing that I found most disturbing is that when the Old Fool pronounced sentence, he commented that he was imposing the longest sentence he had ever given anyone for manslaughter.

And he seemed proud of the the fact.

AussieGal83 – not sure about the ACT, but in most jurisdictions it needs a vote of the legislature. Removals are very rare, and mostly related to issues of personal conduct (the attempted removal of Bruce J in NSW was an exception, being related to excessive delay etc). The best approach if a judge makes an error in a specific case is to appeal.

If a judge, or several judges, have a pattern of error, an appeal court may make it clear that it is setting down principles it will apply. A judge who ignored that would be a fool and would be doing no kindness to anyone who would be forced to commence or respond to an appeal.

A very sad story and a sad family with no winners anywhere. I reckon another 2 years served on top of the 22 months would have been satisfactory for most concerned….

How can we get Higgins sacked?

As with many sentences, this one was never going to be easy. The events were horrid and suggested the murder end of the manslaughter continuum. On the other hand, there was a credible explanation for a confrontation that became over the top. The circumstances of the offence were extreme or one-off, so there’s little likelihood of the apparently light sentence encouraging others. The offender is probably unlikely to err again. His remorse is said to be genuine, and those who know him best (his family) are said to be prepared to have him in the home again.

Bill Stefaniak was on the WIN news, calling for an appeal. If the sentence was out of whack, that’s what should happen. My guess is that it’s within an available range, albeit at the lower end. But sentencing is never precise or predictable.

A real no win situation. Glen Porritt’s life is cactus whether he is locked away or on the streets. He won’t get employed again, he will be looked at and gossiped about for all time and will be just on one long downhill spiral.

My 2c worth.

A very sad situation, with many facets.

Higgins got it right.

Good on Glen, I am sure he has done it hard in the Remand Centre for the last 22 months, I am sure many an ACT prisoner would much rather go to the comfortable Goulburn Jail than live in the squaller at BRC, and it was only Manslaughter, not Murder, so whats the big deal? 22 months is probably a bit excessive.

Good on you Terry, I am glad that you stand for the majority of the Canberra folk who are all pro Human Rights and really feel the Civil Libertarians are outspoken when it comes to sentencing. Remember its not about the victim, it is about the poor offender and what went wrong in society for this to have happened – numbers of victims far outweigh numbers of offenders, if we get the offenders right the victim count will gradually come down in time – it is a win win situation!

but where are the peanuts? are there free peanuts?

Ingeegoodbee said :

instead sniping from the peanut gallery like your opinion counts for anything.

I thought that’s what this site was all about. What are you doing here, then?

@Peterh:
Mens rea and actus reus.

I believe Mens Rea is Chris’s younger brother.

Ingeegoobee: sorry for being so deluded as to think the purpose of this site was for a bit of friendly banter. No-one’s claiming to be the lovechild of Angela Lansbury and Columbo. But if it makes you feel like a big man/woman to throw cold water on everything then here’s your bone. Go and chew on it. Good doggie. Good doggie. And unless you live in a cesspit like China, I think you’ll find that the community’s opinion actually DOES count for something. I did like the Turkey line though.

Mens Rea, there is so much innuendo you could get from that (innuendo, mens rea, geddit?)

But on a more serious note, mens rea: “the act does not make a person guilty unless the mind is also guilty”

Roadrage77 said :

And if his mum truly brought it upon herself, then how do you explain the fact that on an internet chat site Glen had also planned to murder his sisters? Maybe YOU need to read a little more than the headlines?

He didn’t plan on killing them just like he didn’t plan on killing his mother. He said he wanted do it – but he wouldn’t because he didn’t want to go to jail. That’s him actively NOT planning on killing anyone because he recognises the consequences. It was 8 months later that it actually happened – if he really wanted to carry out his plan why would he wait so long?

Roadrage77 said :

Furthermore, like Prius alluded to, he was rational enough to know when the heat was on and it was time to get out of the kitchen. So in summary, I don’t buy into the sob story defense one bit.

Rational is planning something, carrying it out and then covering it up. Irrational is stabbing a whole bunch more than is necessary, freaking out and panicking, trying to mop up blood, grabbing stuff and hiding it, sleeping next to a tree for days, fleeing to QLD, etc., Sounds like the desparate attempts of someone trying to come to grips after the horrifying fact, not someone who planned a murder.

The other option is to get elected, you know.

Mandatory sentencing, juries determining sentences….. Would go down a treat with the normal populace.

jakez said :

peterh said :

whether this is an unrelated violent act and a “once off”, or not. he has killed someone. 22 months is too lenient for a killer.

Are you suggesting that mens rea should not be a requirement of a finding of guilty?

dumb it down a bit – what is mens rea?

I love how every time there’s a legal outcome that dosn’t fit the misguided views of our CSI / Law & Order watching commentariate the same predictable conga-line of used butt-plugs swings into action to spit venom at the justice system.

Good luck to the prick. I bet he’ll never get asked to carve the Christmas turkey.

And if you don’t like it, at least have the balls to give up your current carrer as a cleaner, house maid or whatever and spend five years getting a law degree and then a decade or two working up the ladder to the point where you get a judicial appointment and then do somthing about it instead sniping from the peanut gallery like your opinion counts for anything.

peterh said :

Mr Evil said :

Duke said :

doesn’t matter, even 2 or 3 cuts would have caused her to back off. the fact that he reacted the way he did – if he got the knife off his mother, he could have, should have thrown it away, and restrained her. Not stab her and cut her. Regardless of the events, the fact is that he killed his mother. whether this is an unrelated violent act and a “once off”, or not. he has killed someone. 22 months is too lenient for a killer.

Read his post again, Peter. Porrit was not in control. Cutting someone and stopping when they back off is a sane method of defending yourself.

I doubt there’s any chance of him re-offending. He’s been punished – 22 months behind bars and his obvious remorse. He is receiving mental help. His return to society is being supervised.

peterh said :

whether this is an unrelated violent act and a “once off”, or not. he has killed someone. 22 months is too lenient for a killer.

Are you suggesting that mens rea should not be a requirement of a finding of guilty?

Ofm – there are plenty of people out there who’ve had tough upbringings who haven’t resorted to homicide. For starters you could read some of the threads on this site about child abuse in Catholic schools and maybe you’d realise it is possible to rise above it.

And if his mum truly brought it upon herself, then how do you explain the fact that on an internet chat site Glen had also planned to murder his sisters? Maybe YOU need to read a little more than the headlines?

Furthermore, like Prius alluded to, he was rational enough to know when the heat was on and it was time to get out of the kitchen. So in summary, I don’t buy into the sob story defense one bit.

Mr Evil said :

Duke said :

Get ready to flame me people, but after reading all the reports it sounded to me like Porritt was a good guy pushed too far by a psychotic mother. Product of his environment is Porritt.

So, open season on any psychotic types you happen to dislike – no bag limit?

By the way, he apparently didn’t stab her 57 times: she was cut and stabbed 57 times, with some of the cuts being superficial.

doesn’t matter, even 2 or 3 cuts would have caused her to back off. the fact that he reacted the way he did – if he got the knife off his mother, he could have, should have thrown it away, and restrained her. Not stab her and cut her. Regardless of the events, the fact is that he killed his mother. whether this is an unrelated violent act and a “once off”, or not. he has killed someone. 22 months is too lenient for a killer.

After Mrs Porritt was killed, Glen Porritt skipped town to the Gold Coast where he hid until he was eventually spotted. Not exactly the actions of an innocent man.

I think if there was concern he would re-offend then yes keep him locked up. however it is probably safe to assume that he won’t.

Until someone pisses him off again?

You can only commit matricide once, after that, it’s interfering with a corpse…

Duke said :

Get ready to flame me people, but after reading all the reports it sounded to me like Porritt was a good guy pushed too far by a psychotic mother. Product of his environment is Porritt.

So, open season on any psychotic types you happen to dislike – no bag limit?

By the way, he apparently didn’t stab her 57 times: she was cut and stabbed 57 times, with some of the cuts being superficial.

From what I’ve gathered, he wasn’t “pissed off” and he didn’t “decide” anything. It seems to me like he was a very troubled kid who had put up with a life of abuse from his mother, and through the course of an argument the same “abusive” mother pulled a knife on him. He didn’t plan for her to come at him with a deadly weapon did he? The fact that he ended up stabbing her so many times supports the fact that he wasn’t in control, or else wouldn’t he have stopped once she was dead?

Road rage? Are you guys serious? From what I’ve read he’s not an inherently violent person who uses murder as an answer to his problems. If he was then the judge (or any number of people involved with the case somewhere along the 22 months he’s been incarcerated) surely would have noticed and he’d be put away for a lot longer. That’s why we give judges the power to hand out sentences that are lenient, in cases where it’s appropriate LIKE THIS ONE. It looks to me like he’s just a messed up kid who was abused and pushed by a tyrant mother, who when confronted by that same mother (with a deadly weapon) did something horrible and has been punished, locked up and demonised to the point where he now has a serious mental illness.

You can’t just treat every case by its headline – that’s why there is a judge to weigh up every aspect of the case and I think he had a very tough task looking at the case with an even eye, which he handled well. I’m not saying what happened is right in any way. Glen Porritt killed his mother and he has to live with that for the rest his life. But just stop and think for a minute before calling for the public hanging.

Chief Justice Higgins – don’t listen to the reactionaries who see the number “57” in a headline and stop reading and start typing. Some of us out here recognise how tough the case must have been and support your decision.

I’m not, but a friend with a BPsych(Hons), a BEd, seven years experience in dealing with abused Asperger’s and autistic children and teens, and working on a forensics qualification will only offer that the defence is a crock of shit.

Accountability – there is none in today’s society.

I just wanted an expert opinion on some of the issues raised in this thread. I can tell you how to argue for a dissociative state in court, but I can’t diagnose it properly.

I have a psych degree though I’m not a practising shrink.

Is anyone here actually a psychologist?

Sorry for the multiple posts.
Including this one.

I’ll stop now.

road rage may take on a more sinister aspect…
I agree. If someone now asks me if I am going to pull over if I “accidentally” scrape their car, and I have 2 hysterical passengers screaming “He’s going to get us”…..I’ll listen to them.
It could be Glenn Porritt asking me to pull over.

Also a good way to make the kiddies behave (Glenn Porritt will get angry if you don’t behave.)

road rage may take on a more sinister aspect…
I agree. If someone now asks me if I was going to pull over if I “accidentally” scrape their car, and I have 2 hysterical passengers screaming “He’s going to get us”…..I’ll listen to them.
It could be Glenn Porritt asking me to pull over.

Also a good way to make the kiddies behave (Glenn Porritt will get angry if you don’t behave.)

In summary:

Higgo – get fu*ked.

Obviously Higgo is waaaay above public accountability. The message his sentences send to the community STINK. Martin Bryant would be out by now had he chosen Garema Place rather than Port Arthur as his shooting gallery. Not only is it near impossible to be convicted for murder in the ACT (no conviction since 1998), but as tuggers said, the manslaughter sentences are absolutely laughable.

Regardless of circumstance, how can anyone make an argument that someone who stabs someone in the head 57 times does not pose a threat to the community?!

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

So don’t piss him off!

and do you know what he looks like?

road rage may take on a more sinister aspect…

Did they at least recommend ongoing pysch treatment?

I’d put Hillier and Singh away before Porrit.
but I would’ve given Porrit some kind of sentence too.

So don’t piss him off!

Another psychopath back on the streets.

“In June, the court was told Porritt’s mental health had improved since the verdict was handed down and he was relieved his father and two sisters did not hold his actions against him.” — ABC.

Sounds like family will be happy with the outcome.

And it only took 2 years to get to this point!

Higgins: Keeping the laughter in Canberran manslaughter sentences.

Just how many manhours (total of Police investigation, DPP, Defence legal, Court, and Judicial) were put into the case, for how much detention?

Precedent: Anu Singh; Stephen Hillier

tylersmayhem said :

It does sound very much like it was an accident.

Ooop’s, I tripped with the kitchen knife…oh oh, I tripped again, and again, and again….

or maybe she repeatedly fell on the knife to “teach him a lesson”??

Our Tez excels again.

Lucky MethMum was up before Kaz and not Tez.

I reckon he should have just moved out and not maintained contact with his mother. Would have been easier. Works for plenty of other people.

I think if there was concern he would re-offend then yes keep him locked up. however it is probably safe to assume that he won’t.

It does sound very much like it was an accident.

Ooop’s, I tripped with the kitchen knife…oh oh, I tripped again, and again, and again….

MRB said :

peterh, he didn’t actually live there, he had moved out about 12 months prior. He went to visit apparently…

if there was an issue between them, going there would only make it worse.

(as has been proven)

but, if he had stopped at 2 or 3 stabs – he could have claimed he didn’t know what he was doing. mental illness, temporary insanity etc. 57, now, that is a definite sign that he knew exactly what he was doing, and kept on doing.

not a good outcome.

but not very surprising, considering the current state of the judiciary.

and they want him to come back to society?

what happens when a friend (if he has any left) or a lover has an argument with him?

I would be packing my bags and running like hell.

Higgins: Keeping the laughter in Canberran manslaughter sentences.

Just how many manhours (total of Police investigation, DPP, Defence legal, Court, and Judicial) were put into the case, for how much detention?

does good behaviour bond == “don’t kill your mother again”?

peterh, he didn’t actually live there, he had moved out about 12 months prior. He went to visit apparently…

peterh you make loads of sense. There are loads of other choices that this man could have made apart from the one he did.

The guy killed someone, this is a very light sentence and tells the community that Murder or ‘Unlawful Homicide’ isn’t such a bad thing.

Higgins is a disgrace – pure and simple.

peterh said :

unlawful homicide? what is that? is there a lawful homicide?

homicide – the killing of one human being by another.

Yes there is lawful homicide. You are thinking of murder.

Has ‘manslaughter’ been rebadged as ‘unlawful homicide’ in the ACT? Or is unlawful homicide a new umbrella term that encompasses murder and manslaughter? I don’t remember coming across the term when I did criminal law…2 years ago.

Duke said :

Get ready to flame me people, but after reading all the reports it sounded to me like Porritt was a good guy pushed too far by a psychotic mother. Product of his environment is Porritt.

regardless, he could have:

a) moved away from her
b) moved away from her and barred her calls
c) moved away from her, barred her calls and not told her where he was living

this would have solved his problem.
not, and let me make this clear,
d) stab her 57 times.

Duke said :

Get ready to flame me people, but after reading all the reports it sounded to me like Porritt was a good guy pushed too far by a psychotic mother. Product of his environment is Porritt.

Your last sentence is very Yoda-like 😉

His mother may have been a nasty piece of work, but that doesn’t give him the right to stab her to death.

doesn’t change the fact that he killed someone. killing someone = jail. at least it did when I went to school, times seem to have changed.

Get ready to flame me people, but after reading all the reports it sounded to me like Porritt was a good guy pushed too far by a psychotic mother. Product of his environment is Porritt.

“Justice” Higgins. I am speechless.

unlawful homicide? what is that? is there a lawful homicide?

looks like another case of a soft legal system. she died after being stabbed and cut 57 times?
who the hell wants to live near him?