Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Recruiting experts in
Accountancy & Finance

What Exactly Does ‘Taking Steps to Stop Re-Offending’ Mean in a Canberra Court?

By vg - 20 April 2009 49

Looks like Hilary Penfold is perpetuating the way she started in the ACT Supreme Court [According to a story on the ABC].

    The ACT Supreme Court heard that after an argument with a group of off duty police officers outside a Dickson fast food shop, Bullock chased one of the men and hit him a number of times.

    The court was told he was feeling resentful about the way his sister had been treated by the group.

    Two and a half years ago, Bullock was convicted of assaulting a Sydney man at a bar in Civic in 2005.

    The victim, 23-year-old Mohamed Kamely, was later found dead in his hotel room.

    Today Justice Hilary Penfold said Bullock had taken steps to avoid offending and gave Bullock an 18 month good behaviour order.

I mean the guy ‘had taken steps to stop re-offending’ (the key word here to stop ‘re-offending’, not ‘offending’). The guy gets convicted of an assault 2 years previously in which someone ended up dying and still doesn’t learn his lesson? At what point will a court in this town make someone actually take responsibility for their actions. If he had taken steps he wouldn’t re-offend.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
49 Responses to
What Exactly Does ‘Taking Steps to Stop Re-Offending’ Mean in a Canberra Court?
Inappropriate 4:45 pm 20 Apr 09

FC said :

And why does her name have the suffix ‘QC’ if she has no legal qualifications?

She has a law degree (hon) and is a QC, but has never practiced law.

vg 4:25 pm 20 Apr 09

The point of what he should have learned is obviously lost on you. He should have learned a little thing called consequences

Primal 4:01 pm 20 Apr 09

Side note: it’s a bit rough chucking in “his victim was later found dead” when his conviction suggests no life-threatening action… a bit more info on that link would have been nice. Just sayin’.

FC 3:58 pm 20 Apr 09

And why does her name have the suffix ‘QC’ if she has no legal qualifications?

FC 3:55 pm 20 Apr 09

Steady Eddie. She was NOT simply appointed because she was a women.
If that was the case, then they would have just picked any random woman.

Maybe (and I mean maybe), her being a woman played in her favour when being considered for the position, but her sex is not the only reason she was appointed.

Furry Jesus 3:47 pm 20 Apr 09

Hilary Penfold doesn’t really exist. It’s Terry Higgins in drag – I mean, has anyone ever seen both of them in the same room together??

Steady Eddie 3:44 pm 20 Apr 09

FC said :

A Noisy Noise Annoys An Oyster said :

Hells_Bells74 said :

At what point will a court in this town make someone actually take responsibility for their actions.

When we finally have a government which appoints magistrates who are legally qualified rather than appointing people simply because they have a vagina.

I doubt that was why she was appointed.

a very foolish comment in my opinion

Penfold was appointed simply because she is a woman as our PC Chief Minister (and others in the ACT government) felt that the courts were “a boy’s club” and that not enough women were involved. She has no legal qualifications whatsoever and her appointment was severely criticised for this reason.

FC 3:26 pm 20 Apr 09

Sorry, you must have missed Inga Muscio’s book.

What I believe you are calling for are magistrates that hand out tougher sentences,
Not, “real cnuts”

FC 3:22 pm 20 Apr 09

A Noisy Noise Annoys An Oyster said :

Hells_Bells74 said :

At what point will a court in this town make someone actually take responsibility for their actions.

When we finally have a government which appoints magistrates who are legally qualified rather than appointing people simply because they have a vagina.

I doubt that was why she was appointed.

a very foolish comment in my opinion

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_ 3:22 pm 20 Apr 09

And yet what it seems we need are some real cnuts…

A Noisy Noise Annoys 3:13 pm 20 Apr 09

Hells_Bells74 said :

At what point will a court in this town make someone actually take responsibility for their actions.

When we finally have a government which appoints magistrates who are legally qualified rather than appointing people simply because they have a vagina.

Pommy bastard 2:08 pm 20 Apr 09

“had taken steps to stop re-offending”

Weazel words. How about; “had stopped offending.”

vg 1:56 pm 20 Apr 09

I will add the above is personal, not professional opinion

chewy14 1:32 pm 20 Apr 09

What steps to avoid offending did he take?

Not punching someone in the head for three years?

Hells_Bells74 1:26 pm 20 Apr 09

At what point will a court in this town make someone actually take responsibility for their actions.

When pigs fly!

Oh look, it’s a bird, it’s a plane, no…

1 2 3 4

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site