Gungahlin thug arrested

Jim Jones said :

How_Canberran said :

Jim Jones said :

joingler said :

Why the hell is a 17 year old being charged in the childrens court? Trial him as an adult. Trial anyone over the age of 13 as an adult

Um … do you know what ‘adult’ means?

Yes!….walking the streets at 9:00pm and throwing hay-makers at other people.

Ah yes, we should obviously rewrite the way the justice system works because someone was assaulted by a minor and someone else wants to look tough on the internet about it.

Why shouldn’t teenagers be thrown into the jail? What could possibly go wrong? Jail’s a wonderful environment for rehabilitation and no-one ever became more likely to commit criminal acts because they went to jail, did they?

Okay 13 is extreme. Heat of the moment post.

But my point still stands. The guy is 17 and knew what he was doing. Parents could POTENTIALLY be at fault but ultimately the guy is old enough to know what he is doing. He should not be trialled as an adult.

Perhaps a different system is needed where offenders aged 15-18 or so are trialled more harshly than kids but differently to adults. That is another discussion though….

DrKoresh said :

Stevian said :

Spiral said :

The poor hospital staff probably didn’t know why he was there. If he had just opened his mouth and told them what the problem was then he may have been attended to much quicker.

Open his mouth? With a broken jaw?

You’re not the brightest knife in the cabbage patch, are you?

Yes, he’s missed the subtle comedic stylings of bundah and Spiral. Hilarious stuff guys!

DrKoresh said :

Any other state would have him charged as an adult.

Please back up this claim with evidence citing relevant case law.

Stevian said :

Spiral said :

The poor hospital staff probably didn’t know why he was there. If he had just opened his mouth and told them what the problem was then he may have been attended to much quicker.

Open his mouth? With a broken jaw?

You’re not the brightest knife in the cabbage patch, are you?

Spiral said :

The poor hospital staff probably didn’t know why he was there. If he had just opened his mouth and told them what the problem was then he may have been attended to much quicker.

Open his mouth? With a broken jaw?

How_Canberran said :

Jim Jones said :

joingler said :

Why the hell is a 17 year old being charged in the childrens court? Trial him as an adult. Trial anyone over the age of 13 as an adult

Um … do you know what ‘adult’ means?

Yes!….walking the streets at 9:00pm and throwing hay-makers at other people.

Obviously not.

Jim Jones said :

How_Canberran said :

Jim Jones said :

joingler said :

Why the hell is a 17 year old being charged in the childrens court? Trial him as an adult. Trial anyone over the age of 13 as an adult

Um … do you know what ‘adult’ means?

Yes!….walking the streets at 9:00pm and throwing hay-makers at other people.

Ah yes, we should obviously rewrite the way the justice system works because someone was assaulted by a minor and someone else wants to look tough on the internet about it.

Why shouldn’t teenagers be thrown into the jail? What could possibly go wrong? Jail’s a wonderful environment for rehabilitation and no-one ever became more likely to commit criminal acts because they went to jail, did they?

Nah, this is some bullshit. Any other state would have him charged as an adult. 17 is not a baby, he’s old enough to know he shouldn’t be bashing randoms in the street and if he doesn’t know that he’s old enough by now to learn it the hard way. I’m not usually a hardcore crime and punishment type guy, but I think there are a lot of young folk out there who want to act hard like men and commit men’s crimes but are still being treated like children by the courts. It’s laughable bullshit. You just know he’s going to get some soft-as-cheese sentence which will only boost his ego and serve to let him think he can get away with such behaviour in future. He should be spending a good 4-9 months in grown-up jail, instead he’ll get a slap on the wrist.

The poor hospital staff probably didn’t know why he was there. If he had just opened his mouth and told them what the problem was then he may have been attended to much quicker.

joingler said :

Hang them high, bring back the death peanlty, rah, rah, rah

How_Canberran said :

Jim Jones said :

joingler said :

Why the hell is a 17 year old being charged in the childrens court? Trial him as an adult. Trial anyone over the age of 13 as an adult

Um … do you know what ‘adult’ means?

Yes!….walking the streets at 9:00pm and throwing hay-makers at other people.

Ah yes, we should obviously rewrite the way the justice system works because someone was assaulted by a minor and someone else wants to look tough on the internet about it.

Why shouldn’t teenagers be thrown into the jail? What could possibly go wrong? Jail’s a wonderful environment for rehabilitation and no-one ever became more likely to commit criminal acts because they went to jail, did they?

Chop71 said :

Jim Jones said :

Is this the assault that was reported on ABC radio the other morning? The father of the poor lad who was assaulted told the story of his son waiting for 8 hours in emergency with a broken jaw before being seen by a doctor.

Blah 8 hours……

Hospital stats probably say 30mins

Lol

There was a rep from the hospital on the radio. He acknowledged that the poor lad was in a category that should have been seen in less than 30 minutes, but that it took ‘much longer’ than this. He rambled on about the fact that emergency was ‘unusually busy’ that night, but could give no explanation why this was the case. Pretty unconvincing stuff.

I recognise that health professionals are doing a really tough job in trying circumstances, and it would be mistaken to place the blame at their feet, but when someone with a broken jaw has to wait for 8 hours in the emergency department, there’s something desperately wrong.

Not to mention the unprovoked attack by (allegedly) a group of thugs at 9pm at night in a public place. Cowardly stuff from a pack of braindead tools.

If I saw something like this happen, it would be hard to resist the urge to crack their heads open to make a genuine inquiry into whether they have any brains.

Jim Jones said :

joingler said :

Why the hell is a 17 year old being charged in the childrens court? Trial him as an adult. Trial anyone over the age of 13 as an adult

Um … do you know what ‘adult’ means?

Yes!….walking the streets at 9:00pm and throwing hay-makers at other people.

Jim Jones said :

Is this the assault that was reported on ABC radio the other morning? The father of the poor lad who was assaulted told the story of his son waiting for 8 hours in emergency with a broken jaw before being seen by a doctor.

Blah 8 hours……

Hospital stats probably say 30mins

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-05/attack-victim-criticises-police-health-response/4243938/?site=canberra

Police and emergency both emerge from this looking less than stellar.

joingler said :

Why the hell is a 17 year old being charged in the childrens court? Trial him as an adult. Trial anyone over the age of 13 as an adult

Um … do you know what ‘adult’ means?

bundah said :

Jim Jones said :

Is this the assault that was reported on ABC radio the other morning? The father of the poor lad who was assaulted told the story of his son waiting for 8 hours in emergency with a broken jaw before being seen by a doctor.

That’s gobsmacking!

I laughed then I felt really really bad.

So, if it turns out that the particular thug that king hit the victim isn’t this un-named person I guess JB will have to change the headline.

Until that happens, no harm, no foul

Why the hell is a 17 year old being charged in the childrens court? Trial him as an adult. Trial anyone over the age of 13 as an adult

jthommo said :

johnboy said :

jthommo said :

So how do you know he is a “thug”? Innocent until proven guilty old chap.

“He” has not been named.

And won’t be because he’s a minor. It makes no difference – you have passed a judgement on his character. Poor, poor ethics.

Given he was apparently charged with recklessly inflicting grevious bodily harm suggesting he’s a thug is quite reasonable.

johnboy said :

jthommo said :

So how do you know he is a “thug”? Innocent until proven guilty old chap.

“He” has not been named.

And won’t be because he’s a minor. It makes no difference – you have passed a judgement on his character. Poor, poor ethics.

I predict a stern finger wagging.

Jim Jones said :

Is this the assault that was reported on ABC radio the other morning? The father of the poor lad who was assaulted told the story of his son waiting for 8 hours in emergency with a broken jaw before being seen by a doctor.

That’s gobsmacking!

Is this the assault that was reported on ABC radio the other morning? The father of the poor lad who was assaulted told the story of his son waiting for 8 hours in emergency with a broken jaw before being seen by a doctor.

johnboy said :

jthommo said :

So how do you know he is a “thug”? Innocent until proven guilty old chap.

“He” has not been named.

Anyone charged with serious assault could reasonably be considered a thug although we would need more information to be certain.

jthommo said :

So how do you know he is a “thug”? Innocent until proven guilty old chap.

“He” has not been named.

So how do you know he is a “thug”? Innocent until proven guilty old chap.