Knight Russell Packer jailed for two years

[Qld-Sharkie]

sounds lame

Sounds right.

 

[El Diablo]

you think it will act as a deterrent?

that's what the media use it as

very lame and won't do shit except give journos a hard on every time they use it

 

[age.s]

Yeah it sounds pretty forced. Maybe it should catch on but I really doubt it will.

 

[Flapper]

Coward punch will be about as effective as #stopthetrolls.

 

[POPEYE]

Another teenager stabbing, no different from a king hit or head stomping . . . it's the idea these acts are necessary, more abhorrent than the acts themselves

 

[RHCP]

Its been called a dog shot for as long as I've been alive this coward punch rubbish is just too forced.

 

[_snafu_]

I think the term dog shot is more apt.

Also, he deserves a custodial sentence - whether 2 years is too long is a different matter.

 

[Pierced Soul]

either Packer got dealt with harshly or others have got off leniently

others have gotten off leniently. no different to the MRC when they deem one bad tackle worthy of 6 weeks and identical tackles get 2 weeks...

He would have been denied bail because the judge considered him a danger to the community... That's the only way he could do it... And even that's laughable.

I agree they've made an example out of him... But it's starting to look pretty shady...

why is it laughable? the judge obviously has reports from both the prosecution and the defence. the merkin has already gotten drunk coward punched (yes it sounds awkward) someone, hit him again when he's on the ground and stomped him...had he killed him would you still be saying he isnt a danger to community because he's already killed the guy who pissed him off?

you keep posting contradictory messages where you're denouncing the merkins actions yet questioning the sentence/procedure. if you want to to support the merkin then come out and say it

I think the term dog shot is more apt.

it's derogatory to dogs.

i believe "cowards punch" was recently brought out in part through the daily telegraph/news ltd when referring to the violent incidents and suggesting we call these cheap shots what they are - cowardice. the term doesnt really gel though but it's at least something news ltd is doing which is positive

 

[Snappy]

^^ Agreed. He has proven himself to be a danger to the community. Nothing laughable about that at all.

And how many times do we hear of nrl players reoffending after being given a first chance.

 

[StGeorgeBull]

Even if it doesn't stop one act of violence "coward" is more accurate than "king" and should be used.

In my view Packer got exactly what he deserved. I now hope others in similar situations get dealt with as harshly.

 

[shiznit]

why is it laughable? the judge obviously has reports from both the prosecution and the defence. the merkin has already gotten drunk coward punched (yes it sounds awkward) someone, hit him again when he's on the ground and stomped him...had he killed him would you still be saying he isnt a danger to community because he's already killed the guy who pissed him off?

you keep posting contradictory messages where you're denouncing the merkins actions yet questioning the sentence/procedure. if you want to to support the merkin then come out and say it

I have mixed feelings on the issue...

I think he should be punished for what he did... It was despicable and deserving of punishment.

But the punishment needs to be consistent with what is normally dished out in cases like this.

And yes I find it laughable that he was denied bail because the magistrate considered him a risk to the community... When someone is denied bail for these reasons it's because there is a high risk that they will reoffend and put the community at risk.

Can you seriously say Russell Packer was going to get drunk and assault someone again?? It would have been far more effective to grant him bail with conditions around alcohol.

I mean... Even the prosecution had no issues with him being granted bail... That should tell you everything about how much of a danger he was to the community.

I'm not for one second defending what the dickhead did... I'm just asking questions about the consistency with the sentence handed out.

 

[Matchball]

I'm glad the magistrate didn't fall for the Wayne Bennett letter.
As if is in any position to give him a character reference.

Have they even met?

 

[hineyrulz]

At least no one will blame him for pissing himself this time, merkin deserves every minute of that 2 year sentence.

 

[Pierced Soul]

But the punishment needs to be consistent with what is normally dished out in cases like this.

And yes I find it laughable that he was denied bail because the magistrate considered him a risk to the community... When someone is denied bail for these reasons it's because there is a high risk that they will reoffend and put the community at risk.

Can you seriously say Russell Packer was going to get drunk and assault someone again?? It would have been far more effective to grant him bail with conditions around alcohol.

I mean... Even the prosecution had no issues with him being granted bail... That should tell you everything about how much of a danger he was to the community.

I'm not for one second defending what the dickhead did... I'm just asking questions about the consistency with the sentence handed out.

if the previous sentencing of similar offences is flawed then consistency isnt necessarily a good thing. lets look at the case without worrying about any other cases - is 2 years for a seemingly unprovoked attack where a person already bashed to the ground is continued to be hit and then stomped on fair?

just because some other c**k head escaped with a weaker punishment doesnt mean we should let all merkins off with slaps on the wrist.

it is unusual for the police to not to oppose bail in this situation, but i'm glad the magistrate didnt care about that.

From this incident i do believe packer is at a risk of re-offending. you can argue he should be "managed" by being told not to drink/show up at the cop shop a few times a week but plenty of people on bail re-offend and after what he's done he shouldnt have the opportunity to re-offend. we're not talking about someone who committed a minor crime. whats to stop him thinking "my careers over" (which hopefully it will be), going on a bender and bashing someone else? Newcastle can wank off about "support structures" but these obviously werent in place when he tried to kill a guy

 

[Lambretta]

Newcastle can wank off about "support structures" but these obviously werent in place when he tried to kill a guy

Obviously they had gotten him a place in Windale where this sort of behaviour is socially acceptable

If only he'd moved in a week earlier....


Russell Packer acted without thinking and must now pay the price.
The fact that he can play a sport should not exempt him from having to go to prison. Newcastle should withdraw their support until such time that he has served his time. They can re-assess their position in two years time pending the NRL registering his contract and he being fit enough / good enough to carry on playing.

I hope he and many other young men, take this opportunity to work out that belting the shit out of people is never acceptable.

 

[Fat Krion]

Harsh but fair ! A stand needs to be made by the community supported by strong sentencing from the judicial system.

Packer deserves his sentence, with good behaviour he may yet resurrect his career in a year or so.

What i find interesting is that if he did this on a footy field he wouuld have incurred a life ban from playing, so he got off lightly IMO.

 

[magpie4ever]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...ht-cases-looming/story-fni0cx12-1226796165816

"Beard appeared at Parramatta Court on Sunday where he was granted conditional bail charged with offences including recklessly inflicting grievous bodily harm as well as assaulting Lance McEwen.

He was also charged with possessing steroids after police allegedly found 13 vials of the drug during a search of his home on Saturday."



There is the major problem in one - the gym culture of the Gen Ys, steriods and alcohol (roid rage); and as Popeye indicated the "un-Australian" attitude of the generation.

 

[Snappy]

Can you seriously say Russell Packer was going to get drunk and assault someone again??

It puzzles me how you can be so sure that there is no chance it could happen again. I'm sure people also thought Robert Lui wouldn't be stupid enough to get blind on another mad Monday but we all know how that turned out.

I just don't understand why he should get bail after being sentenced. He'll end up with a prison term anyway, so he can stay in prison while awaiting to appeal the severity of the sentence.

 

[shiznit]

if the previous sentencing of similar offences is flawed then consistency isnt necessarily a good thing. lets look at the case without worrying about any other cases - is 2 years for a seemingly unprovoked attack where a person already bashed to the ground is continued to be hit and then stomped on fair?

just because some other c**k head escaped with a weaker punishment doesnt mean we should let all merkins off with slaps on the wrist.

it is unusual for the police to not to oppose bail in this situation, but i'm glad the magistrate didnt care about that.

From this incident i do believe packer is at a risk of re-offending. you can argue he should be "managed" by being told not to drink/show up at the cop shop a few times a week but plenty of people on bail re-offend and after what he's done he shouldnt have the opportunity to re-offend. we're not talking about someone who committed a minor crime. whats to stop him thinking "my careers over" (which hopefully it will be), going on a bender and bashing someone else? Newcastle can wank off about "support structures" but these obviously werent in place when he tried to kill a guy

I can understand where your coming from...

But consistency is paramount when offering punishment as a deterrent for a crime.

Taking the fact that it's russell packer the NRL player to the side...

Your talking about a guy with no previous criminal convictions being given the maximum sentence after pleading guilty.

You can certainly see why he would be appealing that sentence.

As for the bail being denied because he's a danger to the community... That's rubbish and you know it.

This is his first offence... He's hardly a recidivist offender at risk of offending again.

All that's REALLY happened here is the magistrate has decided to make a name for himself and make an example of packer by giving him a tougher than normal sentence. Which he knows in the current climate will make him popular with the public.

He's then denied bail knowing full well that his original sentence will likely be heavily reduced on appeal. So effectively he's trying to make Packer serve some time in Jail.

What he didn't count on was the prosecution not opposing bail... And now it's made it look very obvious what he's doing.

For the month or so that packer is locked up... It's gonna cost the aussie tax payer tens of thousands of dollars for a guy who is not a risk to the community... When they could have bailed him and let him cover his own costs...

Crazy stuff...

 

[Canard]

I can understand where your coming from...

But consistency is paramount when offering punishment as a deterrent for a crime.

I don't understand your point in relation to this bit.

Your saying that the magistrate should have given a more lenient sentence as that would be consistent and therefore a bigger deterrent?

I believe each case should be dealt with according to the facts, not just one blanket sentence for "assualt" which could range from an open handed slap to knocking someone unconscious and than stomping on there head.