Sef gets his (1 Viewer)

[tWiStEdD]

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/09/17/1095320940706.html
hurrah!

Justice Bruce James today sentenced the 24-year-old student to three concurrent life sentences for the brutal slayings.

``I consider that the murders showed features of very great heinousness...,'' he said.

no better summation could be made.
i'm personally in favour of the sentence... does anyone think it should be any different?

 

[babydoll_]

Well, Australia doesn't have the death sentence, this is as close as we'll get.

Since they proved him to be mentally competent, and since he didn't show much remorse at trial, I think that's enough reason for him to stay locked up.

So yeah, I agree with the sentence.

 

[tWiStEdD]

am i to assume you favour the death sentence?

perhaps a more apt question is does he deserve the death penalty?

 

[theone123]

i seriously think he deserves it

 

[babydoll_]

In this case, I WOULD favour the death sentence.

By Australian law, murder is defined as:

The victim was a human being;
The victim died;
The act or omission of the accused caused the death of the victim; and
The act of the accused was without lawful cause or excuse; and
The accused:
intended to kill or do grievous bodily harm to some person; or
foresaw that it was probable that the death of a person would result; or
intended to commit a felony punishable by penal servitude for life or 25 years.

In this case, Sef Gonzales intended to do grievous bodily harm.
The fact that he showed no remorse for his actions - which resulted in the deaths of 3 people - is an indication that he is not fit to be a member of Australian society.
Also, moral obligations come in... not only did he murder members of his own family, but he did so remorselessly and brutally.

So yeah, I think the death sentence would be appropriate in this case.

 

[tWiStEdD]

re-establishing the death sentence would only lead to general use, application in cases where the death sentence is only just justified.

i think the use of the death sentence, in any case, is kind of hypocritical.

 

[breaking]

he gets off lightly if he was to recieve the D.S...... life is a much worse punishment

 

[babydoll_]

I'm not saying that murder = death sentence; but IF the death sentence was to be legalised in Australia, then it should only be used when it was deemed suitable; IMO it would apply to multiple homicides, felony murders and murdering of children and the elderly

But eh

/shuts up

Oh, and you have a point there Breaking

 

[katie_tully]

The death sentence is stupid.
Why?
Because they dont get fried or hanged like monkeys, they get a quick, relatively painless death.
Secondly..
This was on 60 minutes some time a go, they took you behind the scenes of a murder trial..
I saw the jury.
Jesus fucking christ. If I had those half wits decide my sentence, I'd take myself out the back and shoot myself.
The thing about getting your sentence delivered by a jury is, most of them are in fact half wits and do not comprehend forensic evidence, even if it's written in a picture book.
The only evidence they had against this guy, was a tape where he said he'd kill somebody. Talking it up. The guy was then murdered...
So now he's been sentenced to death, because these people believe a tape is enoguh evidence to convict him of murder, regardless of the fact there lacks physical evidence.
Now with this guy, it's pretty safe to say he did it. But is killing him going to give the remaining family, or families of other murder victims solice?
No. It's the easy way out.
Instead, give him a cell with no window, and no access to other people. I think living in a concrete prison cell for the rest of my life would be worse.

 

[breaking]

The death sentence is stupid.
Why?
Because they dont get fried or hanged like monkeys, they get a quick, relatively painless death.
Secondly..
This was on 60 minutes some time a go, they took you behind the scenes of a murder trial..
I saw the jury.
Jesus fucking christ. If I had those half wits decide my sentence, I'd take myself out the back and shoot myself.
The thing about getting your sentence delivered by a jury is, most of them are in fact half wits and do not comprehend forensic evidence, even if it's written in a picture book.
The only evidence they had against this guy, was a tape where he said he'd kill somebody. Talking it up. The guy was then murdered...
So now he's been sentenced to death, because these people believe a tape is enoguh evidence to convict him of murder, regardless of the fact there lacks physical evidence.
Now with this guy, it's pretty safe to say he did it. But is killing him going to give the remaining family, or families of other murder victims solice?
No. It's the easy way out.
Instead, give him a cell with no window, and no access to other people. I think living in a concrete prison cell for the rest of my life would be worse.

exactly.

 

[omg_a]

i am fundamentally opposed to the death sentence. i definitely agree with him getting a life sentence in jail (although life sentences are almost always reduced on appeal). think about what murder is-the deliberate taking of the life of another human being. think about what the death penalty is-the deliberate taking of the life of another human being. it's just so...sinking to their level. punishing people for an act, which it is then okay for the state to commit.

even if you are morally okay with the death penalty, there are certainly problems with the finality of it... false convictions, new evidence brought to light after the accused has already been killed. what do you say then? oops, sorry?

 

[Ziff]

State sanctioned killings e.g. the death sentence are still murder. They deprive someone of life. Why should the state have the power to kill someone?

Doesn't that go beyond the rule of law? If we're bound by the law not to kill a person, why should the rule of law be broken and the State allowed to kill someone?

I'm opposed to the death penalty. I think that in these cases people should be deprived of their freedom forever as they have murdered someone, but simply killing them will not solve anything and at the same time, State sanctioned killings do reduce the moral impact that the state has because it is condoning a barbaric act (killing) and it is ignoring the rule of law.

It's been shown many times over e.g. on 60 Mins and so on why the death penalty is a major problem including:
- Sentencing to death those that are innocent
- Sentencing to death based on prejudice against a group
- Massive psychological strain on jurors

The list goes on. The death penalty is a poor reflection on those who use it.

 

[cayte]

It's surprising how many people say they are opposed to capital punishment and then when it's put to them "your daughter is raped and mutilated there is incontrovertible proof against the suspect, do you want the guy to receive th death penalty?" the person says yes. I never would. I might want the person to die, to understand the fact that they are an inhuman, worthless individual, but I wouldn't seek the death penalty.

On the Sef issue, did anyone read a couple of months ago the article about him in the Good Weekend? The guy is a sociopath. He was talking about what he was going to do when he got out of jail, starting a fashion label based on the initials of his family members and stuff. It's stomach churning. I remember hearing about it right after it happened and then all of a sudden it seemed that Sef was awaiting a sentence. I wasn't even aware that they'd arrested him at the time, he was so... calm and... sincere at the time. Lock him away, he thrives on power and knowing people like and respect him. Chilling.

 

[SipSip]

You know, he does get what he deserves in this, not only the sentence...because i personally think that the death penalty will mean less than keeping him in jail...think of this, "pretty boi" (as he thinks of himself) will go into jail and trust me, in jail, those big criminals do have some human in them, and they probably would hate someone who killed their own family, so first of all, pretty boi Sef will turn out to becomes BigBubba's new sex toy....
and he'll probably end up getting bashed like hell in there...suffering this for the rest of his freaken life!!
So therefore, he totally deserves everything

 

[Tusitula]

australia cannot re-impose death sentence, its in violation of the UNDHR

 

[tWiStEdD]

Australia can re-impose it. State sovereignty over-rules international treaties and conventions.

 

[thorrnydevil]

Imagine this:

The death penalty is re-instated.
However, you decide if they die or not.
You ring up like ACA or something and place your "Yes" or "No" vote on the 1902 numbers, you can also SMS your choice in. It be a great revenue raiser for the State and the people would get a say. One vote per phone, and its $1.20/call or more from a public or modile phone.

Now, thats taking reality TV to a whole new level!!!

Eargerly awaiting your abuse!!!

 

[Tusitula]

Australia can re-impose it. State sovereignty over-rules international treaties and conventions.

yeah but considering australia goes to all this trouble enacting treaties into domestic law, it'd seem like step back to re-impose it just for one person.

 

[tattoodguy]

i think its too harsh ------------ it was just one day of stupidity.

muder is pretty bad, but the most anyone should get on a murder charge is 15 years.

and if you do 3 at a time..........the most you should get is 10 years each.

espeically if you kill family members etc - i recon it should be an even lighter sentence, cos over the years family memebers give you alot of reasons to kill them.

Most of you are fucking stupid and you fail to relise that most ppple who are murdered in australia.........are murdered for a goood reason and in many cases deserve what they get.

Whats the difference betweeen some dude going and shoooting a scum bag who deserves to die and the government giving someone a lethal injection?


If someone shot you...............or killed a family memember ------- and then u go and murder them ------------------------- what do you think is a reasonable penalty??????

 

[thorrnydevil]

i think its too harsh ------------ it was just one day of stupidity.

muder is pretty bad, but the most anyone should get on a murder charge is 15 years.

and if you do 3 at a time..........the most you should get is 10 years each.

espeically if you kill family members etc - i recon it should be an even lighter sentence, cos over the years family memebers give you alot of reasons to kill them.

Most of you are fucking stupid and you fail to relise that most ppple who are murdered in australia.........are murdered for a goood reason and in many cases deserve what they get.

Whats the difference betweeen some dude going and shoooting a scum bag who deserves to die and the government giving someone a lethal injection?


If someone shot you...............or killed a family memember ------- and then u go and murder them ------------------------- what do you think is a reasonable penalty??????

That would have to be one of the most fucked up, idiotic, stupid things I have ever heard.

Do you realise what you just said? You pretty much said that he deserves to be given a lesser sentence because he killed family members, who deserved to die.

It wasn't one day of stupidity. One day of stupidity is crashing your car, or being clumbsy. One day of stupidity isn't brutally killing three family members.

Besides, it was premeditated murder, so it was like three months of stupidity, or for however long he planned it.

He deserves nothing less than the sentence he has recieved, and your stupid for thinking not.