News NZ terror attack on two mosques.

[K E]

they are hiding the terrorist face, but showing the faces of all his family members.

mind fucken boggling.

Right?

Apparently, the judge ordered his face be blurred so he can get a fair trial or some shit. Don't know where to start with that one...

 

[Nano]

Right?

Apparently, the judge ordered his face be blurred so he can get a fair trial or some shit. Don't know where to start with that one...

What fair trial lmao, the pos recorded and did it himself there is no trial needed... god the law system is full of people who don’t get it, they should really be discussing if they torture him for a few years or end him.

I hope they send him back here and he goes to goulburn super max so he can really meet the true Islamic crazy radicalist he opposes oh so much and have a few “friendly chats” without guards there

 

[EXPLORER]

Right?

Apparently, the judge ordered his face be blurred so he can get a fair trial or some shit. Don't know where to start with that one...

I’m with you
How can there even be a trial?
**** filmed himself doing it
What’s to talk about

Put the **** in jail for the rest of his life.

And put him in the Muslim dominated section of the jail

 

[EXPLORER]

What fair trial lmao, the pos recorded and did it himself there is no trial needed... god the law system is full of people who don’t get it, they should really be discussing if they torture him for a few years or end him.

I hope they send him back here and he goes to goulburn super max so he can really meet the true Islamic crazy radicalist he opposes oh so much and have a few “friendly chats” without guards there

Great minds think alike
You beat me to it

 

[Mr Invisible]

No need to cover the vindictive nature of tossing ihm in jail for retribution... we shouldn't even be entertaining that side of things. Besides he'll be in protective custody for life regardless where he ends up (probably NZ given that it's a nation wide crime of terrorism, not just murder charges).

Don't stoop to that animals level, rise above it !

they are hiding the terrorist face, but showing the faces of all his family members.

mind fucken boggling.

That's what it's always like when someone is charged (even in Australia).

One less reason/excuse for the defence lawyer to say "Oh but my client was unfairly trialled by media before the hearing".

That is probably also the reason why they are scrambling to have the video removed from online (because he could claim an unfair trial based on trial by media - and that no jury could be fair given everyone could have seen the video).

Though that said the video would be shown as evidence to any jury.

Sad thing is you can guarantee his defence lawyer (because some slimey bastard will try and defend him), will pull the "oh as you can see in the video you can't identify that this is my client... sure he shows his face in the video early on, but how can you 100% be sure that it is him shooting and not somebody else.... someone else may have done the shooting and he may have just been the getaway driver".

Surely his legal team will try and spin it someway, or they'll get him to plead guilty to 50 murder charges in exchange to no terrorism charges or some shitty plea deal.

That said I hope not, because he's in no position to bargain (though I'm sure protective custody will be a bargaining chip), and besides, even just the murder charge for a single victim, or terror charges without a murder charge, would be enough for life in prison without parole.

I mean, lets be realistic, he's never coming out of prison.

 

[Nano]

No need to cover the vindictive nature of tossing ihm in jail for retribution... we shouldn't even be entertaining that side of things. Besides he'll be in protective custody for life regardless where he ends up (probably NZ given that it's a nation wide crime of terrorism, not just murder charges).

Don't stoop to that animals level, rise above it !


That's what it's always like when someone is charged (even in Australia).

One less reason/excuse for the defence lawyer to say "Oh but my client was unfairly trialled by media before the hearing".

That is probably also the reason why they are scrambling to have the video removed from online (because he could claim an unfair trial based on trial by media - and that no jury could be fair given everyone could have seen the video).

Though that said the video would be shown as evidence to any jury.

Sad thing is you can guarantee his defence lawyer (because some slimey bastard will try and defend him), will pull the "oh as you can see in the video you can't identify that this is my client... sure he shows his face in the video early on, but how can you 100% be sure that it is him shooting and not somebody else.... someone else may have done the shooting and he may have just been the getaway driver".

Surely his legal team will try and spin it someway, or they'll get him to plead guilty to 50 murder charges in exchange to no terrorism charges or some shitty plea deal.

That said I hope not, because he's in no position to bargain (though I'm sure protective custody will be a bargaining chip), and besides, even just the murder charge for a single victim, or terror charges without a murder charge, would be enough for life in prison without parole.

I mean, lets be realistic, he's never coming out of prison.

He asked to have his given lawyer dismissed and wants to represent him self, just so he has the chance to talk and talk bs infront of the world I believe.

 

[Indiandog]

I read somewhere today that he may be trialed as a mass murderer and not as a terrorist.

 

[Mr Invisible]

Was reading about the admin / owner of some site taunting the NZ police/detectives when they probed asking for IP and other information regarding posts made by the suspect on their message boards/site.

I can see that stand of defiance backfiring.

He asked to have his given lawyer dismissed and wants to represent him self, just so he has the chance to talk and talk bs infront of the world I believe.

Hopefully in a closed court so nobody can hear his BS.

I read somewhere today that he may be trialed as a mass murderer and not as a terrorist.

I guess regardless, 50 x counts of murder vs terrorism charges, he's still going away for life.

 

[EXPLORER]

I read somewhere today that he may be trialed as a mass murderer and not as a terrorist.

We all know it was a act of terror

Out of curiosity thought,
Is there any difference in the sentence he will get if it’s deemed mass murder and not terrorisum?

 

[K E]

I don't think it really matters much what's he's trialled as. He'll serve life in prison regardless. Even if, at worst, he's jailed for 10 years for each murder it's 10 x 50. (chose ten because I'm just assuming NZ's laws are as ridiculous as ours)

 

[Boxer]

I don't think it really matters much what's he's trialled as. He'll serve life in prison regardless. Even if, at worst, he's jailed for 10 years for each murder it's 10 x 50. (chose ten because I'm just assuming NZ's laws are as ridiculous as ours)

And he would get charged for 48 counts of attempted Murdere for the survives .

 

[Mr Invisible]

Here we go, there's a little bit of an insight here. It makes sense. Convict him of a single murder charge and hit him with the maximum penalty (as if any judge is going to overrule that).

https://www.news.com.au/world/pacif...e/news-story/efb1b2fb8b69f4f2d1f2af414a2e1dca

But legal experts in New Zealand fear the accused killer could use his trial to showcase his evil manifesto.

A former senior Crown prosecutor, Ross Burns, said if Tarrant faced a trial on terrorism charges it could lead to a long, drawn-out affair — which he could use “to espouse his ideological reasons”.
Mr Burns told NZ website Stuff prosecutors instead could favour a straight murder trial where only two things had to proven, whether the accused did it and if it was his intention to kill.

Charges under the Terrorism Suppression Act must prove it was done for ideological or political reasons, and was intended to terrorise the community.
“In my view, the elements are all made out, but to minimise the impact on victims, straight murder is easier to prove. And there’s less scope to use a platform to espouse his ideological reasons.”

The 17-minute livestreamed video - which has caused revulsion around the world - and the hate-filled document he placed online before the shootings would be key parts of any criminal trial.

Tarrant has reportedly indicated he would represent himself. The legal representatives who acted for him on Saturday was a duty lawyer, so reports he fired them were not accurate.

The article then talks about potential threats against him already by prisoners. It then continues with:

Tarrant has so far been charged with a single count of murder and has been remanded to a maximum-security prison where he is being watched 24/7 ahead of his return to court early next month.

According to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_imprisonment_in_New_Zealand there is no maximum for murder, and there's no doubt due to it being an act of terror he'll cop a mandatory minimum of 17 years if convicted on a single charge. Of course a judge *could* technically find him guilty of all 50 charges, and order the sentence to be served concurrently (rather than cumulative), but let's be honest... would a judge stick his neck out and rule that on a crime against all of NZ and it's citizens.

Even if they convicted and sentenced him to (min terms based on) 4 x murder charges, that's 68 years minimum, so he'd be released if he made it to 96.

Seems they have a few options they can play to ensure he never gets out.

Will be interesting to see what happened/happens to the others they apparently arrested (wasn't there 4 initially, and 1 was released without charge), hence 2 more to be investigated/charged?

 

[Indiandog]

We all know it was a act of terror

Out of curiosity thought,
Is there any difference in the sentence he will get if it’s deemed mass murder and not terrorisum?

i think it is more of a matter of how it is viewed by the law.

convicted terrorists are kept in a separate prison from other murderers. I could be wrong and cant be stuffed googling it.

 

[EXPLORER]

i think it is more of a matter of how it is viewed by the law.

convicted terrorists are kept in a separate prison from other murderers. I could be wrong and cant be stuffed googling it.

Yeah, I’m no expert on what goes on in prisons but I’d say he will be isolated for his own safety

 

[south of heaven]

i think it is more of a matter of how it is viewed by the law.

convicted terrorists are kept in a separate prison from other murderers. I could be wrong and cant be stuffed googling it.

Same prisons different areas sometimes Goulburn is doing a supermax 2 for terrorist related matters which is basically cutting them off from most people so they can't influence. Race and religion are very different creatures inside prison example aboriginals converting to " islam" not because they want to turn their life around its strength by numbers and being in a " gang"

 

[Realist90]

Same prisons different areas sometimes Goulburn is doing a supermax 2 for terrorist related matters which is basically cutting them off from most people so they can't influence. Race and religion are very different creatures inside prison example aboriginals converting to " islam" not because they want to turn their life around its strength by numbers and being in a " gang"

Don’t forget those dogs were literally cutting ***** up on the face.
Putting this white guy in jail with those radical Muslims will only glorify those radical Muslims further and in a twisted disgusting way make them the good guys.
I think the solution is to introduce the death penalty.

 

[Mr Invisible]

He'll be jailed in NZ unless the Australian government specifically request his extradition back to Australia to serve his sentence.

Much like when international tourists commit a crime in Australia (e.g say importation of drugs), they are jailed in the country the offence was in. Ditto like drug smugglers from Aus taking shit into other countries (e.g Bali 9).

The only way a prisoner serves a local sentence is if the government in the country they hold citizenship (i.e Australia), requests them to be extradited to serve the sentence on home soil (and that would normally only be in specific circumstances, for example if they faced additional charges back home and were serving a non life sentence).

For example: Someone commits a child sex offence in Australia and flees overseas. Whilst overseas they do the same and are jailed for 1 years. The Australian government could request extradition to Australia to serve the 10 year sentence, and then charge/sentence them for the offences in Australia.

Pretty rare for it to happen though.

In Tarrants case this will never happen. He will be jailed and spend his time in an NZ prison, where he will die eventually.

 

[The DoggFather]

I read somewhere today that he may be trialed as a mass murderer and not as a terrorist.

He is a fucking terrorist scum ****, no matter how the MSM try to label it.

 

[The DoggFather]

i think it is more of a matter of how it is viewed by the law.

convicted terrorists are kept in a separate prison from other murderers. I could be wrong and cant be stuffed googling it.

I want whatever is worse for the scum ****

 

[EXPLORER]

I want whatever is worse for the scum ****

True that mate
We all do