| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 80001 | 2007-06-08 07:19:00 | Police charges dismissed | Cicero (40) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 557170 | 2007-06-08 07:19:00 | Does this sort of attempt by police to charge a victim annoy? Article by McCully. The Carvell Case The case for unlawful possession of a firearm against Auckland gunshop proprietor Greg Carvell was yesterday thrown out by two Justices of the Peace. And good on them. The Police are attempting to suggest that Mr Carvell was lucky not to have faced more serious charges. And Crown Law say they are considering their options. None of which is very encouraging. They were foolish to have laid the charges in the first place. Mr Carvell was peacefully running his business. One day a criminal thug entered his shop waving a bayonet, threatening to decapitate Mr Carvell and an associate. Mr Carvell shot him, with the fortunate consequence that neither he nor his friend were decapitated, and the criminal thug was thus denied access to the available supply of weaponry and ammunition. A regrettable situation. But one in which unquestionably the best outcome was achieved. The Police decision to charge Mr Carvell is not quite up there with their decision to charge Northland farmer Paul McIntyre after he shot one of several thugs attempting to steal property from his isolated back country farm. But it is close. You see, there is something quite fundamental about the Carvell case and the case of Mr McIntyre that the Police appear not to understand. Both of these men are VICTIMS. It is disconcerting that some Police desk jockeys do not have the judgement to understand this, or to see that a decision to press charges results in massive defence costs, serious trauma and major family upheaval for people who did not go looking for trouble, and who are, by any measurement, VICTIMS. People who no judge, jury or Justice of the Peace with an ounce of common sense is going to convict. So as the Police and Crown Law contemplate the outcome of the Carvell case, here’s hoping that they pause to consider the faint possibility that perhaps they are being sent a message: stop wasting our time and stop inflicting needless cost and suffering on people who have already, through no fault of their own, suffered enough. |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 557171 | 2007-06-08 07:37:00 | If you look at the Crimes Act, it might just be the case that the police had no options other than to lay the charges. The only real "option" they may have had was to ensure insufficient evidence was available so the natural justice would be done, which we may just have observed. By far the real travesty here is the Civil Rights lawyer that now suggests that the machete weiding "target" had the absolute right to not be shot. |
godfather (25) | ||
| 557172 | 2007-06-08 13:31:00 | the police had to press charges otherwise we'd all be running around shooting people "in self defence". i don't think they actually intended to find him guilty of anything. anyway, anyone stupid enough to try to rob a gun shop armed with a knife deserves to be shot:groan: |
motorbyclist (188) | ||
| 557173 | 2007-06-08 23:01:00 | The Police did want they were meant to do. They have no manidate to pass judgement on the actions of individuals or groups that what the court system is for. I disagree slighty with your comparison though (farmer and this shop owner). The farmer did not keep a LOADED weapon in his possion, he only loaded when the need arose. Want would have been the outcome I wonder if someone else other the shop owner, got hold the LOADED weapon under the counter. Therefore I feel there is a case for careless use at least. I am very much aware of states of weapon readiness, it was part previous job. my :2cents: |
beama (111) | ||
| 557174 | 2007-06-08 23:38:00 | of course we all know one of the Police's functions is to protect the criminal against the law abiding when they try to defend themselves or their property. It is called political correctness gone mad. |
KenESmith (6287) | ||
| 557175 | 2007-06-09 01:02:00 | the police had to press charges otherwise we'd all be running around shooting people "in self defence". i don't think they actually intended to find him guilty of anything. anyway, anyone stupid enough to try to rob a gun shop armed with a knife deserves to be shot:groan: Spot on.:thumbs: |
rob_on_guitar (4196) | ||
| 557176 | 2007-06-09 02:39:00 | Well, that's refreshing. I've just been posting similar views ie. the police were correct to prosecute and leave it the court to decide. Suffice to say, some other forums violently disagree with that view. :D Makes for some fun :thumbs: Look - if I was Greg Carvell, I'd probably have shot the guy too, knowing I might be charged. Better a live martyr than a decapitated law abiding citizen. |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 557177 | 2007-06-09 06:06:00 | There is only one person who should suffer in the above scenario,and that is the machete wielder. But no I here you say,the victim must suffer too,in the name of the law. If that makes sense,it beats me. |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 557178 | 2007-06-09 06:22:00 | The police/crown prosecutors position is quite ludicrous when you think about it logically. The police admit the shooting was self defence, so they did not bring charges on that score. They are concerned that he had a weapon available which he was able to readily and quickly able to fire. That is the problem and which according to todays Dominion Post, they may yet seek to prosecute. So, for Mr Carvel as gunshop worker to act legally this is what he would have to do: First, he would have to say to the machete wielding thug" "Hang on a minute mate, while I go and get a pistol from that locked cabinet over there, then hang on a bit longer while I go and get some ammunition from that locked drawer back there, then just a bit more while I load the magazine. Right, I'm ready now to shoot you in self defence before you try to decapitate me". |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 557179 | 2007-06-09 06:39:00 | and if the thug got a hold of the loaded weapon? | motorbyclist (188) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 | |||||