Oh my God
Sometimes when you read something, your brain automatically converts it to what you think it should read, not what it said. So when I saw the headline about sex with women he killed, I read it as he was a rapist and a murderer.
But then the article makes clear, it is far more yucky than that. Im not sure if one can say if rape is worse or better than necrophilia – both are evil and disgusting – but in somewhat different ways.
The Press reports:
‘House of horrors’ murderer Jason Somerville strangled his wife Rebecca Somerville and Tisha Lowry to death before having sex with them.
That’s the word I missed.
The statement said Somerville strangled Lowry until she was no longer breathing. He then stuffed a pair of his wife’s underpants in her mouth and had sex with her.
Somerville was due at a meeting early that afternoon so had no time to dispose of Lowry’s body, leaving her lying on the floor of a cupboard.
The following day, Somerville waited until his wife had gone out before again having sex with Lowry’s body, now hidden under the house.
I think I can speak for everyone when I say I hope Mr Somerville is not let out of jail in my lifetime.
The statement of facts raises real questions about how the Police did not catch him after the first murder.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Doesn’t he bear a remarkable resemblance to that other fellow who occupied the headlines for week after week after week?
I hope we are not going to be regaled with wall to wall details of this dead fucker’s every excuse.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
’scuse me while I barf in a corner
November 9th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
What is the libertarian position on necrophilia?
[DPF: We are not having that debate, in the context of his killing of these women, and subsequent actions. There is a time for theoretical libertarian debates - and this is not one of them.]
November 9th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
That’s different…
Legal experts – how does a guilty plea affect likelihood of home detention when sentencing is considered?
November 9th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
He has obvious mental issues, they will probably sentence him to preventative detention, which seems to be worse than a life sentence.
November 9th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
IT MUST BE preventative detention for this sod.
November 9th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
As gruesome as it sounds it can’t be a murder and rape if that is the order being suggested. Without trying to be overly legalistic it is not actually possible to rape the dead as rape requires the someone living. I think the charge would be interfering with human remains.
November 9th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
ewwwww. Bad enough while still warm, but a day after? I’m not entirely up on rigor mortis. I would seem that having sex with a dead male might be enhanced by rigor mortis, but I would have thought having sex with a dead female would be ….. difficult?
November 9th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Sh*t – that sounded as if I was trying to defend the bastard. I wasn’t. I was just trying to point out the legal position….
November 9th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
DPF: “Im not sure if one can say if rape is worse or better than necrophilia”
IMHO necrophilia where you kill the person first is worse than rape, because it is murder.
Necrophilia where the deceased dies of natural causes = distasteful, but clearly the cadaver does not suffer through the intercourse itself (being a cadaver and all.) Therefore not worse than rape.
Imaginary necrophilia scenario #1:
I die while out on a walk, and my cadaver lies on the street. A passerby discovers the body and decides to start having sex with it. Clearly not right, but aren’t there other public indecency laws that would apply here?
Imaginary necrophilia scenario #2:
I die in my sleep. My missus wakes up in the morning, and in her grief decides it would be appropriate to have sex with her partner(’s body) one last time. A bit euw, perhaps, but is a crime really committed here?
November 9th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Gee RRM, I thought I was tiptoeing along the line. But your imaginary scenarios I reckon went right over that line without blinking.
November 9th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
As I understand it his early guilty plea trumps ‘preventive detention’ – that the Judge must give him credit for that (can one of the legal eagle chappies clarify this?)
But certainly it is very disturbing and outside of normal behaviour what this fellow has done; mind you when I lived in Christchurch I tended to view all of Liane Dalziel’s constituents as being rather ’suspicious’ and ‘weird’…
http://www.nightcitytrader.blogspot.com
November 9th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Line? What line?! – RRM…
November 9th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
I often drive past the ” house of horrors “..its been firebombed a couple of times.. its a real spooky lookin place ..almost evil looking..I wish the council would buy it and demolish..it must be a real shitter for the neighbours havin to look at it..aw yeah..the sick fuck needs preventive detention in a cell with bad arse burton…
November 9th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Lineberry: “As I understand it his early guilty plea trumps ‘preventive detention’”
No. Guilty plea or not he will still get preventive detention. Graeme Burton plead guilty but still got preventive detention. Some slim reduction in the non-parole period will be warranted for the guilty plea, but it will be slim.
I felt very sorry for his sister who attended Court. She looked very dignified on the news, given the circumstances.
November 9th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
RRM: “Imaginary necrophilia scenario #1: I die while out on a walk, and my cadaver lies on the street. A passerby discovers the body and decides to start having sex with it.”
Happened in England (although obviously not to you). No link sorry.
November 9th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
If anyone believes evil doesn’t exist – then this is the proof that it does.
November 9th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
The statement of facts raises real questions about how the Police did not catch him after the first murder.
The impression I got is that while he put out a weird vibe in plenty (Urkel being a description used), he didn’t strike anybody as a violent type. Only his wife seemed to sense there was up (“why are you so stressed all the time?” she asked him in front of a visitor who didn’t notice anything) and even she didn’t suspect murder.
I strongly doubt the statement that he invited her in and suspect it appeared it in the police statement of facts because they didn’t have anything to rebut it.
At least when double bunking is introduced at Christchurch Men’s Prison, they have somebody to share the cell with Clayton Weatherston.
November 9th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
Ok DPF – watch your blood pressure and cholesterol, exercise well and live a long time because I don’t want to see this guy out either.
November 9th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
Christchurch’s very own John Tanner
November 9th, 2009 at 8:03 pm
Necrophilia – the uncontrollable urge to crack open a cold one. (Negative karma record, here I come)
November 9th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
Imaginary necrophilia scenario #2:
I die in my sleep. My missus wakes up in the morning, and in her grief decides it would be appropriate to have sex with her partner(’s body) one last time. A bit euw, perhaps, but is a crime really committed here?
It’s a slippery slope…
November 9th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
So the sex was the same, but the dishes kept piling up.
Least he was getting some I suppose
November 9th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
And all the other menial tasks that women are made to do. They just kept piling up. So I guess he simply could not stand it any more even though the sex was great he just hated all that rotting food and dirty dishes and the dust and the dirty towels, don’t you just hate that.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
# Kris K (967) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 1 Says:
November 9th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
If anyone believes evil doesn’t exist – then this is the proof that it does.
I think everyone here knew it already – most of us helped vote it out a year ago
November 10th, 2009 at 1:45 am
cell mate with graham Burton please!
November 10th, 2009 at 1:49 am
comparing killers
to political parties
you don’t like is sweeeeet
November 10th, 2009 at 6:00 am
Razork – he has to work his way up the pecking order first. I suggest that Somerville share a cell with Weatherston, with the survivor to earn the right to be considered to be Burton’s cellmate. I’m sure Somerville and Weatherston would have hours of fun regaling one another with tales of their past exploits – until one grew tired of the other. Who would blink first?
November 10th, 2009 at 8:10 am
Preventative detention my ass, this is another good argument for a death penalty in extrreme cases.
Anyone want to argue this is not an extreme case? The fact is he will be out in less than twenty years.
November 10th, 2009 at 8:25 am
I would regard him as insane. That doesn’t mean he doesn’t know what he is doing and isn’t accountable. By ordinary standards he is insane. I agree with other posters he should go away for life – real life.
November 10th, 2009 at 8:51 am
DPF: “I think I can speak for everyone when I say I hope Mr Somerville is not let out of jail in my lifetime.”
I think I can speak for everyone when I say I hope Mr Somerville is not let out of jail in HIS lifetime either.
November 10th, 2009 at 9:11 am
Ernesto 6:12pm ..Delighted to hear it! thanks for that; this fellow really does need a very severe punishment.
http://www.nightcitytrader.blogspot.com
November 10th, 2009 at 9:14 am
People who do abhorrent things aren’t allowed to be considered insane. It gets in the way of everyone’s righteous anger.
November 10th, 2009 at 9:21 am
I would regard being angry at murder and necrophilia as being very right.
November 10th, 2009 at 9:57 am
^^^ relatives of yours are they?
If not then get a grip. Four million people, statistically you are going to get a few freaks.
And steadfastly extolling the basic sense of right and wrong your mum GAVE to you decades ago is less impressive than you think it is. You are always quick to endorse or condemn along with everyone else, usually won’t (or can’t?) say much about why.
November 10th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Murray said “The fact is he will be out in less than twenty years”.
I understand your sentiments Murray (although I personally don’t believe in the death penalty), but I think you’re wrong that he’ll be out in less than 20 years. What many people overlook when we’re talking about sentencing is that many murderers don’t get out at their first, or subsequent, chance(s) at parole – look at Dally and Tamihere, who are still in prison 20 years after their crimes, well past any minimum non-parole period.
The politicians, courts, judges, parole board etc are often eviscerated in the media, and accused of giving killers too-light sentences (based on headline-grabbing cases), but the fact is killers get life, with a minimum non-parole. Minimum being the operative word – many killers are still behind bars long after that time has passed (deservedly, I might add).
So I don’t think you’ll be in any danger of seeing this guy out on the streets before 20 years is up… he killed two people, and with aggravating factors is likely to get above a 20-year minimum (quite possibly 25+), and the chances are he won’t necessarily get out then anyway…
November 10th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
Murray: “The fact is he will be out in less than twenty years.”
I disagree. I picked Weatherston’s sentence exactly on this blog and I predict Somerville will get around 28 years non-parole, based on Lundy (26 years) and Howse (28 years) which both involved two victims.
The chairman of the Parole Board, Judge Carruthers, has said on record that few of those sentenced to preventive detention will ever be found suitable for release, and given the bizarre nature of the offending Somerville would be right near the top of those who won’t ever get release.
We won’t see preventive detainees William Bell, Graham Burton or Somerville again, although I shudder to think Weatherston bears a slim chance at getting parole one day.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
On reflection, when Somerville is viewed as a serial killer, it could be argued that he is far more culpable than a killer who kills two people in short order. There is no precedent in NZ for a serial killer being sentenced, so it is not unreasonable to think that his offending could be seen as more serious than William Bell’s one-off triple murder. Bell, of course, got 30 years non-parole.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
RRM
Scenario No2
I would have thought that she got ownership of the body as next of kin?
So maybe it might be a gray area?