Strike One
June 30th, 2010 at 12:00 pm by David FarrarThe Dom Post reports:
An Upper Hutt man has been served with New Zealand’s first warning under the controversial “three strikes” law after being convicted of groping a woman.
Dwyane Christopher Mercer, 32, was convicted in Upper Hutt District Court last week after pleading guilty to indecently assaulting his friend’s partner. Indecent assault is one of 40 serious violent offences that attract “strikes” upon conviction. The law came into force on June 1. …
Mercer, a landscape gardener, assaulted his victim after being offered a bed for the night after drinking, the court was told.
His partner of seven years, Vanisha Mercer, 25, supported him in court and was unhappy with the “strike”. His three-year-old daughter and son, 6, were missing their father, who was in prison for the first time, she said. “I think it’s unfair … He was just drunk.”
The new law was a good idea “for really bad people … But he’s not a bad person,” she said.
Actually if Mercer is not a bad person, then the law will work on him. He will not want to get a second strike, knowing it will mean no parole. Some criminals will not be deterred from reoffending, but it sounds like Mercer can be.
“I reckon that if he had known the law had changed he wouldn’t have [pleaded] guilty, because then he would have got his bail.”
The three strikes law doesn’t affect bail.
June 30th, 2010 at 12:06 pm
I disagree.
While it shouldn’t affect bail at the first strike, with the presumption of prison without parole at the second strike, bail awaiting sentence on a second or third strike will be much harder to get. Similarly, on a second or third strike, the likely sentence is a factor when considering bail pre-trial (e.g. if the person, even if convicted, is unlikely to get a prison term, this is a factor weighing in favour of a grant of bail). If prison is more likely (or mandatory) bail will be less likely.
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 12:09 pm
“The new law was a good idea “for really bad people … But he’s not a bad person,” she said.”
Just maybe, he isn’t “bad”, but he is as sure as hell married to an idiot.
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 12:13 pm
Red you beat me to it, and these people breed.
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 12:15 pm
How could he not know the law had changed?
P.S. He looks older than 32, more like 42.
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 12:19 pm
Hmm, the jury is still out on this law for me. People who commit serious crime do it because they have no respect for others, authority or themselves. They do not rationally weigh the consequences, and I predict that this law will be repealed before anyone has a third strike. At that time serious crime will have continued to increase.
Respect begins in the home, and while we have a welfare system that incentivizes family dysfunction under the guise of ‘support’ today, we buy ourselves societal dysfunction and full prisons tomorrow.
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 12:25 pm
All he had to do in court was pin his labour party members card to his jacket and say the law was confusing, other men were also groping friends partners when drunk and they have not been punished.
What a mug, the law is confusing and others were doing it too is a valid defense when you are in Labour, how could he not know that….
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 12:27 pm
Sounds like just the sort of people who should be going away for longer then.
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 12:38 pm
The man in question apparently has committed previous offences whilst drunk.. From the article
“Mercer was also facing sentence for assaulting his mother while he was drunk, she said. His offending over the past 16 years was all alcohol-related.”
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 12:39 pm Vote:
June 30th, 2010 at 12:44 pm
pidge
Talking to a person who had dealings with Graham Burton in prison I heard this similar quote; “He’s a really nice guy when he’s not off his head on P”.
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 12:54 pm
“I reckon that if he had known the law had changed he wouldn’t have [pleaded] guilty, because then he would have got his bail.”
So if it wasn’t for this law he would have lied and pleaded not guilty ? Sweet, it’s working already !
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 12:54 pm
One Strike.. Two Strikes.. Three Strikes… and your out… Then What.. and who pays.
Theres no winners in this game only loooses.
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 12:59 pm
I blogged on this earlier today (link is on the GD thread). Strike One is a bit like a shot across the bows. Dwayne Mercer should be under no illusions now that any repeat of his violent or abusive behaviour when drunk will have serious consequences. If that warning shot is not enough to wake him up, prompt him to sort out his drinking, and stop this kind of offending, then he deserves every day that he has to spend in prison.
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 1:14 pm
Am I right in accepting this was a bedroom invasion not a “grope” in front of others. If he invaded her private space then he needs to
Vote:1 address his drinking.
2 learn or relearn acceptable behavior.
3 have someone who can, convince him of his clear and present danger.
4 just accept longer holidays
June 30th, 2010 at 1:50 pm
Krazykiwi opines:
Exactly. It’s entirely possible this clown will get a second or even third strike because he clearly can’t hold his alcohol (he has a record of offending while drunk); and thinks with the wrong head.
What needs to happen now is for him to be sentenced to a mandatory alcohol problem (or what about a suspended sentence contingent upon him staying off the booze for a year or two? He might even lose the taste for it). Plus some restorative justice, such as having to face women who’ve been groped and even raped and be told what it’s like to be the victim of what he probably sees as “harmless” behaviour?
Might not work, but more likely to work than whatever he’ll end up getting.
Damn right. “3 strikes” is the gorilla cage at the bottom of the cliff. What we ought to be addressing is why so many of our fellow citizens are incapable of acting like anything other than lower primates. Then fewer of us will fall victim to their behaviour.
Incientally KK, just a heads up that I’ve answered your question re TVs, gyms and internet in prisons on the other thread.
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 1:51 pm
Ummm… well that’s his first strike. no problem
If he does it two more times, he’s fucked. So maybe he will think twice.
The law is working.
Fuck off commies.
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 3:40 pm
What do you reckon about Rex’s alcohol treatment idea above?
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 4:38 pm
…which should read “a mandatory alcohol program” not “problem”. And no, I haven’t been drinking
But someone whose answer to a complex mullti-layered question on how to change human behaviour is “Fuck off commies” is unlikely to have a response that’s of much interest, I suspect.
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 4:42 pm
@Rex 1:50. Thanks for the answered prison question
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 5:54 pm
It wasn’t directed at you Rex. I just love telling commies to fuck off. Consider it my duty even.
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 8:35 pm
He should have run with the defense that it wasn’t him… It was his ‘mate’ – “Hit on other peoples missus’ Steve”…
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 8:37 pm
# RKBee (916) Says:
“June 30th, 2010 at 12:54 pm
One Strike.. Two Strikes.. Three Strikes… and your out… Then What.. and who pays.
Theres no winners in this game only loooses.”
The thing is, RKBee, prison isn’t there just to punish the offenders. It’s there to keep them away from the society they seem intent on hurting. Yes, it takes tax to pay for it, but the money isn’t going there for no reason.
Would you prefer a three-strikes death penalty?
Vote:June 30th, 2010 at 9:39 pm
unlikely to have a response that’s of much interest, I suspect.
Sometimes I do a kind of reverse-trolling. Isn’t quite as successful as ‘original trolling’ though
Vote: