Compare and contrast: A tale of two prison sentences

This sentence:

A convicted rapist who threatened to shoot his nieces and eat their hearts has had his prison sentence for threatening to kill reduced by four months…

Justice Anthony Randerson said: “On the face of it, it does seem a pretty stiff sentence. He was in prison, he couldn’t carry out (the threat) for a number of years.”

The Court of Appeal has now quashed Faaleaga’s sentence and replaced it with a reduced sentence of six months.

With this sentence:

The founder of New Zealand’s first cannabis club, Dakta Green, has had his jail sentence more than doubled following an appeal by the Solicitor General.

Green, 61, who ran The Daktory in New Lynn, Auckland, for more than 30 months, was sentenced in June to eight months’ jail for selling cannabis, possession of cannabis and allowing a premises to be used for commission of a crime against the Misuse of Drugs Act…

The Solicitor General appealed the sentence last month and in a decision recently released the Court of Appeal quashed Green’s orginal sentence and increased his jail term to 23 months.

Anyone else think something is very wrong here?

6 thoughts on “Compare and contrast: A tale of two prison sentences

  1. Yep, something is very wrong here. A political party desiring to be a member of the political branch is criticizing the judiciary. I say that as a Green member.

    I get that you’re an individual and the views aren’t that of the party, but when you post here it creates an impression of what Greens think.

  2. Without commenting on the actual issue of drug law reform I can understand the judges’ respective decisions here. A threat to commit a serious crime, especially when the perpetrator does not have the means to carry out the threat does not seem to warrant 10 months in jail – that’s a long time.
    By comparison regular sale/supply of illegal drugs is always likely to attract a stiff sentence, whether it is done for political reasons or just for profit. I’d argue the sentences from both appeal judgments were pretty reasonably within the boundaries of their respective crimes.

  3. Well I think this is just fucked, which is probably a sentiment shared by most Greens to varying degrees. The main problem here is that its completely inconsistent!

    First we have somebody who is a peaceful activist for personal choice and the use of Marijuana for medicinal purposes. Decriminalization is something that nearly every Medical Association around the world agrees with.

    Then we have a rapist who has threatened to kill his nieces, and done this in a way that is assured to traumatize them… perhaps for life. The actual law does not stipulate as to whether a death threat can be carried out, just that it’s illegal.

    Thanks for letting us know about this travesty of justice Toad. Keep up the good work.

  4. Frankly, if I was the mother of those two little girls, whose convicted rapist uncle threatened them, I’d be very worried about the Judge reducing that sentence.

    To my knowledge, the worst that Ken has against him is a tendency to have worn loud ties in the 70’s when he was running markets in Auckland, and the possibility that if released from jail he might have run an effective campaign in Waitakere, where the Daktory is located, causing some grief to the dishonourable Member for West Auckland, Paula Bennett.

    Given that such notables as Sir Geoffrey Palmer, and Warren Young, at the Law Commission, have come out in favour of a repeal of the 1975 Misuse of Drugs Act, would this be a prima facie argument that political interference by the Judge is proven?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s