This case shows just how out of step with reality our judiciary is when it comes to young offenders and why politicians need to act to protect the community they are supposed to serve.

A 16 year-old who was cleared of murdering a teenager in 2022 because of his young age (the offender was 13 at the time) despite footage showing him stomping on the victim’s head repeatedly while others stabbed him and returning to stomp on his unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended has been caught again taking part in a vicious home invasion. This time, he has been charged with aggravated home invasion with a firearm, intentionally causing serious injury in circumstances of gross violence, reckless conduct endangering life and committing an indictable offence while on bail.

So not only did the Supreme Court Justice find in 2023 that there was “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”, he has now been caught offending again - while on bail! How can anyone come to the conclusion that a 13 year-old doesn't know that stomping on someone's head repeatedly while others stabbed them and then return to stomp on the unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended is wrong? My seven year-old son knows doing such a thing is completely and utterly wrong. There's no way in the world he didn't know what he was doing was wrong.

The law needs to be changed to lower the age for which young people can be tried for these crimes. Maybe it needs to be as low as 11 or 12 years of age. Perhaps even ten. I read an article recently in which these young people brag on social media about getting away with crimes because of "doli incapax". It is the common law in NSW that presumes children between the ages of 10 and 14 lack the criminal intent necessary for criminal responsibility for which this teenager owed his freedom back in 2023.

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/mother-of-melbourne-teen-stabbed-to-death-horrified-by-twist-after-13yearold-set-free/news-story/7b56acb51c7ca3bcad82891c43a4d269

This dolly seems pretty incapax:-

---

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Aug 31^st, 2025 at 11:33pm:

This dolly seems pretty incapax:-

All you have to say about this is a lame attempt at humour? What if it was your loved one who was murdered?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 31^st, 2025 at 12:40pm:

This case shows just how out of step with reality our judiciary is when it comes to young offenders and why politicians need to act to protect the community they are supposed to serve. A 16 year-old who was cleared of murdering a teenager in 2022 because of his young age (the offender was 13 at the time) despite footage showing him stomping on the victim’s head repeatedly while others stabbed him and returning to stomp on his unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended has been caught again taking part in a vicious home invasion. This time, he has been charged with aggravated home invasion with a firearm, intentionally causing serious injury in circumstances of gross violence, reckless conduct endangering life and committing an indictable offence while on bail. So not only did the Supreme Court Justice find in 2023 that there was “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”, he has now been caught offending again - while on bail! How can anyone come to the conclusion that a 13 year-old doesn't know that stomping on someone's head repeatedly while others stabbed them and then return to stomp on the unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended is wrong? My seven year-old son knows doing such a thing is completely and utterly wrong. There's no way in the world he didn't know what he was doing was wrong. The law needs to be changed to lower the age for which young people can be tried for these crimes. Maybe it needs to be as low as 11 or 12 years of age. Perhaps even ten. I read an article recently in which these young people brag on social media about getting away with crimes because of "doli incapax". It is the common law in NSW that presumes children between the ages of 10 and 14 lack the criminal intent necessary for criminal responsibility for which this teenager owed his freedom back in 2023. https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/mother-of-melbourne-teen-stabbed-to-death-horrified-by-twist-after-13yearold-set-free/news-story/7b56acb51c7ca3bcad82891c43a4d269

https://quadrant.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/rudabanka.png

'Welsh choir' doli of 17.

Frank wrote on Sep 1^st, 2025 at 8:49pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 31st, 2025 at 12:40pm: This case shows just how out of step with reality our judiciary is when it comes to young offenders and why politicians need to act to protect the community they are supposed to serve. A 16 year-old who was cleared of murdering a teenager in 2022 because of his young age (the offender was 13 at the time) despite footage showing him stomping on the victim’s head repeatedly while others stabbed him and returning to stomp on his unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended has been caught again taking part in a vicious home invasion. This time, he has been charged with aggravated home invasion with a firearm, intentionally causing serious injury in circumstances of gross violence, reckless conduct endangering life and committing an indictable offence while on bail. So not only did the Supreme Court Justice find in 2023 that there was “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”, he has now been caught offending again - while on bail! How can anyone come to the conclusion that a 13 year-old doesn't know that stomping on someone's head repeatedly while others stabbed them and then return to stomp on the unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended is wrong? My seven year-old son knows doing such a thing is completely and utterly wrong. There's no way in the world he didn't know what he was doing was wrong. The law needs to be changed to lower the age for which young people can be tried for these crimes. Maybe it needs to be as low as 11 or 12 years of age. Perhaps even ten. I read an article recently in which these young people brag on social media about getting away with crimes because of "doli incapax". It is the common law in NSW that presumes children between the ages of 10 and 14 lack the criminal intent necessary for criminal responsibility for which this teenager owed his freedom back in 2023. https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/mother-of-melbourne-teen-stabbed-to-death-horrified-by-twist-after-13yearold-set-free/news-story/7b56acb51c7ca3bcad82891c43a4d269 https://quadrant.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/rudabanka.png 'Welsh choir' doli of 17.

Except this isn't Melbourne, it's Sydney. Also, the offender isn't a black immigrant, he's white.

Not to be confused with stoli incapax - when you have drunk too much vodka.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2025 at 5:54am:

Frank wrote on Sep 1st, 2025 at 8:49pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 31st, 2025 at 12:40pm: This case shows just how out of step with reality our judiciary is when it comes to young offenders and why politicians need to act to protect the community they are supposed to serve. A 16 year-old who was cleared of murdering a teenager in 2022 because of his young age (the offender was 13 at the time) despite footage showing him stomping on the victim’s head repeatedly while others stabbed him and returning to stomp on his unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended has been caught again taking part in a vicious home invasion. This time, he has been charged with aggravated home invasion with a firearm, intentionally causing serious injury in circumstances of gross violence, reckless conduct endangering life and committing an indictable offence while on bail. So not only did the Supreme Court Justice find in 2023 that there was “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”, he has now been caught offending again - while on bail! How can anyone come to the conclusion that a 13 year-old doesn't know that stomping on someone's head repeatedly while others stabbed them and then return to stomp on the unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended is wrong? My seven year-old son knows doing such a thing is completely and utterly wrong. There's no way in the world he didn't know what he was doing was wrong. The law needs to be changed to lower the age for which young people can be tried for these crimes. Maybe it needs to be as low as 11 or 12 years of age. Perhaps even ten. I read an article recently in which these young people brag on social media about getting away with crimes because of "doli incapax". It is the common law in NSW that presumes children between the ages of 10 and 14 lack the criminal intent necessary for criminal responsibility for which this teenager owed his freedom back in 2023. https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/mother-of-melbourne-teen-stabbed-to-death-horrified-by-twist-after-13yearold-set-free/news-story/7b56acb51c7ca3bcad82891c43a4d269 https://quadrant.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/rudabanka.png 'Welsh choir' doli of 17. Except this isn't Melbourne, it's Sydney. Also, the offender isn't a black immigrant, he's white.

Wacism.

Frank wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2025 at 7:27am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 2nd, 2025 at 5:54am: Frank wrote on Sep 1st, 2025 at 8:49pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 31st, 2025 at 12:40pm: This case shows just how out of step with reality our judiciary is when it comes to young offenders and why politicians need to act to protect the community they are supposed to serve. A 16 year-old who was cleared of murdering a teenager in 2022 because of his young age (the offender was 13 at the time) despite footage showing him stomping on the victim’s head repeatedly while others stabbed him and returning to stomp on his unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended has been caught again taking part in a vicious home invasion. This time, he has been charged with aggravated home invasion with a firearm, intentionally causing serious injury in circumstances of gross violence, reckless conduct endangering life and committing an indictable offence while on bail. So not only did the Supreme Court Justice find in 2023 that there was “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”, he has now been caught offending again - while on bail! How can anyone come to the conclusion that a 13 year-old doesn't know that stomping on someone's head repeatedly while others stabbed them and then return to stomp on the unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended is wrong? My seven year-old son knows doing such a thing is completely and utterly wrong. There's no way in the world he didn't know what he was doing was wrong. The law needs to be changed to lower the age for which young people can be tried for these crimes. Maybe it needs to be as low as 11 or 12 years of age. Perhaps even ten. I read an article recently in which these young people brag on social media about getting away with crimes because of "doli incapax". It is the common law in NSW that presumes children between the ages of 10 and 14 lack the criminal intent necessary for criminal responsibility for which this teenager owed his freedom back in 2023. https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/mother-of-melbourne-teen-stabbed-to-death-horrified-by-twist-after-13yearold-set-free/news-story/7b56acb51c7ca3bcad82891c43a4d269 https://quadrant.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/rudabanka.png 'Welsh choir' doli of 17. Except this isn't Melbourne, it's Sydney. Also, the offender isn't a black immigrant, he's white. Wacism.

No, simple facts.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2025 at 7:37am:

No, simple facts.

Trump is advocating the same thing.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwGjI-M1M0g

Leroy wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2025 at 8:24am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 2nd, 2025 at 7:37am: No, simple facts. Trump is advocating the same thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwGjI-M1M0g

He really isn't.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2025 at 9:18am:

Leroy wrote on Sep 2nd, 2025 at 8:24am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 2nd, 2025 at 7:37am: No, simple facts. Trump is advocating the same thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwGjI-M1M0g He really isn't.

What IS the difference then?



Gangs are using under-age, juvenile thugs precisely because the leniency of the legal system.

Frank wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2025 at 11:10am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 2nd, 2025 at 9:18am: Leroy wrote on Sep 2nd, 2025 at 8:24am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 2nd, 2025 at 7:37am: No, simple facts. Trump is advocating the same thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwGjI-M1M0g He really isn't. What IS the difference then? Gangs are using under-age, juvenile thugs precisely because the leniency of the legal system.

Trump is doing this for two reasons only, neither of which is related to crime in any way. Cause trouble for Democrat governors and mayors and to distract from the Epstein files. He couldn’t care less about crime. If he did, he’d have sent the National Guard to Louisiana first, which has a murder rate nearly four times higher than California. He hasn’t done so because that’s where Speaker Johnson (a Republican) is from.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 31^st, 2025 at 12:40pm:

This case shows just how out of step with reality our judiciary is when it comes to young offenders and why politicians need to act to protect the community they are supposed to serve. A 16 year-old who was cleared of murdering a teenager in 2022 because of his young age (the offender was 13 at the time) despite footage showing him stomping on the victim’s head repeatedly while others stabbed him and returning to stomp on his unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended has been caught again taking part in a vicious home invasion. This time, he has been charged with aggravated home invasion with a firearm, intentionally causing serious injury in circumstances of gross violence, reckless conduct endangering life and committing an indictable offence while on bail. So not only did the Supreme Court Justice find in 2023 that there was “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”, he has now been caught offending again - while on bail! How can anyone come to the conclusion that a 13 year-old doesn't know that stomping on someone's head repeatedly while others stabbed them and then return to stomp on the unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended is wrong? My seven year-old son knows doing such a thing is completely and utterly wrong. There's no way in the world he didn't know what he was doing was wrong. The law needs to be changed to lower the age for which young people can be tried for these crimes. Maybe it needs to be as low as 11 or 12 years of age. Perhaps even ten. I read an article recently in which these young people brag on social media about getting away with crimes because of "doli incapax". It is the common law in NSW that presumes children between the ages of 10 and 14 lack the criminal intent necessary for criminal responsibility for which this teenager owed his freedom back in 2023. https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/mother-of-melbourne-teen-stabbed-to-death-horrified-by-twist-after-13yearold-set-free/news-story/7b56acb51c7ca3bcad82891c43a4d269

Supreme Court Justice Rita Incerti found in 2023 that despite the criminal age of responsibility being 10 in Victoria, there was a “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”.

The teen “cannot be found guilty of murder or the alternative charge of manslaughter”, she ruled.

Reasonable probability?  Reasonable?   >:(

This judge doesn't have a clue.  These thugs are wised up street kids and know exactly what they're doing.  And knowing full well that the idiots in the court system will let them off time and time again.  This kid had 44 prior charges!

And why aren't the parents in the dock with their kids? 

It seems that everyone who could do something to ensure the safety and welfare of the public has abrogated their duty.  We're on our own when it comes to home invading thugs and murderers.   >:(

Aquarius wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2025 at 3:36pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 31st, 2025 at 12:40pm: This case shows just how out of step with reality our judiciary is when it comes to young offenders and why politicians need to act to protect the community they are supposed to serve. A 16 year-old who was cleared of murdering a teenager in 2022 because of his young age (the offender was 13 at the time) despite footage showing him stomping on the victim’s head repeatedly while others stabbed him and returning to stomp on his unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended has been caught again taking part in a vicious home invasion. This time, he has been charged with aggravated home invasion with a firearm, intentionally causing serious injury in circumstances of gross violence, reckless conduct endangering life and committing an indictable offence while on bail. So not only did the Supreme Court Justice find in 2023 that there was “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”, he has now been caught offending again - while on bail! How can anyone come to the conclusion that a 13 year-old doesn't know that stomping on someone's head repeatedly while others stabbed them and then return to stomp on the unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended is wrong? My seven year-old son knows doing such a thing is completely and utterly wrong. There's no way in the world he didn't know what he was doing was wrong. The law needs to be changed to lower the age for which young people can be tried for these crimes. Maybe it needs to be as low as 11 or 12 years of age. Perhaps even ten. I read an article recently in which these young people brag on social media about getting away with crimes because of "doli incapax". It is the common law in NSW that presumes children between the ages of 10 and 14 lack the criminal intent necessary for criminal responsibility for which this teenager owed his freedom back in 2023. https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/mother-of-melbourne-teen-stabbed-to-death-horrified-by-twist-after-13yearold-set-free/news-story/7b56acb51c7ca3bcad82891c43a4d269 Supreme Court Justice Rita Incerti found in 2023 that despite the criminal age of responsibility being 10 in Victoria, there was a “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”. The teen “cannot be found guilty of murder or the alternative charge of manslaughter”, she ruled. Reasonable probability?  Reasonable?   >:( This judge doesn't have a clue.  These thugs are wised up street kids and know exactly what they're doing.  And knowing full well that the idiots in the court system will let them off time and time again.  This kid had 44 prior charges! And why aren't the parents in the dock with their kids?  It seems that everyone who could do something to ensure the safety and welfare of the public has abrogated their duty.  We're on our own when it comes to home invading thugs and murderers.   >:(

Child labour, like colonialism, ended too soon.
Send them down the mines for 12 hour shifts, 6 days a week. That'd get their jiggles out.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2025 at 12:09pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 2nd, 2025 at 11:10am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 2nd, 2025 at 9:18am: Leroy wrote on Sep 2nd, 2025 at 8:24am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 2nd, 2025 at 7:37am: No, simple facts. Trump is advocating the same thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwGjI-M1M0g He really isn't. What IS the difference then? Gangs are using under-age, juvenile thugs precisely because the leniency of the legal system. Trump is doing this for two reasons only, neither of which is related to crime in any way. Cause trouble for Democrat governors and mayors and to distract from the Epstein files. He couldn’t care less about crime. If he did, he’d have sent the National Guard to Louisiana first, which has a murder rate nearly four times higher than California. He hasn’t done so because that’s where Speaker Johnson (a Republican) is from.

Correct.

And why would he?

He's a convicted criminal himself.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2025 at 12:09pm:

Trump is doing this for two reasons only, neither of which is related to crime in any way. Cause trouble for Democrat governors and mayors and to distract from the Epstein files. He couldn’t care less about crime. If he did, he’d have sent the National Guard to Louisiana first, which has a murder rate nearly four times higher than California. He hasn’t done so because that’s where Speaker Johnson (a Republican) is from.

Oh it upsets the democrats when someone stops crime. How dare he stops crime.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 31^st, 2025 at 12:40pm:

This case shows just how out of step with reality our judiciary is when it comes to young offenders and why politicians need to act to protect the community they are supposed to serve. A 16 year-old who was cleared of murdering a teenager in 2022 because of his young age (the offender was 13 at the time) despite footage showing him stomping on the victim’s head repeatedly while others stabbed him and returning to stomp on his unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended has been caught again taking part in a vicious home invasion. This time, he has been charged with aggravated home invasion with a firearm, intentionally causing serious injury in circumstances of gross violence, reckless conduct endangering life and committing an indictable offence while on bail. So not only did the Supreme Court Justice find in 2023 that there was “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”, he has now been caught offending again - while on bail! How can anyone come to the conclusion that a 13 year-old doesn't know that stomping on someone's head repeatedly while others stabbed them and then return to stomp on the unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended is wrong? My seven year-old son knows doing such a thing is completely and utterly wrong. There's no way in the world he didn't know what he was doing was wrong. The law needs to be changed to lower the age for which young people can be tried for these crimes. Maybe it needs to be as low as 11 or 12 years of age. Perhaps even ten. I read an article recently in which these young people brag on social media about getting away with crimes because of "doli incapax". It is the common law in NSW that presumes children between the ages of 10 and 14 lack the criminal intent necessary for criminal responsibility for which this teenager owed his freedom back in 2023. https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/mother-of-melbourne-teen-stabbed-to-death-horrified-by-twist-after-13yearold-set-free/news-story/7b56acb51c7ca3bcad82891c43a4d269

A 16 year old can't legally own a firearm was the NRA right saying if you outlaw guns only the outlaws will have guns?

Kids should know right from wrong at 10 if they don't the parents haven't brought them up very well or kids are retarded

Trump and Karamela are in Victoria now stirring up the kids to crime?

Who'd 've thunk that... get me Bob Katter on the line.... we need a Leb slant on this..

Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 31^st, 2025 at 12:40pm:

This case shows just how out of step with reality our judiciary is when it comes to young offenders and why politicians need to act to protect the community they are supposed to serve. A 16 year-old who was cleared of murdering a teenager in 2022 because of his young age (the offender was 13 at the time) despite footage showing him stomping on the victim’s head repeatedly while others stabbed him and returning to stomp on his unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended has been caught again taking part in a vicious home invasion. This time, he has been charged with aggravated home invasion with a firearm, intentionally causing serious injury in circumstances of gross violence, reckless conduct endangering life and committing an indictable offence while on bail. So not only did the Supreme Court Justice find in 2023 that there was “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”, he has now been caught offending again - while on bail! How can anyone come to the conclusion that a 13 year-old doesn't know that stomping on someone's head repeatedly while others stabbed them and then return to stomp on the unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended is wrong? My seven year-old son knows doing such a thing is completely and utterly wrong. There's no way in the world he didn't know what he was doing was wrong. The law needs to be changed to lower the age for which young people can be tried for these crimes. Maybe it needs to be as low as 11 or 12 years of age. Perhaps even ten. I read an article recently in which these young people brag on social media about getting away with crimes because of "doli incapax". It is the common law in NSW that presumes children between the ages of 10 and 14 lack the criminal intent necessary for criminal responsibility for which this teenager owed his freedom back in 2023. https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/mother-of-melbourne-teen-stabbed-to-death-horrified-by-twist-after-13yearold-set-free/news-story/7b56acb51c7ca3bcad82891c43a4d269

I agree with you.



Armchair_Politician,

Do you agree with the moral principle expressed in Deuteronomy 25:1 ?

Deuteronomy 25:1
If there be a controversy between men, and they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them; then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked.


Or would you choose to 'shy away' from that particular 'pronouncement'......
because 'it reflects archaic, and religious values' ?

Just curious.


.


Tolerance, of widespread LAWLESSNESS in any human society,
will be the destruction of that society.

That, isn't 'rocket science'.

It is just common sense.



Hosea 4:6
My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.


What knowledge have we rejected ?

The knowledge of the God of Israel, and of His law of righteousness.



Matthew 19:17
[Jesus said].....if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
18  He saith unto him, Which?
Jesus said,
Thou shalt do no murder,
Thou shalt not commit adultery,
Thou shalt not steal,
Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19  Honour thy father and thy mother: and,
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.


1 John 5:3
For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments:
and his commandments are not grievous.


Psalms KJV
"Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the LORD."


[Jesus said].....

Matthew 7:22
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23  And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Aquarius wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2025 at 3:36pm:

Supreme Court Justice Rita Incerti found in 2023 that despite the criminal age of responsibility being 10 in Victoria, there was a “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”. The teen “cannot be found guilty of murder or the alternative charge of manslaughter”, she ruled. Reasonable probability?  Reasonable?   >:( This judge doesn't have a clue.  These thugs are wised up street kids and know exactly what they're doing.  And knowing full well that the idiots in the court system will let them off time and time again.  This kid had 44 prior charges! And why aren't the parents in the dock with their kids?

Aquarius,

I strongly disagree with that view.

How can a parent, be responsible for the behaviour and the actions,
of an 'out of control' [i.e. a habitually, disobedient] child ?



IMO, everyone should be held responsible for the consequences, of their own actions.

'Children' too.


.



Aquarius wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2025 at 3:36pm:

It seems that everyone who could do something to ensure the safety and welfare of the public has abrogated their duty. We're on our own when it comes to home invading thugs and murderers.   >:(

I agree.


.


And there was no 'justification' to steal, if you are hungry, or poor.

Stealing.......is a serious crime.


Exodus 22:1
If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it;
he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.


Exodus 22:2
If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him.
3  If the sun be risen upon him, there shall be blood shed for him;
for he should make full restitution;
if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.

i.e.
Let the thief [BEFORE HE IS RELEASED],
be redeemed by his kinsfolk, by THEM paying the cost of the penalty.


That is justice.


KJV
"And those which remain shall hear, and fear,
and shall henceforth commit no more
any such evil among you."

Leroy wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2025 at 5:30pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 2nd, 2025 at 12:09pm: Trump is doing this for two reasons only, neither of which is related to crime in any way. Cause trouble for Democrat governors and mayors and to distract from the Epstein files. He couldn’t care less about crime. If he did, he’d have sent the National Guard to Louisiana first, which has a murder rate nearly four times higher than California. He hasn’t done so because that’s where Speaker Johnson (a Republican) is from. Oh it upsets the democrats when someone stops crime. How dare he stops crime.

Is that what he's doing? Seems more like he's trying to use the military to usurp the authority of elected officials in states and cities which are not Republican. If he was serious about addressing crime, he'd have sent the National Guard to Louisiana, which is where Speaker Johnson (R) is from. But no - he's only sending them to places where there are Democrats. Remember, seven out of the top ten states with the highest murder rate in the US are Republican.

Aquarius wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2025 at 3:36pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 31st, 2025 at 12:40pm: This case shows just how out of step with reality our judiciary is when it comes to young offenders and why politicians need to act to protect the community they are supposed to serve. A 16 year-old who was cleared of murdering a teenager in 2022 because of his young age (the offender was 13 at the time) despite footage showing him stomping on the victim’s head repeatedly while others stabbed him and returning to stomp on his unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended has been caught again taking part in a vicious home invasion. This time, he has been charged with aggravated home invasion with a firearm, intentionally causing serious injury in circumstances of gross violence, reckless conduct endangering life and committing an indictable offence while on bail. So not only did the Supreme Court Justice find in 2023 that there was “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”, he has now been caught offending again - while on bail! How can anyone come to the conclusion that a 13 year-old doesn't know that stomping on someone's head repeatedly while others stabbed them and then return to stomp on the unconscious body a second time after the first frenzied attack ended is wrong? My seven year-old son knows doing such a thing is completely and utterly wrong. There's no way in the world he didn't know what he was doing was wrong. The law needs to be changed to lower the age for which young people can be tried for these crimes. Maybe it needs to be as low as 11 or 12 years of age. Perhaps even ten. I read an article recently in which these young people brag on social media about getting away with crimes because of "doli incapax". It is the common law in NSW that presumes children between the ages of 10 and 14 lack the criminal intent necessary for criminal responsibility for which this teenager owed his freedom back in 2023. https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/mother-of-melbourne-teen-stabbed-to-death-horrified-by-twist-after-13yearold-set-free/news-story/7b56acb51c7ca3bcad82891c43a4d269 Supreme Court Justice Rita Incerti found in 2023 that despite the criminal age of responsibility being 10 in Victoria, there was a “reasonable probability (the boy) did not know (his) conduct was seriously wrong in a moral sense”. The teen “cannot be found guilty of murder or the alternative charge of manslaughter”, she ruled. Reasonable probability?  Reasonable?   >:( This judge doesn't have a clue.  These thugs are wised up street kids and know exactly what they're doing.  And knowing full well that the idiots in the court system will let them off time and time again.  This kid had 44 prior charges! And why aren't the parents in the dock with their kids?  It seems that everyone who could do something to ensure the safety and welfare of the public has abrogated their duty.  We're on our own when it comes to home invading thugs and murderers.   >:(

This one line shows that the Judges clearly have no idea. Even my seven year-old knows that it is wrong to stomp on someone's head and then return to land a few more blows after the initial attack has ended. Not only does this thug know what he's doing is wrong, he's bragging about it! The argument from the Justice is as weak as it is offensive.

Update to this case: the offender has appeared in Court via video link in a brief session where he did not apply for bail. He was apparently seen to be disinterested in the proceedings and was playing cards. The level of contempt this arsewipe has for everyone around him is staggering. He needs to be locked up for the maximum sentence possible given his lengthy criminal history and obvious lack of remorse for his crimes. Time to put the rights and safety of the public first instead of the offender for once!

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/teenage-boy-charged-over-gladstone-park-home-invasion-and-bashing-appears-in-childrens-court/news-story/825c4708a7f07d07b6406208e9de38ce

Maybe it's time for our Judges to face re-election, as is the case in some parts of the United States? It might help to make them more in tune with public expectations.