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...

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


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

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


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

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

Wacism.

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


Trump is advocating the same thing.

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

What IS the difference then?



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

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


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.   

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


Correct.

And why would he?

He's a convicted criminal himself.