Mate you sliced her ears off you psycho 2
I killed her, Weatherston told officer at scene
"I killed her," Clayton Weatherston said as he stood over Sophie Elliott's bloodied body, a jury has been told. The High Court in Christchurch heard yesterday that Weatherston admitted stabbing his former girlfriend with a knife, and using scissors "at the end". Constable John Cunningham was the first officer at the scene on January 9 last year after Elliott was killed in the bedroom of her Dunedin home. Weatherston admits manslaughter but denies murder, saying he was provoked.
I just can’t get enough of my favorite South Island psycho pin up boy, Clayton Weatherston. I’m just so offended on so many different levels that he’s trying to use provocation as a defence.
In my headspace, I accept that people can flip out and do awful things. That’s no justification of their actions, just an acceptance of human nature. My thinking is that if that moment occurs for you, you have a responsibility to man up and acknowledge the damage you’ve caused, take your punishment and work the rest of your life for redemption. I could have accepted if Weatherston’s defence was insanity, but PROVOCATION? He’s effectively saying Sophie was ‘asking’ for it, that she in some way ‘deserved’ being stabbed 216 times, have her ears sliced off and genitalia mutilated! The audacity and arrogance of this guy is absolutely astounding and I really want to see his face when the verdict is read out if he's found to be guilty of murder.
What’s the bet Mr Emotionless burst into tears if his fantasy self-justification gets so roundly discredited?
posted by Bomber @ 1:08 pm
25 comments
25 Comments:
I particularly enjoy watching the mugging/grimacing of his lawyer Mrs Rumpole of The Bailey every time the mention of provocation comes up.
She must be so proud to be defending the indefensible.
I must go now and suck the aromatic herb-infused alcohol stains off the front of my shirt.
I have real problems with the defense...namely provocation. Never-the-less Ablett-Kerr's first obligation is to her client and not the victim and she must do her best by him.
I too, am at a loss as to why insanity hasn't been used...
Death Penalty......
I am dreading what defence witnesses he will call. I suspect they will all be designed to try and blacken Sophie's name.
His total lack of remorse chills me.
A senior immigration official rejects claims by British newspapers that New Zealand authorities are effectively sending home immigrant workers to save jobs for their own citizens.
"Claims of an anti-migrant job crisis in New Zealand are not supported by the facts," Immigration New Zealand's service delivery group manager Steve Cantlon said.
"One can only feel sympathy for the plight of families who have had to return home because of the changing labour market .
"However, temporary workers have always known that there was no certainty that their permits would be extended or that they would be able to progress on to permanent residence.
"The change in their economic circumstances is to be regretted, but it is not the result of an anti-immigrant jobs policy."
Mr Cantlon was commenting on claims that the dreams of hundreds of British migrants have been shattered when their temporary work permits expire and they have to apply for a new one.
British expatriates "face losing their jobs and being kicked out of the country" because of the credit crunch and what is said to be a major shift in policy by the New Zealand government, the Daily Mail newspaper reported in London.
"The dreams of hundreds who left for a better life on the other side of the world are now turning into nightmares.
"With unemployment at a six-year high of 5 percent of the population of 4.3 million, tough economic times have led to jobs going to native New Zealanders first."
The newspaper said one factor was New Zealand emigrants who had lost their jobs overseas returning home, and that more than 3000 of the 26,000 who returned last year ended up on benefits.
But Britons in New Zealand who were being left without work had complained they were being hurt by a "jobs for Kiwis" trend.
A migrant assistance group, Move2NZ, created by two Britons who emigrated nine years ago, has issued a pamphlet that claimed the attitude of officials is: "We've taken your money, used your skills, now bugger off!" London's Telegraph newspaper reported.
One member of the group, Mike Bell, of Christchurch, said: "We are seeing families who have worked here years being effectively kicked out in two weeks.
"Many have existing jobs or offers of work in areas listed by immigration as being in dire shortage."
But the "essential skills" approach to issuing work visas was last month narrowed: Immigration New Zealand cut 44 job-types that had previously been on the Government's "immediate skill shortage list" of 87 occupations, in a twice-yearly Labour Department review.
Affected trades included bakers, sheep farm workers and construction sector occupations, such as bricklayers, carpenters, plumbers and scaffolders.
Employers wanting to bring in a migrant worker to do those jobs will have to show there are no suitable New Zealanders available in their region.
Mr Bell said: " These workers have been invited. But they are effectively being told New Zealand doesn't want them any more".
But Mr Cantlon said immigration policy had always been based on ensuring that New Zealanders have the first opportunity to take up work vacancies.
The Government's long-term skill shortage list of 60 professions, included air conditioning and refrigeration mechanics, automotive mechanics, boat builders, electricians and fitters and turners. And the 87 professions still on the immediate skills shortage list included laboratory technicians, gasfitters and glaziers.
Removal of 44 occupations from that list last month reflected an " astute adjustment" between supply and demand.
"There is now an increased supply of New Zealand citizens and permanent residents available who are qualified to fill positions previously on the skill shortage lists," Mr Cantlon said.
"There is now an increased supply of New Zealand citizens and permanent residents available who are qualified to fill positions previously on the skill shortage lists,"
LIKE FOREIGN STUDENTS PERHAPS?
Who knows with the jury system though. A few sympathetic males on the jury and compelling testimony from him and who knows the jury could become emotionally invested and manipulated like we saw in the Bain trial and reach a similar verdict. Unlikely, but from his perspective what does he have to lose. Its not like he can use the old paper run alibi.
Your understanding of the provocation defence is retarded. The difference between provocation and insanity is insane people are mentally ill all their lives (this is a generalisation), as opposed to people who are provoked, who are 'insane' in the moment that they committed their crime. This is a legal term and so the usage isn't the one that you take it to mean, your definition being that he is implying that she asked for it.
Show your outrage all you like but don't make shit up or talk about legal stuff you're ignorant about.
Its not like he can use the old paper run alibi.
8/7/09 3:31 PM
Show your outrage all you like but don't make shit up or talk about legal stuff you're ignorant about.
8/7/09 4:42 PM
LIKE THE FOREIGN STUDENT 'KIWI' LAWYER IN OZ WHO LOST HIS JOB AND CAN'T GET THE DOLE FOR 2 YEARS.TOUGH SHIT JOHNNY FOREIGNER.THAT'S WHAT U GET FOR COMING IN THE "BACK DOOR"!
Mad as a gum diggers dog but the sure to fail provocation plea is way better than him getting out of the nut house after a few years "treatment".
For once Mr Farrar you and I are in total agreement!
Your understanding of the provocation defence is retarded. The difference between provocation and insanity is insane people are mentally ill all their lives (this is a generalisation), as opposed to people who are provoked, who are 'insane' in the moment that they committed their crime. This is a legal term and so the usage isn't the one that you take it to mean, your definition being that he is implying that she asked for it.
Show your outrage all you like but don't make shit up or talk about legal stuff you're ignorant about.
Oh don't get your panties in such a twist love. I am well aware of the defence of provocation:
169 Provocation (1) Culpable homicide that would otherwise be murder may be reduced to manslaughter if the person who caused the death did so under provocation. (2) Anything done or said may be provocation if— (a) In the circumstances of the case it was sufficient to deprive a person having the power of self-control of an ordinary person, but otherwise having the characteristics of the offender, of the power of self-control; and (b) It did in fact deprive the offender of the power of self-control and thereby induced him to commit the act of homicide.
and I say that his attempt to use it is absolute bullshit! Temporary insanity would be a much stronger case (because he comes across as a psycho with the calm manner he showed afterwards) than pretending he was provoked by the year long emotional angst she apparently put him through. Personally I think the way this defence has been used to get hetro-ragers who kill homosexuals off murder is as deplorable as what Clayton is trying to pull.
Christ I'm sick of seeing this nutcase on tv though. It's getting nearly as bad as bain, I don't need to be reminded every night on the news how many times he stabbed the girl during her murder.
It's interesting he is using the defence of provocation when he brought the knife with him to the murder scene. I think that point will make for a very difficult use of this defence.
He shows no remorse at all, no shame. Just sorry for himself. This case is sickening and there is no defense, but with our shonky jury system (emotive, easily maniuplated, gullable, etc), my breath is held. Surely this jury will do the right thing?
The character assasination of the deceased in what gets me. How can Ms Rumpole sleep at night.
And the most shocking thing of all - in her parents home, with the mother there.
Life.
This pencil's gonna hav a lotta fun in pokey!
His defence team now seems to be using the narcissist defence, is that a mental illness ???
He spoke in court yesterday about a " big fan " of his supporting his work ( or something) ... I wonder if he insisted on giving evidence because he's SUCH a narcissist and if his lawyers felt that he's gone for all money anyway and that they may as well throw that into the pot as well.
He makes hannibal lector look like a nice guy.
You go to your girfriends house equipped with a knife (murder weapon), and claim manslaughter?
I don't think so!
I'm shocked that he can stand there bare-faced and argue provocation as a defence and that a woman lawyer (who really should know better) would agree to bring such a defence to our courts of law.
Imagine if he is found not guilty because of this so-called provocation. Could every NZ male now decide to stab a woman 216 times and plead provocation? Will provocation now become a defence again, for men who beat up their partners? Could violent parents (having lost the ability to plead reasonable force when they beat up their kids) now insist on provocation as a defence instead. It seems to me we have another piece of law which requires repealing.
he's SUCH a narcissist
bob said...
His defence team now seems to be using the narcissist defence, is that a mental illness ???
He spoke in court yesterday about a " big fan " of his supporting his work ( or something) ...
INDIVIDUALISM AND NARCISSISM.
Christopher Lasch diagnoses a deep secondary narcissism at the heart of society.The culture of competitive individualism; males are theorised to seek and value autonomy, individuation, separation and the moral ideas of rights and justice which are thought to depend on a highly individuated conception of persons.By contrast, females are theorised to seek and value connection, sociality, inclusion,
and moral ideals of care and nurturance.From this perspective, highly individuated selves have been viewed as a problem (or "mentally ill"(?).)
They are seen as incapable of human attachments based on mutuality and trust, unresponsive to human needs, approaching students as irrationally self interested utility maximisers thriving on technology inspired separation from eachother and competition and thereby creating social institutions like uni which tolerate even legitimise 'violence and aggression'.
THE NEW RIGHT , INDIVIDUALISM AND THE CULTURE OF NARCISSISM.PAGE 105-106; INDIVIDUALISM AND COMMUNITY.PETERS AND MARSHALL.
AND WE ARE GONNA CLEAN UP ALL THE BUTTA CHICKEN TAKEAWAYS AND GET THE PIGEONS FROM SPREADING BIRD/SWINE FLU.NO MORE PECKING AT THE TABLES OF THE MAIN STUDENT CAFE NEXT TO THE QUAD ME LITTLE MATES.NO, WE ARE GONNA SET UP A WASH STATION FOR RINSING OUT YER TEN DOLLAR LUNCHES AND TIPPING THE REST AWAY.THEN WE WILL GET BACK TO THE HIGH STANDARDS OF ENTRANCE AND EXCELLENCE RUBBISH.ALL AFTA I GET BACK TO UNI AT THE 1ST SRC MOTION IN THE QUAD AFTA THE 2ND SEMESTER STARTS JULY 20TH.I WON'T BE BACK UNTIL AFTA AUGUST 15TH SO SEEYA WEDS 19TH.BE THERE OR BE SQUARE.
Every time I see him on TV or hear him on the radio, this phrase pops into my head-
"Mate you cut off her ears, you psycho!"
Good header Bomber, pretty much sums it up for me.
As if everyone who commits a murder is not to some degree in an altered state. It's not the kind of thing a calm sane person considers. But if anything, his oddly chilled manner indicates rather the opposite. His initial statements to the first cop on the scene are going to do for him, and serves him right.
It's like he thinks that if he can convince the jury of how white and normal he is, they'll understand that he's a good guy and doesn't deserve to go to jail.
Yeah. Good luck with that, you psycho.
I saw the guy on the TV3 website giving evidence about his sexual relationship with Sophie Elliot.
I found he came across almost likeable. This I found disturbing - not him, but the fact that I could possibly find hime likeable. Perhaps he really was -most of the time.
But he is a sick fuck who needs to dangle from a good stout rope. All murderers, rapists, psychos, are sometimes nice, are sometimes kind.
But people are defined by their worst, and perhaps best, deeds. Hitler is still Hitler, in spite of his love and devotion to Blondie (his Alsation dog).
I hope the jury is smart enough to resist this obvious appeal for empathy from the accused, that they realize that the defence is deliberately trying to humanize this creep and present him as a 'normal' person who is not a murderer at heart(an inscrutable Asiatic such as Naiyin Xue of course would have a harder time of it, as would any Polynesian crim).
And it may just work.
Surely if this provocation defence works for Weatherstone, then this would prove the justice system to be a joke - especially in light of the fact that we have two good men sitting in jail now, both convicted of murder, for killing a pedophile who molested a young girl during a party at their house.
http://tinyurl.com/kolqlm
If provocation did not work for these two, surely no way should it work for Weatherston.
Maybe when he gets to prison he can hang out with the banjo-killer dude. They might get along.
Post a Comment
<< Home