BREAKING NEWS: Clayton Weatherston GUILTY OF MURDER!
MATE YOU CUT OFF HER EARS YOU PSYCHO 3
Now that the verdict is in, (and thank you to Idiot/Savant for correcting me on speaking out before the trial had finished) let me say what I really think about Clayton Weatherston.
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.
What infuriated me was that instead of manning up and admitting he was responsible for what he did, Clayton tried to use provocation as a defence, this ridiculous argument that tacitly puts the responsibility on the victim for their murder, that it was somehow Sophie’s actions that led to a scenario where Clayton was so overcome he wasn’t in control and as such didn’t have murderous intent. I find that as intellectually detestable as claiming a woman’s lipstick and short skirt are reasons she gets raped.
It astonishes me that the brutal mutilation of her body by a murder weapon that Clayton brought into the room should be a mitigating factor for him. It clearly shows he took his time and he thought he was justified in his actions because he was so angry, that’s the truth – this arrogant little prick honestly believed he was justified in doing what he did to Sophie.
His mental state is important, but note how none of these disorders were recorded in his previous mental health assessments.
And the thing that really gets me – Clayton was en educated guy, if you’ve had the opportunity to gain an education, you have a responsibility that demands better judgment than 216 stab wounds and cutting a persons ears off.
The insult he has added to injury on Sophie’s name with his delusional views on her should be counted in whatever sentence is handed out.
When you have done wrong on this scale, you man up, he didn’t. What a sad, arrogant individual and what a sad loss for Sophie’s friends and family.
PS - Hands up who thinks the idiot TVNZ cameraman who didn't actually have Clayton in shot when the verdict was read out will get sacked?
PPS - DOH - I'm the idiot, of course the cameraman can't film the impact of the verdict (I hate that rule so much 0. Didn't we all want to see the realization on his face that his delusional defence wasn't acceptable to the rest of society? Let's hope one day he actually confronts what he did and accepts it. The sad reality is that our prison system just isn't capable of rehabilitation.
posted by Bomber @ 10:08 am
33 comments
33 Comments:
You hit the nail right on the head my friend. I can't understand why it took so long, and what a waste of time, money and resources. To bad we can't just lock him up and throw away the key.
Deep in a prison somewhere someone's getting the lube and playboy mag ready for him.
He'll be married before midnight ...
Also,how does someone so angry and out of control perfectly symetricly cut of off one's nose. (and nipple btw)
Sickening. I agree he should be further punished for the delusional b/s he spun about this 22 year old who was butchered by a pathetic excuse for a human.
I've been watching and hoping that NO blogger would risk the trial by talking about it...and everyone seemed to understand that they needed to shut up.
I guessed very early on that they were going to try the narcissist defence and I'd hazard a guess that his defence team didn't like the arrogant, pompous, nasty little prick one bit, in fact I reckon they didn't even argue with him when he wanted to take the stand... " ahhh fuck him " they probably thought ... he NEEDED to be found guilty of murder...this is one murderer I can find no sympathy for at all... no harsh deprived brutalising background, no provocation ...he'll appeal though, he's such a pompous twat.
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.)
It's not a personality disorder or psychological it's social.The social problems we now face as the children of rogernomics (he is only 33 for god's sake) -structural long term sickness and invalids benefits which don't show up in masked figures as only 50,000 short term unemployed, increasing poverty, the growth of an identifiable underclass, increasing social inequalities due to race class and gender lines, high and increasing levels of violent crime even assaults on tourists cycling and walking around our country.Problems which have accumulated and which have inter-generational social effects.They are the problems we have inherited as part of a right wing experiment to privatise society.The lesson for other countries is clear.Avoid the N.Z experiment at all costs.Give the guy a break, and a proper defence next time.
WELFARE AND THE FUTURE OF COMMUNITY THE N.Z EXPERIMENT (GONE WRONG).PAGE 60.
From my brief reading of this case (and I have been trying NOT to pay attention) the guy was suffering from something like anti social personality disorder.
If this is the case then all the points you just made are kind of obvious and typical of the condition.
No real surprise really. Nor was the verdict although the media tried to pretend he somehow had a chance of getting away with provocation. Gutter journalism.
Of course everyone has an outraged opinion on this now that it has been dragged through the media as it was.
But what else do we expect nowadays??
300,000 PLUS ON BENEFITS.
This is certainly a case of "let's hope he gets what he deserves in jail." 216 times...
NS
Brashes views are firmly located within a neoliberal ideology that regards every individual as being born equal with equality of opportunity.Inequalities arise from favouring one particular group or race like maori over all others.Instead of individual failure it is usually due to race class and gender and giving them special attention advantages them and disadvantages everybody else.This situation is clearly unfair.That is all he was saying and its not racist to say so.Far from it.It has been argued by neoliberals that the welfare state created a dependency culture among the needy on some form of welfare or benefit.This included a large group of maori.Some see maori as a group even further dependent on the state than ever before.They assert a shift away from this to exerting agency.A response by labour to protests and complaints when they don't get what they want like the foreshore or the h in wanganui or the maori seats in the supercity.Instead they appoint unelected boards like the foreshore and seabed review panel or the hui and submissions process to even change the N.Z flag.
He is sick and sad and off to where is belongs - but what about Ablett Kerr- I wish there was a hell for that bitch to go to, instead she will snigger go home to her mansion and buy a new jag.
We need an urgent review of sociopathic lawyers and judges, these vile sick animals are praised, loved and honoured, become MP’s and ministers, they are the real evil criminals they destroy society they destroy all sense of decency and sneer at the truth.
DON'T FORGET THE GEOGRAPHIC BOARD.
AND WHAT THEY DID TO JOHNO FROM THE ROCK.THEY BANNED HIM FOR 2 WEEKS FOR DOING A FUNNY BILLY T VOICE GOT 20 CENTS BRO.
PROOF POSITIVE THAT MAORI AND THERE IF YA CAN'T BEAT EM JOIN EM MOB HAVE NO FUCKING SENSE OF HUMOUR AND JUST AREN'T THAT FUNNY.
"He is sick and sad and off to where is belongs - but what about Ablett Kerr- I wish there was a hell for that bitch to go to,"
I got the impression she wasn't trying too hard (from the snippets I saw on TV , admittedly)I've seen her in action before and she's very dynamic but here she looked to be sleepwalking.
SOMEONE has to act as defence counsel ... would you also consign the doctor who treats a murderer's wounds to hell ? Some people just have to do their job.
Some people have little real choice about their job - I don't agree will selling tobaco but if I ran a small shop an I needed the income to support my family would I do it?? In extreme circumstances probably, but I make sure I have a business that does not kill people or insult the decency of society.
Ablett Kerr has many many choices, she does not need the money, she could use her legal education to work in a different area of law or her fame to make a living in a decent manner.
If she chooses to defend the killers of women she can also choose how she does that, if her 'client' does not want a lawyer whose personal values require her to act with honesty and honour the he can sack her and get someone else.
If is possible to present a fair trial and represent a person without insulting and torturing their victims - if it isn't then we need to get rid of the system.
There is a time as a lawyer and decent person the only honourable thing to do is advise your client to tell the truth and them get them the support, containment, help or whatever they need this protects them and society.
Would you lie, cheat, torture and abuse for money or fun - I would not. I was in a situation once where lawyer abuse was going on and a friend of mine shook his head in and said ' I could never do that to a person ' the person being tortured was the victim of sexual abuse - my reply was 'that is why you will never prosper'.
Sadly the evil in suits prosper - we need to change than.
I would be very interested (although I doubt surprised) to see some psychiatric tests results on lawyers, may fit the bill of sociopath.
It is not just lawyers of corse – if you want to rape, mutilate and murder women (and get well paid for it) become a doctor. A tiny few get caught eventually (Morgan Fahey – he was caught by television not the authorities who all knew what he was and turned a blind eye) then gynaecologist butcher in Whangarei got away scot free with mutilating and killing women – he is still working as a gynaecologist, how many more are out there happily butchering and raping in full view. Everyone knows but the club keeps quiet, most ‘criminal’ killing happen in secret, if you saw someone taking knife to a woman in public presumably you would intervene, yet when doctors butcher they are surrounded by witnesses – nurses, other doctors etc. look at the butcher of Bega case in Australia.
Ablett Kerr could have turned the job down she chose not to – that tells you all you need to know about her.
This criminal has murdered one woman and destroyed many peoples lives in the process, he is now out of harms way, others destroy people and society everyday for decades and get rewarded for it. If you think criminals are in jail you are dreaming they are living in the rich suburbs driving jags and laughing at a world that’s lets them to do it.
By the way the poster who said ‘he will be married soon ….’ You may have been joking but sadly you are right ‘literally’ as we speak/write armies of women (if there were prized for stupidity women would win most of them) writing him love letters, sending him gifts and queuing up to visit him. That is another phenomenon that needs more study.
If you can't find a job to do with honour, integrity and compassion (and some skill and competance) then there is something seriously wrong in society.
Goodbye Clayton, I hope he can one day realise the enormity of what he's done, and can own up to his crime. Remorse would be a good start.
To the posters who wish him all sorts of brutality in prison, is the killer/rapist of a killer some sort of a hero in your eyes?
His being locked away is his punishment, being raped/assaulted/murdered is a heinous criminal offence, and no one should be subjected to those things, including prisoners.
Take your lynchmob mentality over to kiwiblog.
"If is possible to present a fair trial and represent a person without insulting and torturing their victims - if it isn't then we need to get rid of the system.
There is a time as a lawyer and decent person the only honourable thing to do is advise your client to tell the truth ..."
True... good point.
But then maybe in this case this rooster wasn't prepared to take advice from anyone, being such a superior type and all.
I find that as intellectually detestable as claiming a woman’s lipstick and short skirt are reasons she gets raped.
BAN THE BURQA?
If she chooses to defend the killers of women she can also choose how she does that,
where was the defence case apart from the unusual and near brilliant outcome step of putting him in the witness stand.Mesmerising testimony I thought on the news!
Some people have little real choice about their job...
...If you can't find a job to do with honour, integrity and compassion (and some skill and competance) then there is something seriously wrong in society.
Anon's rant is reason why we shouldn't have television cameras in trials.
You then get people like anon who think defendents shouldn't have the right to a fair trial, that the lawyers who defend them are sociapathic with no morals or scruples and we shoold ban judges and lawyers and forget about the innocent until proven guilty bit.
Weatherston killed Ms Elliot no doubt, but he has the right to a trial, a right to defence counsel, and the right to be judged accordinly.
Which he was.
Abbott-Kerr QC, as a defence lawyer, was most probably advised by her client in which course to take.
It's his right to do so, and it's her job to defend him.
Unless she has very strong grounds, she can't turn down a defendent, and if heinous crimes were to be shunned by lawyers, how could defendents get a fair hearing?
If you don't like what defence lawyers do, don't watch the news.
Or, alternatively, media, please don't show us wall to wall coverage of trials, as it brings out the red neck executioner in us all.
"PS - Hands up who thinks the idiot TVNZ cameraman who didn't actually have Clayton in shot when the verdict was read out will get sacked?"
Bomber, you can't film the accused while the verdict is being read out. It'll get you thrown in jail by the presiding judge. Ever wonder why the cameras focused on Joe Karam during the Bain verdict?
Tumeke, if you're going to constantly blog and abuse people who work in television at least get your facts straight. In-court media rules mean it is never permitted to let any camera film an accused while the verdicts are being read. It is a blanket rule applied to every case. Remember that the camera was on Karam in the Bain verdicts?
When it comes to you ignorance is not bliss, it's just frustrating. Sort it out.
This has probably been said before, but I think that by law the camera can't be focused on the accused during the reading aloud of the verdict.
I must go now and toast to this psycho asshole's new career as a "prison knife block".
Bomber, the Judge ruled, as they often tend to do, that the reaction of the accused is not allowed to be filmed. This was what happened in this case as well.
Hey Bomber,
Good blog mate, you summed things up very nicely and I agree with you on pretty much all of it!
The cameraman however wasn't allowed to focus on his face when the verdict was read. The judge imposed this. Same thing happened with the Bain trial
Cheers
@ Anon 3:30: Thanks for pointing out that no-vid requirement at the verdict. I suspected as much, especially after the Bain verdict.
It is the right verdict and this is one of the rare cases where I hope he never gets out. He is so clearly and so very grossly narcissistic that he could do this again. As absurd as this sounds, given that we must assume a reasonable intelligence, he really does not seem to understand what he has done and certainly shows no remorse.
And we need to do something about that defence of provocation! Such a defence should not be allowed - I truly thought we were past the era of victim blaming but it seems not.
Yeah and Power won't comment until sentencing.What a bunch of chicken-shit's you've all become!
For those that are prepared to talk about it go to www.radiolive.co.nz
audio on demand
15.15-30pm
wednesday
AND JOHNO AND DA WANNA GET SOME FLASH SMOKES FOR ME MUM AND WHERE WAS THE BITCH WHEN I WOS OUT TAGGING.KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK AND GO BACK TO WORK AT THE ROCK 3-7PM MATE.
Great balls of fire!!
I thought the consideration of sane-and-sadistic might have been advanced by the prosecution!!
Totally unconscionable as a response to being provoked - anyway - it was indefensible.
I hope the prisons general population get to know this sadistic and remorseless megalomaniac up close and personal, because the sadist revels in inflicting pain, but can't handle receiving it -
unholy-hypocrisy...bye`bye butcher....
anons right about the lawyers. Yes everyone needs a defense, and yes the lawyers have to use the full parameters of the law but there is no way that the lawyer should go out to destroy the reputation of a victim, especially when that victim has no one defending them. No one. The lawyer always has the choice and when they choose to do what was done here then it reminds me of the nuremburg defense. "Its my job... someone had to do it... following the law... " There is such a thing as moral fibre and to say that you are just doing your job, and that job is to destroy, sully the reputation of a young vibrant woman and also the poor woman's mother's testamony by saying she was too traumatised to recollect the last dying words of her daughter is beyond disgusting, it is vile, and "it's my job" is no defense in my book. lawyers we know why you do it - Truth? justice? honesty? respect? Don't make me laugh try money, fame, ego.
TV3 were shooting in court coverage today. The footage was pooled to all the other channels.
Weatherston has been in protection since his arrest. He has never been with the general prison muster.
He will remain in protection and in solitary for quite a while yet.
People oversell the prison rape situation. A good friend of mine is a Detective Sergeant in the local Police, and he maintains it is largely urban myth - one which they are happy to promote - as it keeps people fearful of prison and doing crime. Not the crim's as such - but your usual run of the mill average person. Classic SysOp on their part.
As I understand it, Ablet-Kerr wasn't assigned this case, she fought to get it. She certainly orchestrated the systematic character asassination of Sophie Elliot, while her grieving family sat there powerless to defend their murdered daughter.
If this is true, she is well worthy of our scorn.
For a woman and a mother to CHOOSE to defend this bastard defies belief.
A rehabilitated Psychopath? = oxymoron.
For me, the quote of the trial was CW's : It's Mills and Boon, man."
What do you think about his parents comments in the Herald today?
Don't worry you didn't miss anything on the news. He didn't show any emotion when the verdict was read out, he was like a statue. I watched him for 5 days on the stand and I've never seen anything like it - a disgusting human being in every way. He deserves whatever's coming to him.
Post a Comment
<< Home