Isn't it amazing the difference a shave, a haircut and a suit and tie can make? Meet (from left) Daryl Lee Fraser and Sean Ian Te Hira Selby.You'd think that butter wouldn't melt in their mouths, but you'd be wrong. We doubt that either of these two fine, upstanding gentlemen is looking quite so dapper just at the moment - Stuff reports:
After three trials, three appeals and an attempted escape to Australia, the identity of two teen killers can now be revealed.
A Court of Appeal decision released yesterday lifted name suppression on the men convicted of killing Darryl Graydon in Auckland two and a half years ago - Daryl Lee Fraser and Sean Ian Te Hira Selby.
In doing so the Court also lifted the veil on a previously hidden case in which Fraser stabbed another man in the neck just months before Graydon's killing.
In December 2007 Fraser and Selby, both aged 18, were walking home from a birthday party in Howick when they got into an argument with a group of 24-year-olds standing outside another party.
One of them, Mr Graydon, punched Fraser, who ran home with Selby, got three knives, and returned.
The pair found Graydon and a mate and taunted them by yelling "knifey, knifey" before chasing them. Graydon bled to death in the back of an ambulance having been stabbed five times - twice in the back as he tried to flee.
Fraser and Selby are nothing more than low-life street punks in our humble opinion. The community is a safer place for them being behind bars. And one wonders what was so special about this case that both convicted and imprisoned men were given name suppression for so long - read on:
Because of the appeals and a re-trial, their names were suppressed, but yesterday the Court dismissed their appeals, confirmed their convictions and ended name suppression.
In doing so, they also allowed the reporting of another case Fraser was involved in.
For the first time it can be revealed that just months before his part in the killing of Darryl Graydon, Fraser had attacked another group of youths on a bus with a broken bottle.
We can only surmise that Fraser and Selby had rich parents who could afford to engage a prominent lawyer to represent them, and could afford to dress them in fine suits and silk ties. Recent cases have shown over and over again that the well-to-do get name suppression whilst those lower down the social strata do not.
Fraser and Selby are killers; there is nothing more that can be said of them. The Court of Appeal has done all of us a favour by overturning the decision to suppress their names. We rather perversely hope that someone wherever these killers are incarcerated sees the photographs, joins the dots, and that Messrs Fraser and Selby find out what it is like to be the hunted rather than the hunters. Rough justice perhaps, but it might just be the wake-up call that these two young men need.
15 comments:
Just had a look at the Ca decision. Can't be faulted. Neither can the outcome these scroats will face.
In general I agree with your comments.
But some general comments on assummptions you make, the two offenders both went to Pakauranga College, which ain't by any stretch of the imagination a school for the rich and famous. If their parents were "rich" they wouldn't have gone to that school.
The fact that each was looking at a career in the military supports that view.
I suspect reading the decisions that these cases were legal aid appeals which at best returns a couple of K to counsel.
Lastly I was actually surprised and impressed to see the offenders wearing suits and ties.
It makes a hell of a change as if you visit any court be it supreme, court of appeal, high court or district the public now generally wear whatever they threw on to get the paper in the morning and sometimes less. Dressing to respect the institution of the court went out the door many years ago (much to my disappointment) so as I say I was surprised and pleased to see they bothered to dress for the occasion.
My 2 cents
Appreciate your comments Alex. You wouldn't happen to know where to find the High Court decision ordering name suppression by any chance?
Those aren't wool suits or silk ties. Wool doesn't look like that and silk doesn't tie like that. And Shelby's shirt is too big. Their parents could be the New Rich - money, but no class, if that's a consolation.
You certainly have to be above average to become a Pilot Officer in the RAF. NZ Navy, by comparison, would be striclty best fit.
Interesting to read that the media they trot out the "must clamp down on carrying knives" after illustrating what was done with a broken bottle.
Be interesting to know just how these two became so dangerously aggressive by 18 years old, if indeed they did have wealthy parents of social standing, as you suggest.
I2 The best place to start looking for decisions is the Justice Department website were there is a section devoted to decisions of the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. But as the earlier decisions were suppressed it would be hard to know where to start looking unless you knew the name of the judge or the court file reference.
The Selby/Frazer Court of Appeal decision appears on the Courts Department website as a decision of public interest.
That decision gives an indication of the first instance decsion making process and who made the decisions.
Appreciate that Alex - there's more than a little bit of reading on that site! Here's the link for anyone else who is interested in matters judicial:
http://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/from/decisions/judgments.html
A few things that were not brought out in the court room, Fraser,s conviction for an incident where by there were two groups of young men? one group in fancy dress, one plained clothed.
the victim Van Stee claimed it was a man dressed as a lion with brown hair who struck him across the head with a bottle, all witness could not say they had seen Fraser hit Van Stee with a bottle, Van Stee could not say he had seen Fraser hit him either he could only identify the brown haired lion.
Fraser was also dressed as a lion he has red hair. Fraser gave his DNA for testing on the bottles found on the bus with blood on them, there was no DNA of Fraser's but there was DNA of others,
Selby was on this bus dressed as alladin he refused to give his DNA. There was also no blood on Fraser,s lion suit however the victims group insisted there was blood all over the back of the bus;So therefore if Fraser had been the perpertator he would have had blood on him, there was no one speke.
now listen;
the police officer Clapp, returned the lion suit belonging to the brown haired lion a week after the event? why ? there were two lions dressed exactly the same? Question which one?
the brown haired lion on being spoken too by police also had a blood stained t-shirt hidden inside his lion suit?
the police did not bring this forward as evidence and the t-shirt was never tested for DNA or found again for that matter?
the Officer Clapp then posted the statements given by the witnesses and victim, he had changed the statements from where it clearly stated brown haired lion, to ginger haired lion? why would he do that? when asked by the defence he stated ' it was a typo "
the Victim Vann Stee stated minutes after the incident that it was Alladin who was the main offender? Alladin was Sean Selby. the police never followed up this lead and selby never took his fancy dress outfit back to the costume shop? i wonder why?
Aladdin Selby also informed a school friend he had stabbed someone on the bus but not to tell anyone?
the police only finger printed the bottles found on the bus, no prints of Fraser were found, when asked by the defence why the bottles were not DNA tested by ESR Clapp replied ' it would have cost too much.
when asked by the defence why did you take the other lion costume back to the costume shop he replied' because it wasnt relavent to the case? it was clearly very relavent to the case.
Mr Fraser was a scape goat the officer made the shoe fit, his investigaton was one sided and biased, it was a sloppy investigation and a a result Fraser has paid a heavy price for an innocent man,this man is innocent. when you are sat as the accused you are deemed to be guilty by the jury, proving your innocense is a very difficult task when the police have done every thing in their power to set you up? or do you think this doesnt happen, wake up and smell the coffee.
im guessing your some little first year law grads who do not know what you are talking about and for the record Frasers suit was wool and his tie was silk, and he is a great guy, he was just set up on both counts and it will be proven in time
A few things that were not brought out in the court room, Fraser,s conviction for an incident where by there were two groups of young men? one group in fancy dress, one plained clothed.
the victim Van Stee claimed it was a man dressed as a lion with brown hair who struck him across the head with a bottle, all witness could not say they had seen Fraser hit Van Stee with a bottle, Van Stee could not say he had seen Fraser hit him either he could only identify the brown haired lion.
Fraser was also dressed as a lion he has red hair. Fraser gave his DNA for testing on the bottles found on the bus with blood on them, there was no DNA of Fraser's but there was DNA of others,
Selby was on this bus dressed as alladin he refused to give his DNA. There was also no blood on Fraser,s lion suit however the victims group insisted there was blood all over the back of the bus;So therefore if Fraser had been the perpertator he would have had blood on him, there was no one speke.
now listen;
the police officer Clapp, returned the lion suit belonging to the brown haired lion a week after the event? why ? there were two lions dressed exactly the same? Question which one?
the brown haired lion on being spoken too by police also had a blood stained t-shirt hidden inside his lion suit?
the police did not bring this forward as evidence and the t-shirt was never tested for DNA or found again for that matter?
the Officer Clapp then posted the statements given by the witnesses and victim, he had changed the statements from where it clearly stated brown haired lion, to ginger haired lion? why would he do that? when asked by the defence he stated ' it was a typo "
the Victim Vann Stee stated minutes after the incident that it was Alladin who was the main offender? Alladin was Sean Selby. the police never followed up this lead and selby never took his fancy dress outfit back to the costume shop? i wonder why?
Aladdin Selby also informed a school friend he had stabbed someone on the bus but not to tell anyone?
the police only finger printed the bottles found on the bus, no prints of Fraser were found, when asked by the defence why the bottles were not DNA tested by ESR Clapp replied ' it would have cost too much.
when asked by the defence why did you take the other lion costume back to the costume shop he replied' because it wasnt relavent to the case? it was clearly very relavent to the case.
Mr Fraser was a scape goat the officer made the shoe fit, his investigaton was one sided and biased, it was a sloppy investigation and a a result Fraser has paid a heavy price for an innocent man,this man is innocent. when you are sat as the accused you are deemed to be guilty by the jury, proving your innocense is a very difficult task when the police have done every thing in their power to set you up? or do you think this doesnt happen, wake up and smell the coffee.
im guessing your some little first year law grads who do not know what you are talking about and for the record Frasers suit was wool and his tie was silk, and he is a great guy, he was just set up on both counts and it will be proven in time
A few things that were not brought out in the court room, Fraser,s conviction for an incident where by there were two groups of young men? one group in fancy dress, one plained clothed.
the victim Van Stee claimed it was a man dressed as a lion with brown hair who struck him across the head with a bottle, all witness could not say they had seen Fraser hit Van Stee with a bottle, Van Stee could not say he had seen Fraser hit him either he could only identify the brown haired lion.
Fraser was also dressed as a lion he has red hair. Fraser gave his DNA for testing on the bottles found on the bus with blood on them, there was no DNA of Fraser's but there was DNA of others,
Selby was on this bus dressed as alladin he refused to give his DNA. There was also no blood on Fraser,s lion suit however the victims group insisted there was blood all over the back of the bus;So therefore if Fraser had been the perpertator he would have had blood on him, there was no one speke.
now listen;
the police officer Clapp, returned the lion suit belonging to the brown haired lion a week after the event? why ? there were two lions dressed exactly the same? Question which one?
the brown haired lion on being spoken too by police also had a blood stained t-shirt hidden inside his lion suit?
the police did not bring this forward as evidence and the t-shirt was never tested for DNA or found again for that matter?
the Officer Clapp then posted the statements given by the witnesses and victim, he had changed the statements from where it clearly stated brown haired lion, to ginger haired lion? why would he do that? when asked by the defence he stated ' it was a typo "
the Victim Vann Stee stated minutes after the incident that it was Alladin who was the main offender? Alladin was Sean Selby. the police never followed up this lead and selby never took his fancy dress outfit back to the costume shop? i wonder why?
Aladdin Selby also informed a school friend he had stabbed someone on the bus but not to tell anyone?
the police only finger printed the bottles found on the bus, no prints of Fraser were found, when asked by the defence why the bottles were not DNA tested by ESR Clapp replied ' it would have cost too much.
when asked by the defence why did you take the other lion costume back to the costume shop he replied' because it wasnt relavent to the case? it was clearly very relavent to the case.
Mr Fraser was a scape goat the officer made the shoe fit, his investigaton was one sided and biased, it was a sloppy investigation and a a result Fraser has paid a heavy price for an innocent man,this man is innocent. when you are sat as the accused you are deemed to be guilty by the jury, proving your innocense is a very difficult task when the police have done every thing in their power to set you up? or do you think this doesnt happen, wake up and smell the coffee.
im guessing your some little first year law grads who do not know what you are talking about and for the record Frasers suit was wool and his tie was silk, and he is a great guy, he was just set up on both counts and it will be proven in time
A few things that were not brought out in the court room, Fraser,s conviction for an incident where by there were two groups of young men? one group in fancy dress, one plained clothed.
the victim Van Stee claimed it was a man dressed as a lion with brown hair who struck him across the head with a bottle, all witness could not say they had seen Fraser hit Van Stee with a bottle, Van Stee could not say he had seen Fraser hit him either he could only identify the brown haired lion.
Fraser was also dressed as a lion he has red hair. Fraser gave his DNA for testing on the bottles found on the bus with blood on them, there was no DNA of Fraser's but there was DNA of others,
Selby was on this bus dressed as alladin he refused to give his DNA. There was also no blood on Fraser,s lion suit however the victims group insisted there was blood all over the back of the bus;So therefore if Fraser had been the perpertator he would have had blood on him, there was no one speke.
now listen;
the police officer Clapp, returned the lion suit belonging to the brown haired lion a week after the event? why ? there were two lions dressed exactly the same? Question which one?
the brown haired lion on being spoken too by police also had a blood stained t-shirt hidden inside his lion suit?
the police did not bring this forward as evidence and the t-shirt was never tested for DNA or found again for that matter?
the Officer Clapp then posted the statements given by the witnesses and victim, he had changed the statements from where it clearly stated brown haired lion, to ginger haired lion? why would he do that? when asked by the defence he stated ' it was a typo "
the Victim Vann Stee stated minutes after the incident that it was Alladin who was the main offender? Alladin was Sean Selby. the police never followed up this lead and selby never took his fancy dress outfit back to the costume shop? i wonder why?
Aladdin Selby also informed a school friend he had stabbed someone on the bus but not to tell anyone?
the police only finger printed the bottles found on the bus, no prints of Fraser were found, when asked by the defence why the bottles were not DNA tested by ESR Clapp replied ' it would have cost too much.
when asked by the defence why did you take the other lion costume back to the costume shop he replied' because it wasnt relavent to the case? it was clearly very relavent to the case.
Mr Fraser was a scape goat the officer made the shoe fit, his investigaton was one sided and biased, it was a sloppy investigation and a a result Fraser has paid a heavy price for an innocent man,this man is innocent. when you are sat as the accused you are deemed to be guilty by the jury, proving your innocense is a very difficult task when the police have done every thing in their power to set you up? or do you think this doesnt happen, wake up and smell the coffee.
im guessing your some little first year law grads who do not know what you are talking about and for the record Frasers suit was wool and his tie was silk, and he is a great guy, he was just set up on both counts and it will be proven in time
A few things that were not brought out in the court room, Fraser,s conviction for an incident where by there were two groups of young men? one group in fancy dress, one plained clothed.
the victim Van Stee claimed it was a man dressed as a lion with brown hair who struck him across the head with a bottle, all witness could not say they had seen Fraser hit Van Stee with a bottle, Van Stee could not say he had seen Fraser hit him either he could only identify the brown haired lion.
Fraser was also dressed as a lion he has red hair. Fraser gave his DNA for testing on the bottles found on the bus with blood on them, there was no DNA of Fraser's but there was DNA of others,
Selby was on this bus dressed as alladin he refused to give his DNA. There was also no blood on Fraser,s lion suit however the victims group insisted there was blood all over the back of the bus;So therefore if Fraser had been the perpertator he would have had blood on him, there was no one speke.
now listen;
the police officer Clapp, returned the lion suit belonging to the brown haired lion a week after the event? why ? there were two lions dressed exactly the same? Question which one?
the brown haired lion on being spoken too by police also had a blood stained t-shirt hidden inside his lion suit?
the police did not bring this forward as evidence and the t-shirt was never tested for DNA or found again for that matter?
the Officer Clapp then posted the statements given by the witnesses and victim, he had changed the statements from where it clearly stated brown haired lion, to ginger haired lion? why would he do that? when asked by the defence he stated ' it was a typo "
the Victim Vann Stee stated minutes after the incident that it was Alladin who was the main offender? Alladin was Sean Selby. the police never followed up this lead and selby never took his fancy dress outfit back to the costume shop? i wonder why?
Aladdin Selby also informed a school friend he had stabbed someone on the bus but not to tell anyone?
the police only finger printed the bottles found on the bus, no prints of Fraser were found, when asked by the defence why the bottles were not DNA tested by ESR Clapp replied ' it would have cost too much.
when asked by the defence why did you take the other lion costume back to the costume shop he replied' because it wasnt relavent to the case? it was clearly very relavent to the case.
Mr Fraser was a scape goat the officer made the shoe fit, his investigaton was one sided and biased, it was a sloppy investigation and a a result Fraser has paid a heavy price for an innocent man,this man is innocent. when you are sat as the accused you are deemed to be guilty by the jury, proving your innocense is a very difficult task when the police have done every thing in their power to set you up? or do you think this doesnt happen, wake up and smell the coffee.
im guessing your some little first year law grads who do not know what you are talking about and for the record Frasers suit was wool and his tie was silk, and he is a great guy, he was just set up on both counts and it will be proven in time
A few things that were not brought out in the court room, Fraser,s conviction for an incident where by there were two groups of young men? one group in fancy dress, one plained clothed.
the victim Van Stee claimed it was a man dressed as a lion with brown hair who struck him across the head with a bottle, all witness could not say they had seen Fraser hit Van Stee with a bottle, Van Stee could not say he had seen Fraser hit him either he could only identify the brown haired lion.
Fraser was also dressed as a lion he has red hair. Fraser gave his DNA for testing on the bottles found on the bus with blood on them, there was no DNA of Fraser's but there was DNA of others,
Selby was on this bus dressed as alladin he refused to give his DNA. There was also no blood on Fraser,s lion suit however the victims group insisted there was blood all over the back of the bus;So therefore if Fraser had been the perpertator he would have had blood on him, there was no one speke.
now listen;
the police officer Clapp, returned the lion suit belonging to the brown haired lion a week after the event? why ? there were two lions dressed exactly the same? Question which one?
the brown haired lion on being spoken too by police also had a blood stained t-shirt hidden inside his lion suit?
the police did not bring this forward as evidence and the t-shirt was never tested for DNA or found again for that matter?
the Officer Clapp then posted the statements given by the witnesses and victim, he had changed the statements from where it clearly stated brown haired lion, to ginger haired lion? why would he do that? when asked by the defence he stated ' it was a typo "
the Victim Vann Stee stated minutes after the incident that it was Alladin who was the main offender? Alladin was Sean Selby. the police never followed up this lead and selby never took his fancy dress outfit back to the costume shop? i wonder why?
Aladdin Selby also informed a school friend he had stabbed someone on the bus but not to tell anyone?
the police only finger printed the bottles found on the bus, no prints of Fraser were found, when asked by the defence why the bottles were not DNA tested by ESR Clapp replied ' it would have cost too much.
when asked by the defence why did you take the other lion costume back to the costume shop he replied' because it wasnt relavent to the case? it was clearly very relavent to the case.
Mr Fraser was a scape goat the officer made the shoe fit, his investigaton was one sided and biased, it was a sloppy investigation and a a result Fraser has paid a heavy price for an innocent man,this man is innocent. when you are sat as the accused you are deemed to be guilty by the jury, proving your innocense is a very difficult task when the police have done every thing in their power to set you up? or do you think this doesnt happen, wake up and smell the coffee.
im guessing your some little first year law grads who do not know what you are talking about and for the record Frasers suit was wool and his tie was silk, and he is a great guy, he was just set up on both counts and it will be proven in time
A few things that were not brought out in the court room, Fraser,s conviction for an incident where by there were two groups of young men? one group in fancy dress, one plained clothed.
the victim Van Stee claimed it was a man dressed as a lion with brown hair who struck him across the head with a bottle, all witness could not say they had seen Fraser hit Van Stee with a bottle, Van Stee could not say he had seen Fraser hit him either he could only identify the brown haired lion.
Fraser was also dressed as a lion he has red hair. Fraser gave his DNA for testing on the bottles found on the bus with blood on them, there was no DNA of Fraser's but there was DNA of others,
Selby was on this bus dressed as alladin he refused to give his DNA. There was also no blood on Fraser,s lion suit however the victims group insisted there was blood all over the back of the bus;So therefore if Fraser had been the perpertator he would have had blood on him, there was no one speke.
now listen;
the police officer Clapp, returned the lion suit belonging to the brown haired lion a week after the event? why ? there were two lions dressed exactly the same? Question which one?
the brown haired lion on being spoken too by police also had a blood stained t-shirt hidden inside his lion suit?
the police did not bring this forward as evidence and the t-shirt was never tested for DNA or found again for that matter?
the Officer Clapp then posted the statements given by the witnesses and victim, he had changed the statements from where it clearly stated brown haired lion, to ginger haired lion? why would he do that? when asked by the defence he stated ' it was a typo "
the Victim Vann Stee stated minutes after the incident that it was Alladin who was the main offender? Alladin was Sean Selby. the police never followed up this lead and selby never took his fancy dress outfit back to the costume shop? i wonder why?
Aladdin Selby also informed a school friend he had stabbed someone on the bus but not to tell anyone?
the police only finger printed the bottles found on the bus, no prints of Fraser were found, when asked by the defence why the bottles were not DNA tested by ESR Clapp replied ' it would have cost too much.
when asked by the defence why did you take the other lion costume back to the costume shop he replied' because it wasnt relavent to the case? it was clearly very relavent to the case.
Mr Fraser was a scape goat the officer made the shoe fit, his investigaton was one sided and biased, it was a sloppy investigation and a a result Fraser has paid a heavy price for an innocent man,this man is innocent. when you are sat as the accused you are deemed to be guilty by the jury, proving your innocense is a very difficult task when the police have done every thing in their power to set you up? or do you think this doesnt happen, wake up and smell the coffee.
im guessing your some little first year law grads who do not know what you are talking about and for the record Frasers suit was wool and his tie was silk, and he is a great guy, he was just set up on both counts and it will be proven in time
The problem with the media is that what they report is all about sensationalism as opposed to truth.
Daryl Fraser was set up by the police and had 2 judges who completely misled the jury. In the bus incident Daryl was convicted of something he without a doubt did not do (nor is there any evidence apart from lies from police and changed witness statements). He did not pick up a bottle nor a knife at any stage in either of these incidents,yet the media would have have you belive this is not true. Where he screwed up was picking the absolute wrong friends - Selby who then tried to implicate him in the murder to lessen his charge and the person who did the bottling on the bus who has refused to speak up and has let Daryl take the blame.
Our justice system and our media reporting system is disgraceful and hopefully there is someone out there who will take the time to investigage this and they will be astounded at how this miscarrage of justice has happened.
As for Selby - he deserves to rot in jail!
Somebody, please look further into this because dear god, Daryl and his family have been through hell and back and actually they do not deserve this.
This particular piece is chauvinistic, and dependant heavily on misconstrued information dealt by the media. The author obviously has no ability to think and speak objectively and ignores fundamental information that relates to the case at hand. Being able to ‘impress’ the public with your somewhat flawed impression of news is severely detrimental for important cases such as the Fraser case in high court, and spinning inaccurate information without having concrete evidence behind it is cowardly, unprofessional but most of all incredibly idiotic.
The way with which you begin to address the class of the families is incredibly disrespectful to say the least!! Here is one family in particular (Fraser) who are dealing with an incident that he had NO part of but is instead framed as a scapegoat so that the victims family have someone to blame. For you to sit at your computer and judge their level of class by assessing the school they went to must be upsetting for a family who already have to deal with so much.
Some of the facts you should try and wrap you little mind around...
1. There was NO DNA of Daryl Fraser on the bottle that allegedly struck Van Stee causing the injury.
2. Fraser willingly gave his DNA to be tested…Selby refused
3. If there was as much blood flowing from Van Stee tell me why there was absolutely NO blood on the costume of Fraser …
4. Selby never took the costume back to the costume shop he hired it from…said he lost it…
This entire disaster is just a cover for Clapp exposing the inadequate nature with which he covered the case. Unfortunately he has now unfairly imprisoned a promising young man, ruining not only his life but Fraser's family's in the process. Makes you question the validity of the police force controlling our nation doesn’t it.
If you are unaware of the media and its tendency to fabricate and intensify information in any way to get the story they need, then you are seriously misguided.
Know the inside and outside of a case before you decide to write about it in a public domain, because honestly it is making you look like a damned fool.
I hope darly got lots of hugs from the Mongrel Mobsters on "Hug A Ginga Day" last year.
Post a Comment