The sad case of The Comedian has hopefully been out to rest at last; Stuff reports:'
A comedian who sexually assaulted his four-year-old daughter has been convicted and sentenced to eight months home detention."It is clear this was grave offending," Judge Mark Perkins told the man at sentencing in the Auckland District Court today.
Judge Perkins has taken a far more realistic view if this case than his judicial counterpart Judge Philippa Cunningham took almost a year ago when she was far too lenient towards The Comedian.
He agreed to the prosecution's request for a sentence of home detention, but far more importantly he entered a conviction against The Comedian. Actions have consequences, and the drunken actions of The Comedian in December 2009 will have life-long consequences for him.
The Court was told that The Comedian had abstained from alcohol since this incident, and sought help; read on:
Judge Perkins said a probation report indicated the offending was one-off and there was no prospect of future harm to the child.The offender had dealt with his alcohol issues and both the Family Court and Child Youth and Family "harbour no continuing concerns".The man has shared custody of his children with his former wife and had a clear expression of remorse. "You are horrified at your own offending," the judge said.Much of the child's trauma at the time was related to the break-up of the family."Obviously one would hope the child would not remember the details," Judge Perkins said.He said he considered whether a jail term was necessary but given the informal agreement in an earlier court, he could only do that by vacating the man's earlier guilty plea."It is clear I should stand by the position now presented."He said there was no premeditation in the offence, there were expressions of remorse and steps had been taken to overcome alcohol abuse but he had to be convicted to deter others.
16 comments:
Damned good show - the conviction, that is. But it should have been accompanied by a couple of years in prison. I don't like the idea of him serving his "sentence" in the same house as his victim (if indeed the family is still together).
This guy was in a position of trust in relation to the toddler. That compounds seriously the already heinous nature of his crime. And I don't accept his drunkenness as a defence or as an excuse.
The family is not together anymore Siena. The Comedian has shared custody of his children, and from what I've heard today, there are no concerns that he will reoffend. That's good.
No concerns that he will reoffend. I've heard that about a few pedophiles and then they do turn up in the news again.
This offending was disgusting but i don't think i would consider the comedian a paedophile. This offence related to the offender's drug and alcohol issues which have hopefully been addressed - or will be via court ordered counselling during his sentence.
I do believe if those issues are addressed he would be highly unlikely to reoffend.
This sentence seems fair in my view. Home detention is no picnic and 8 months of it will not be fun for someone who is used to a social lifestyle - as this guy clearly is.
Well said Jacqueline
Personally my opinion is: "if you're breathing, you know if you're heaving. Your brain is never so knocked out by alcohol that you're unaware of moral no-go areas. However, if he's been dry it may conceivably come down to drug and alcohol issues.
I agree with you, Monique. "Your brain is never so knocked out by alcohol that you're unaware of moral no-go areas."
Can't believe this guy has "shared custody of his children". Does that include his defenceless victim? Very sad for the youngster.
John Banks - not very funny after all.
@ Siena - it does seem odd that he can have unsupervised access to a child that he abused, but I guess that reinforces the arguneb=nt that the offending arose out of his abuse of alcohol rather than any underlying sexual issues. I am sure that those with more expertise in these issues than you and I have looked long and hard at the likelihood of his reoffending, with the safety of his children being the most important consideration.
And just for clarification, his drunkenness was not an excuse for the offending IMHO. No-one should ever be so drunk that they cannot distinguish adult genitalia from those of a four year old.
Sorry, KS. I can't follow your line of reasoning. If he must have known (as you suggest) that it was a child - and I agree with you and Monique on that - what is all the defence camouflage about with regard to alcohol?
And if the alcohol influence is seen as some form of partial defence (it shouldn't be, but suppose that's the way it's treated), are we to simply accept that he has been "cured"? Either for life, or for the times that he's allowed to be with that poor wee mite whom he victimised?
It's all legal and social science nonsense to me. Why can't our society come to look to the protection and interests of victims first?
I am struggling with the "your brain is never so knocked out that you are unaware" thing..
Ummm...yes - your brain can be completely so far knocked out by alcohol that you have no idea what you are doing and/or have no recollection of it.
You are obviously not aware of the damage that alcohol can do.
Very naive comment.
Obviously it is no excuse for behaviour like this but it is entirely possible - in fact highlu likely given the fact that he now has joint custody of the child in question - that he was telling the truth when he stated that he thought he was performing the act on his partner.
As Inv2 said - professionals would have assessed this prior to giving him access to the child and i would say they would be more informed than a couple of blog commenters who appear to know nothing about the effects of alcohol and/or drugs on a person's brain.
Jacqueline, sad that your debating style has to become so personal. I'll leave you to your own categorical assertions and assumptions.
Meanwhile, my sympathies lie with a little girl who has been wronged by a person who has escaped appropriate punishment.
@ Siena - the welfare of the victims has always been my overriding concern in this case, which is why I have blogged on it a number of times. I use the plural of "victims", because The Comedian's partner, who witness the offending is as much a victim as their daughter.
Judge Perkins notes that he considered jail time, but he would have had to break an agreement between The Comedian's defence team and Judge Cunningham that once he had pleaded guilty, jail was off the table. Judge Perkins noted that The Comedian's guilty plea would have had to be vacated for that to occur. His hands were pretty much tied, so it is unfair to blame him.
On the other hand, Judge Philippa Cunningham got this completely wrong, and effectively got a telling-off from the High Court, the end result of which was yesterday's resentencing.
But at the end of the day, no-one poured piss down The Comedian's throat at TV3's Christmas party in 2009. No-one got him so drunk that he couldn't tell the difference between a four year old and an adult woman. If his career has been ruined, he has b=no-one to blame but himself.
Thanks, KS. Very sensible comments. I like especially the sentiments in your last paragraph, and admire the skill with which you have expressed them.
I was not aware of the earlier deal between Judge Cunningham and the defence, and how it had distorted subsequent events and judgments.
My main issues are:
1. The poor wee child should come first when considering how the cards fall. (That's the only reason why the defendant has name suppression - at least I hope it is.)
2. Any defence, or mitigation of guilt, that depends on use of alcohol (or other recreational drugs) is a complete crock - an abrogation of personal responsibility. I've done a few silly things in the past affected by seriously excessive alcohol, but I've accepted the consequences of my own actions.
sac burberry
sac chanel
chaussures nike
porte cles chanel
bracelet louis vuitton
chaussures puma
portefeuille louis vuitton
chaussures louis vuitton
tee-shirts louis vuitton
louis vuitton pas cher
sac juicy
sac louis vuitton 2012
louis vuitton soldes
chaussures jordan hommes
chaussures nike air max hommes
chaussures gucci femmes
chaussures christian louboutin femmes
Post a Comment