Thread: Discharge Without Conviction

Originally Posted by Tommy

People have been killed by similar airguns in NZ in recent times, it could well have killed the victim. The fact that it didn't, there was premeditation, and he used a potentially deadly weapon against a person because he didn't like what came out of the victim's mouth (allegedly). Justice was not done here.

if the victim was blinded or dead, then the gravity of the office would be high or very high (maybe even a different offence), the defendant would be unlikely to meet the test and discharge would probably not given. Gravity of the offence is assessed by the actual offence, not what could have happened.

Premeditation is an aggravating factor in sentencing under Section 9(1) of sentencing act. But it is not an be-all-end-all factor. It is somewhat mitigated by the fact that he was provoked by the victim.

You may not think justice is not done, that is fine. I understand we all have different moral judgement and standard. But as far as applying the established law goes, there was no error that I could see.