It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Graffiti girl jailed for first offence

page: 17
12
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 04:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by RFBurns
Answer this tezza. Have you since day one of this issue written any letter or email or made a phone call or even threw a rock at the halls of justice about this matter?

You probably haven't worked out yet that I do things my way, to my agenda. Not to your's.

Halls of justice painted green, money talking (another quote from Metallica). If you haven't figured it out by now, I've got next to no respect for the legal and (in)justice systems.

I've written lots of letters to all ATS readers to show how she's been shafted by the Aussie legal system. That's MY way, RFBurns. You do it your way.




posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 04:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by atlasastro
but you and tezza have yet to explain or argue why these new laws are unjust,

We've been showing why this law is unjust for the past 15 pages. Maybe you should reread the thread?

Once again, this is not just about the girl. Its about the sentence, why it was needed, how it came through legislation. This means you need to address the issues I have raised about the need for the rights of other to be respected and protected. You only focus is that this girl recieved a harsh penalty. WHY IS THAT? I have continuosly expressed the needs of society, expressed through councils, buisnesses, citizens and the State Govt. that sought and legislated these laws. Your are yet to show why these are unreasonable. You will not argue that there is no need to increase penalties via sentencing by discussing the broader issues that effect our State to the cost of $200 million dollars. You will not explain why tougher sentences are irrational given our police force has recieved over 100 thousand call relating to Graffiti and vandalism in one year. You have not shown that councils and buisnesses, some councils spending 3 million per year, have been unfair in lobbying my State Govt. to introduce tougher sentences.

All you have is "She wrote on a wall, her sentence is tough, its her first offence etc", attacks on the court and accusations of madness and heavy handedness without addressing or considering the society and the system that sought and asked for these penalties. It goes beyond that, you know it. but all you want to do is stick to your reaction to an aspect of an issue, that broader issue being we have a serious graffiti and vadalism problem that has seen solutions evolve from that of passive intervention and education into the harsher penalties we now see that are just 2 months old and are seeing the light of day in sentencing. Your solution is not working, that is why society has lobbied policy makers to act. I agree, once again, these penalties are harsh and will ask one more time, what other option not previously used by the State should our law makers have taken?



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by atlasastro
Your solution is not working,

My solution wasn't tried. Where was she given the chance, by the court, to try my solution?

It's like a bad game of Monopoly for her. She landed on the wrong square and was sentenced straight to jail.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 05:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by RFBurns
This might surprise a few members here but I actually think the judgement itself is definately byond the scope of the offense.

Huh? It took you 15 pages to admit that we are right? Why bother arguing for that long?


Technically you are wrong becasue the law apparently calls for the sentance this young lady got. What I am saying simply, is that the sentance is harsh, and felt that from page 1, but my point of view is not based on my personal feeling for this young lady's unfortuante and harsh sentance, my opinion is based on the actual letter of the law. What I feel is irrelevant, as it is for you or anyone else..irrelevant. What is at issue here is the law and its judgement.



Originally posted by tezzajw


What I stand by firmly, is the fact that the law was broken by this individual.

That's not a problem we can all see that. She wrote her name on a wall. I'd call it an error of judgement more than breaking a law. Still, we can agree that she did do something that she shouldn't have.


Yep.



Originally posted by tezzajw


I did not write the law there in Sydney, I just believe that the law should be obeyed and enforced by the legal system.

The law has failed, it's excessive (you agree) but you still think it should be obeyed? Ok... I'll be chewing on that logic bone all night long.


Why is it excessive? Do you remember my post a few pages back where I told you about my visit to Sydney 6 years ago? I was there for about a year and half and I saw first hand the huge problem Sydney dealt with about the graffiti and defacing of public and private property. Except for driving on the left side of the roads and the driver's seat on the right side of the vehicles, seeing all that "writting on the wall" made me feel like I was in downtown LA. Thats how bad it was. Perhaps that is why the law is excessive, trying to deter the problem.

I see your point that the sentance is excessive, but its the law. It needs to be changed.



Originally posted by tezzajw


I can dislike the sentance all day long, but that doesnt change my position on the fact that the law was broken.

We all agree that she 'broke the law' and you also admit and agree that the sentence was excessive.

So where we differ is that because it's a written law you think it should be BLINDLY followed. Interesting. Pulling your strings, justice is done (Quote from Metallica). If I type what I really think I'll be warned, so I'll leave it at that.


Nope, you mis-interpreted what I was saying. The law isnt being blindly followed. The law is simply being enforced. Tho it is an excessive punishement for the offense, the law is as it is written, thus being enforced. Its really quite simple. As others have pointed out, the judge could have made a different decision. But for some reason...and that reason has really not been addressed in this 15 page discussion, that reason why the judge threw the book at this young lady is unknown.

Why do you think the judge threw the book at her? She might have a clean adult record, but what about a juvi record? And what if it isnt anything to do with her record at all, but the fact that the city of Sydney and the business owners who have dealt with paying for fixing up defaced property, that the judge decided that its time to put the foot down and make an example that any level of defacing property is not tolorated?

I think that if you were to step outside of your personal opinion for a few minutes, and put yourself into the position of the business owners and the judges, perhaps it might be understandable that after so many years of dealing with the revolving door policy of "tap tap the wrist dont do that again" that the system is tired of tapping wrists and putting the foot down.

Well other than trying to get the law changed for this kind of offense about the only other option would be for the lawyer of this young lady is to keep appeals going and have her out on bail. That is if the law there allows such a thing. If not, well then the best thing to do is to petition the courts to review this judgement and call for a lesser sentance.



Cheers!!!!



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 05:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by RFBurns
Answer this tezza. Have you since day one of this issue written any letter or email or made a phone call or even threw a rock at the halls of justice about this matter?

You probably haven't worked out yet that I do things my way, to my agenda. Not to your's.

Halls of justice painted green, money talking (another quote from Metallica). If you haven't figured it out by now, I've got next to no respect for the legal and (in)justice systems.

I've written lots of letters to all ATS readers to show how she's been shafted by the Aussie legal system. That's MY way, RFBurns. You do it your way.


Well other than sensing your obvious ruffled feathers over this one issue, which I begin to question "your way" considerably, I am not sure if I was this young lady I would want you any where near my case simply because of your attitude about the issue.

Writting letters to ATS members..ok if you think that will get the courts attention..be my guest. As the ad says on the brown bag in red letters.."Have It Your Way".

Not sure you will get a freshly cooked burger with that order tho.



Cheers!!!!



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 05:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Your solution is not working,

My solution wasn't tried. Where was she given the chance, by the court, to try my solution?

It's like a bad game of Monopoly for her. She landed on the wrong square and was sentenced straight to jail.

Sorry, but like I said, you need to realise that society as a whole is sick of this arguement and legislation is not there to cater for individuals. It is a law for society to follow. All of us. Judges then use their discretion in decideing how much of that law they enforce on individuals. if you would address the whole issue with this is mind you may start to see the point of view that the laws are there for others, not for the criminal. It is not the criminals right to ask for special treatment. She broke the Law. She was found guilty. She was sentenced. Harshly. WHY? not just because she wrote on the wall but because the state is done with excuses, done with patience, done tolerating and accpeting and assuming the best in offenders. The LAw is siding with society on this issue because in large, graffiti artis think that this is just a harmless bit of fun.
Here is the Judge, again, open your mind.

Mr McRae gave her a sobering wake-up call, saying graffiti cost the community millions in clean-up bills and taggers or graffiti vandals needed to be sent a clear message.

He said that unless the courts start treating it seriously people would continue thinking it was an innocent offence.


Anyway, there is no point going on is there. Keep up the pitch forks.
I'll leave you to your own private revolution.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 05:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by atlasastro

Once again, this is not just about the girl. Its about the sentence, why it was needed, how it came through legislation. This means you need to address the issues I have raised about the need for the rights of other to be respected and protected.


The government thinks that tackling the graffiti problem by tougher sentences will fix the problem, when in actual fact it has been proven time and time again that imprisonment in most cases will damage even destroy a person, through the action of confinement alone and through the actions of other, more violent inmates. The lawmakers keep making the same mistake again and again and refuse to see reason.


You will not argue that there is no need to increase penalties via sentencing by discussing the broader issues that effect our State to the cost of $200 million dollars. You will not explain why tougher sentences are irrational given our police force has recieved over 100 thousand call relating to Graffiti and vandalism in one year. You have not shown that councils and buisnesses, some councils spending 3 million per year, have been unfair in lobbying my State Govt. to introduce tougher sentences.


The government refuses to acknowledge that there is a systemic problem in the community at large where kids and young adults are feeling the need, more and more as time passes, to damage, deface and cause trouble. Why is that? What is so different about today's kids as opposed to yesteryear when much of this sort of stuff did not happen. Could it be because of things like increased government control of our daily lives, constant lies from the mass media, little if not any public places available for kids and young adults to entertain themselves? And why do we not have these things? Because the government would rather spend the money upgrading their offices, giving away ridiculously large 'bonuses' and paying the mass media to paint them in a good light.


All you have is "She wrote on a wall, her sentence is tough, its her first offence etc", attacks on the court and accusations of madness and heavy handedness without addressing or considering the society and the system that sought and asked for these penalties.


We have, perhaps we were wrong in assuming people were intelligent enough to determine the meaning behind what we have been saying.


Your solution is not working, that is why society has lobbied policy makers to act.


I don't recall anyone I know ever lobbying the policy makers for these laws. I even recall reading that the Cafe owner disagreed with the harsh sentence. Did the Cafe owner get a say in these policy makers decisions? Nope. So who does get to lobby these people? The people with the biggest wallet


I agree, once again, these penalties are harsh and will ask one more time, what other option not previously used by the State should our law makers have taken?


Anything but harsher sentencing which I have already said has proven time and time again to increase the chance of re-offending, rather than deter.


I would like to take this WAY back to the beginning now and reaffirm the main point of this thread:

She was a first time offender.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by RFBurns
 


Again, you question my motives, as though they should make sense to you. There's no point for you to try and justify why I am here or why I type what I type. Your incorrect speculation will deflect from the issue raised in this thread.

A teenage girl wrote her name on a wall with a texta and she was sentenced to three months jail. That's the issue. Not why I am here or who I should be contacting.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by atlasastro
Sorry, but like I said, you need to realise that society as a whole is sick of this arguement and legislation is not there to cater for individuals.

That's a quote worth framing in Gold.

Public Announcement:
People of the free world, as long as you are part of a society, you WILL NOT be recognised as an individual. You will conform to society. You will not deviate from society. You will do what society tells you to do. You will obey the will of society. Society is a self-sustaining entity that does not recognise individuals.

Sorry, atlasastro but I'm an individual, you can't fool me! (Aussies might know who sung that line!!!)



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Again, you question my motives, as though they should make sense to you. There's no point for you to try and justify why I am here or why I type what I type. Your incorrect speculation will deflect from the issue raised in this thread.


You are taking great effort to get everyone to go along with your motive and point of view, yet also ignoring what others have been saying about alternative ideas that might help both you to achieve your agenda, but also to help this young lady.

It seems to me, and this is just an observation, that you want everyone to focus on how you feel about the issue, and not focus on the issue itself.
It is apparent in your replies all over this thread, and me bringing it up is not diverting from the topic, you are making it a part of the topic, thus leaves it open for debate.



Originally posted by tezzajw
A teenage girl wrote her name on a wall with a texta and she was sentenced to three months jail. That's the issue. Not why I am here or who I should be contacting.


Yes we know this already. And some here have told you more than once, that this young lady will most likely not even serve 1 month at most. Especially if enough people petition to the courts to ease off on the sentance, and even more specifically, if this young lady's lawyer petitions the courts for the same.

If you want to focus on this one young lady thats fine. But I will bet you anything right here and now, that she is not the only one who has been injusticed by the laws. What about them? What about their unfair sentances that fits right into the same catagory as this young lady's case?

Let me tell you what I see here. I see someone who is taking this WAY to personal and lashing out at others here in the discussion who do not agree with you, and we are simply trying to tell you that we agree with you to a point. We agree that the sentance is harsh, too much, as you feel that it is. But I know that I dont agree with your motives or your method of how to go about in actually helping this young lady.

Who should you contact? Man if you havent figured that out yet, you need to take a long break from this issue, turn off the pc and go outside and get some air!

Why not contact the young lady's attourney? Let him/her know how you feel. All those ATS members you wrote letters to...get them to sign a petition and send it to you so you can send it to the attourney and the courts.

Doesnt that sound like a doable thing that could help this young lady??


But as you said...do it your way.




Cheers!!!!

[edit on 3-2-2009 by RFBurns]



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 05:31 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by atlasastro
Here is the Judge, again, open your mind.

Mr McRae gave her a sobering wake-up call, saying graffiti cost the community millions in clean-up bills and taggers or graffiti vandals needed to be sent a clear message.

He said that unless the courts start treating it seriously people would continue thinking it was an innocent offence.


Yep, and that was my point as well, tho I hammered it home with a more.. ahem.. "serious" penalty


But I agree with that excerpt -- such "petty" crimes do cost the community millions of $/£/etc and a strong message needed to be made.

I don't have a problem with it because a) I don't commit crimes and am wholly sin-free and b) I don't see why my extrenuous taxes must pay for the delinquency of others. If those that commit what society has deemed as a crime, then they should pay the price. For those that feel it was too harsh and that some other form of rehabilitation is needed (i.e., hugs and love) then I'd ask those people to pay up for the removal of the vandalism. Done.

[on a side note : Yes, I am in a slight grey-area when it comes to the usage of certain substances and crime, etc. I admit that. However I have said that so long as the actions of the individual are not by means an infringment upon the life and well being of another, then I don't really have a problem] with it.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 06:06 AM
link   
So by this standard "stan" and "bones" would b locked up for life.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by atlasastro
Sorry, but like I said, you need to realise that society as a whole is sick of this arguement and legislation is not there to cater for individuals.

That's a quote worth framing in Gold.

Public Announcement:
People of the free world, as long as you are part of a society, you WILL NOT be recognised as an individual.
Did i say that you will not be an individual. I said laws are not legislated to cater for just YOU, or I, or a girl that just wrote her name on the wall. For individuals. They are Laws. Laws for us all. LOL. look out Terra, they be a comin for ya, them there Individuals police.

You will conform to society.
I obey the law. I guess you do, unless you are in Jail. You do as society tells you.

You will not deviate from society.
What is deviating any way, posting on ATS,ohhhh, you extreme Individual. You obey the laws, other wise you get in trouble, you do not deviate, you do as society tells you.

You will do what society tells you to do.
And you don't Terra?, you listen when society says you need to wear clothes, you drive on the correct side of the road, you pay taxes, you obey the law. You pay your bills, You use the health system, you bank your money. You read papers, you watch TV.


You will obey the will of society.
Yes. the Law. The Laws say we are free to behaviour in any manner that does not break these laws.

Society is a self-sustaining entity that does not recognise individuals.
Society, as a collective of individuals with common goals and interests, could not exist without Indviduals. It recognises that not all Individuals will act in the best interests of other individuals. That is why we have Laws.
Feel free to leave. No one is keeping you here Terra.




[edit on 3-2-2009 by atlasastro]



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by atlasastro
 



LOL. look out Terra

And you don't Terra?

No one is keeping you here Terra.


You just can't give that a rest can you? Since when did ridiculing someone's username become allowable and standard practice on ATS?


Did i say that you will not be an individual. I said laws are not legislated to cater for just YOU, or I, or a girl that just wrote her name on the wall. For individuals. They are Laws. Laws for us all.


And that is EXACTLY what is inherently wrong with the entire system. If the system was designed to review each individual case and base punishment on that, we would not be finding an 18 year old first offender being sent to jail for writing her name on a wall.


I obey the law. I guess you do, unless you are in Jail. You do as society tells you.


Obey only because if we don't we get treated like dirt then thrown in a jail cell to rot - regardless whether the law is right or not.


What is deviating any way, posting on ATS,ohhhh, you extreme Individual. You obey the laws, other wise you get in trouble, you do not deviate, you do as society tells you.


Unwillingly, because we are given no other choice.


you listen when society says you need to wear clothes, you drive on the correct side of the road, you pay taxes, you obey the law. You pay your bills, You use the health system, you bank your money. You read papers, you watch TV.


I wear clothes so I don't blind people with my ugly skinny body. Also to keep warm. I drive on the correct side of the road because if I do not, I die. I pay taxes because I have no choice, if I do not I am put in jail. I'm not sure what you mean about the rest of the points, they do not seem to make sense in context.


Yes. the Law. The Laws say we are free to behaviour in any manner that does not break these laws.


Again, unwillingly because I am forced to or go to jail. Jail is another thing I did not ask to be made into law either.


Society, as a collective of individuals with common goals and interests, could not exist without Indviduals. It recognises that not all Individuals will act in the best interests of other individuals. That is why we have Laws.


And these laws should be for the people, by the people - and yet the only people who have a say in our laws are the one's with the fattest wallet.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 
Women are always punished disproportionately to men. It is a good way to control and intimidate the female population.

WE had an article in the Uk whinging about a rise in female all girl gang crimes in the UK. What they failed to point out was that the majority of these girls were into silly petty crime and immeadiately charged for these crimes and punished wheras boys would get away with them.

If you are a woman and shoplift in the UK you will usually go to Jail.

If you are a man, you will be let of with a caution, which also now applys in the Uk to men who commit sex crimes, and violent crimes. The prisons are full of men.....so just let them go. However, women......is another story all together!!



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by LeTan

My step sister on the other hand, got put into juvenile hall for stealing some clothing at MACYS. Yep, she's in federal prison now for identity theft. Maybe if someone showed her some compassion, she would have ended up like me and turned a new cheek.

[edit on 2-2-2009 by LeTan]


And there's where we disagree. My brother in law has been arrested three times...maybe it's four, now. The first time was before he was of legal age. The judge took one look at his innocent face and let him off. Since then, my brother in law (who is of age now) has grown even worse. He's never paid for any of the mistakes that he's done. He's stolen the neighbors car, drove while intoxicated and stole a friend's car drove drunk and crashed into a tree. Granted, compared to the girl's tagging, it's more severe, but he's never been punished. Everytime he stands in front of a judge, he acts like he's sorry, hell, he probably is...because he got caught. Even now, he's back to the same stuff. He's drinking now, who know's how long it'll be before he gets into a car and kills someone. The man is a joke. Every judge that's taken a look at him has been 'lenient' on him, and doesn't deserve it.

You, must have been one of the few who did learn their lesson. Did you maybe stop to condsider that while the store manager's reaction helped, that it was ultimately you who decided not to steal again?

[edit on 3-2-2009 by LysCat]



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by noonebutme
I don't have a problem with it because a) I don't commit crimes and am wholly sin-free and b) I don't see why my extrenuous taxes must pay for the delinquency of others. If those that commit what society has deemed as a crime, then they should pay the price. For those that feel it was too harsh and that some other form of rehabilitation is needed (i.e., hugs and love) then I'd ask those people to pay up for the removal of the vandalism. Done.


a) that's either sarcasm or a lie, no?
b) your taxes ARE paying for the states inappropriate and faulty solution to this 'delinquency' issue. 3 months jail time - 40 grand. Cost to remove grafitti - a bottle of soap and a rag, less than 2 bucks.

I think you have also missed where EVERYONE who has disagreed with your assessment of the appropriatness of the jail term suggests she 'remove the vandalism' AND 'pay up'

Man you got it back to front across the board!

[edit on 3/2/09 by RogerT]

[edit on 3/2/09 by RogerT]



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 11:59 AM
link   
This girl is practically a terrorist.

I think she should be sent to Guantanamo in order to protect society.

People like this ruin it for all of us.

I seriously don't think a life sentence is out of order here - especially given the circumstances of this case.

Despicable, Really.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Snappahead
 


Have you taken a look at the graffiti inside of the great pyramid? Don't delude yourself into believing this is a symptom exhibited only by modern youth




top topics



 
12
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join