Just making people laugh

NZ Herald

Looks like “The Comedian” who got of any real punishment for his crime because he “makes people laugh” is having his sentencing reviewed:

A judge who allowed a comedian to walk free from an indecent assault charge against his 4-year-old daughter made an error of law, the High Court at Auckland has been told.

The comedian – whose name is suppressed to protect the identity of his daughter – was discharged without conviction at the Auckland District Court last September for performing an indecent act on his daughter.

But the Crown has sought a judicial review in the High Court.

If Justice Murray Gilbert finds there has been an error, he could send the case back to the Auckland District Court for the comedian to be sentenced.

Judges can discharge defendants without conviction if they believe that the consequences of a conviction would outweigh the gravity of the crime.

Crown lawyer Mark Lillico told the court today that the district court judge failed to recognise the seriousness of the offending, given the man had admitted to indecently assaulting his daughter.

Mr Lillico said although there were mitigating factors for the comedian, he was a father who had offended against his daughter, it was sexual offending and there was a large disparity in ages.

“There were serious consequences but it was serious offending.”

He said the judge also took into account that the comedian was intoxicated when she said he had a “low consciousness of action”.

“By doing so it seems to have watered down the level of intent required in a criminal offence.”

He said the comedian had pleaded guilty to indecently assaulting his daughter and that carries an admission of intent.

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Brendon

    “He said the comedian had pleaded guilty to indecently assaulting his daughter and that carries an admission of intent.”
    woah, ok I’m not on this guys side or anything but since when does a guilty plea imply intent?

    • Random66

      When he was drunk he did what he intended to do, end of story.  In the light of day and sober he can say that was not his intention, but his actions say otherwise.  I’m with Mr Lillico on this one. Whether he is right on a point of law  I’m not sure, but as a parent I think the bastard should have paid.

      • Brendon

        as a parent also i agree totally that he needs to pay for his actions.

        im just not sold on the admission of guilt equals intent line.  that is not a logical statement to me.  this is saying that whenever anybody admits to doing anything they are also admitting that they fully intended doing it, that it was a premeditated act.  this can not be true no matter how you spin it.

        saying that when someone is drunk their real intentions come to light is a totally different statement.

      • Random66

        Brendon, I just re-read the above article and it would seem that ‘the level of intent’ is what this thing hinges on.  The female judge (wrongly in my view) decided that because ‘B’ was intoxicated his level of conciousness was so low as to not know what he was doing so he couldn’t possible have intended doing whatever he did wrong (bullshit). For this guy to get what is coming to him the crown needs to prove criminal intent so that is why Lillico worded his sentence the way he did.  Sorry abit of a waffle there, clearly I have time on my hands.

      •  I’ve been pissed a few times, but I don’t think I’ve ever been so pissed that I couldn’t tell the difference between a grown woman and a pre-school girl.

  • Busman

    good job i hope they nail his arse this time , lets hope the judge is not a soft cock

  • tspoon

    Also,what legal difference does his intent make in such a case? As I understand it he was blind drunk, and maybe claims he didn’t know what he was doing. Which isn’t a valid defence either as far as I know.
     The most worrying aspect of the decision the comedian benefitted from, was another clear indication of the various tiers of our justice system, which closely mirror the basic structure of almost all human societies, i.e high status males, followed closely by all females, then lastly by lower status males (most males). Individuals from the first two groups are regular recipients of leniency from the judiciary, who often contort themselves looking for new ways to show extra leniency in a way which will not be transferable to the remaining group of people mentioned.

  • Adybombs

    The judge also made an error in fact because he just isn’t funny, “makes people laugh”, makes people cringe more like it.

  • Mark

    If this guy ever goes to prison he will be eaten to a pulp. They don’t muck around in there.

  • jay cee

    the defense of intent (mens rea)is valid only when put in context of the crime committed. picking up speed going down hill and being pinged for speeding is an example. one could argue that you did not speed intentionally only that you didn’t keep your eye on the speedo. in this or any other sexual offending that arguement becomes moot because to commit a sex act ,for a man,requires a fair amount of concious effort.

  • Apolonia

    Maybe the Judge was trying to be a comedian

  • Tristanb

    Will the initial judge get punished for the stupid mistake?

    • Gazzaw

      Who by? His legal mates?

      • P1LL

         The Judge is a woman ! read the facts before posting.

        At the comedian’s sentencing District Court Judge Philippa Cunningham
        said the reasons for his discharge without conviction included that he
        “makes people laugh”.

        She also said he had stopped drinking, paid a high price in his personal and work life, and had shown remorse.

        “He’s a talented New Zealander. He makes people laugh.

        “Laughter is an incredible medicine and we all need lots of it,” Judge Cunningham said.”

        I hope he gets a prison term for the heinous crime he committed & he is not funny ,
        Ben is way funnier than Bill ever was

      • Gazzaw

        I stand corrected P1LL

        Who by? Her legal mates?

  • dad4justice

    Justice in New Zealand is directed by bent and twisted judges.
    Who are these judicial creeps accountable to when they get it wrong?
    The public deserve better from these overpaid lemons!

    • Gazzaw

      As I understand it the judges get reviewed periodically and it counts against them if they dish out severe sentences that the crims inevitably appeal. F**ked if I know Dad, the system seems all arse about face to me. It’s about time the public started to get the sort of sentencing that they expect and if our legal system needs rejigging to achieve that then sobeit. Every other secor in society seems to have made major adjustments, maybe it’s time for the legal old boy network to face up to the 21st century as well.

      • AngryTory

        Hell Yeah! And for paedos like this guy, 9mm to the back of the head & all done & dusted.

        Paedos, Greenies, Unions, all scum, all deserve just the same.

  • Jackhenderson00

    he could be telling the truth. but… ultimately you have to be responsible for your actions when you’re drunk regardless.

41%