[Confirmed] Russell Packer -->Not the Broncos

[broncos4life]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

Not out of context at all, you said it. If you aren't standing by your statement then say that.

I am standing by my fucking statement. No one knows the intent.

It is out of context because I was trying to clarify with porthoz why under the same circumstances he can say with certainty that packer intended to kill whilst lui didn't.

 

[1910]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

I am standing by my ****ing statement. No one knows the intent.

It is out of context because I was trying to clarify with porthoz why under the same circumstances he can say with certainty that packer intended to kill whilst lui didn't.

That's not removing something from its context.

I arrived at the exact same conclusion as Porthoz, his 'intention' doesn't need to be verbally stated or no one would ever be convicted. His actions are his intent- if you're kicking someone in the head you're taking on the inention to kill.

As I said in my example, your intention might not be to kill people, and you haven't stated it but you've taken it on through your actions.

 

[Mr Fourex]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

Intention to maim someone or intention to kill

....is there really a difference?

Packer's a shit ****

no thanks.

 

[broncos4life]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

That's not removing something from its context.

I arrived at the exact same conclusion as Porthoz, his 'intention' doesn't need to be verbally stated or no one would ever be convicted. His actions are his intent- if you're kicking someone in the head you're taking on the inention to kill.

As I said in my example, your intention might not be to kill people, and you haven't stated it but you've taken it on through your actions.

That's still not the point. As I said if his intention was to kill he had the guy completely vulnerable so he did a shit job if that was his intent.

Once again this was a discussion with porthoz about comparing two cases, but whatever the cavalry have arrived and taken over the discussion, so well done.

 

[Mr Fourex]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

 

[lynx000]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

Carney went and played bush footy and earned money pouring beers. Packer spent a year in jail... Are you telling me that Carney served more penance than Packer?

B4L, you are either being deliberately obtuse or not reading posts properly. For you I will run through it again. Packer being sent to jail was his punishment for his crime, not any penance or punishment put in place by the NRL for the damage he also caused to the game.

Todd Carney was similarly dealt with by the Courts for his various indiscretions over time (all of which were less serious than that of Packer). Over and above what the Courts imposed upon him, the NRL also imposed a suspension or a refusal to register his contract until he (Carney) had also paid penance to the NRL in respect of his conduct. That involved a year in bush football and being a good citizen.

The same thing has occurred with players charged with drink driving. They have been dealt with by the Courts and then either the club or the NRL have come in and given additional fines and or suspensions over and above those imposed by the Courts.

I hold the view that the same should apply to Packer. He has not received any punishment from the NRL for the damage he caused to the game. He still has to pay his penance for that.

Packer was forced to pay a higher price than Carney by the Court for his offence, but this is because his offence was viewed as a serious one by the sentencing magistrate in a climate where there had been an increase in alcohol fuelled violence.

Your argument is fatally flawed because you are comparing the punishment meted out by the Court for a serious offence with the punishment meted out by the NRL for the damage that Carney caused to the game. You are comparing apples and oranges.

He is entitled to be rehabilitated, but not by going straight back into the NRL, he owes the game some dues.

 

[coreyh88]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

if you shoot someone at any distance (point blank to kneecaps doesn't count) you have attempted to murder them. courts can't judge if you were aiming at the arm or chest or head.

if you stomp on someone's head you have the intent to main or grievously harm with a decent likelihood of death.
This is not something that can be looked past. However to be honest we shouldn't even be looking this far.

The guy urinated on our home ground. this should be punishable by death. How could he ever have pride in our jersey when he urinated in his on SUNCORP!

 

[Porthoz]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

That's still not the point. As I said if his intention was to kill he had the guy completely vulnerable so he did a shit job if that was his intent.

Once again this was a discussion with porthoz about comparing two cases, but whatever the cavalry have arrived and taken over the discussion, so well done.

Seriously, are you actually deriving intent from the result? You would fit perfectly in the NRL Judiciary! :laugh:

If someone takes a 45 calibre and shoots someone with it, but miraculously misses everything vital, and the person survives... does that mean there was no intent to kill?

If your argument is, that stomping on an unconscious person's head doesn't equal attempting to kill him, either you went too far in your defense of hiring Packer, and thus can't lose face by backing out, or there is something seriously wrong with your perspective. I sincerely hope it's the first!

Once again, as barbaric and disgusting Lui's assault was, there was no intent to kill (albeit I don't dispute it could have happened, because we all know one blow is enough).
Don't take my word for it, look at the way the courts judged both cases:
Lui was fined and released under probatory status for assaulting his pregnant g/f, while Packer was jailed with bail for assaulting a bloke in a bar, after being allegedly provoked.
How do you think that happened?

 

[Huge]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

I'm sure there is a perfectly valid reason why a Packer wasn't charged with attempted murder. Most likely explanation is that the Crown( police,whomever) could not prove there was intent to murder and if so, what makes you all think there was that intent ? I mean, the people who have access to all the video, all the witness statements, all the evidence and actually specialise in the field and with the benefit of a hundred and fifty years experience can not conclusively prove or assert he had intent to murder. On the other hand we have a few internet champions with no access to the facts or evidence and with little or no experience asserting that it's obviously intent.


Mmmmmm. Who to believe ?

 

[Porthoz]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

I'm sure there is a perfectly valid reason why a Packer wasn't charged with attempted murder. Most likely explanation is that the Crown( police,whomever) could not prove there was intent to murder and if so, what makes you all think there was that intent ? I mean, the people who have access to all the video, all the witness statements, all the evidence and actually specialise in the field and with the benefit of a hundred and fifty years experience can not conclusively prove or assert he had intent to murder. On the other hand we have a few internet champions with no access to the facts or evidence and with little or no experience asserting that it's obviously intent.


Mmmmmm. Who to believe ?

Hello Internet "not champion". Please tell me what you think the intent behind stomping on an inanimate person's head was?
I don't have the burden of proof to make up my mind. The court transcripts for this case are a matter of public record. Feel free to read them and make up your own mind, instead of taking shots at others for their opinion.

I'm sure you never heard of prosecutors taking a lesser charge to assure a conviction or plea, right?
The judge who punished him with one of the highest penalties for the charge and denied bail must have been off his rocker (maybe he paid a visit to Dank before hand)...

P.S. For someone allegedly "pragmatic", your heart seems to bleed a lot for criminals and drug cheats...

 

[broncos4life]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

Seriously, are you actually deriving intent from the result? You would fit perfectly in the NRL Judiciary! :laugh:

If someone takes a 45 calibre and shoots someone with it, but miraculously misses everything vital, and the person survives... does that mean there was no intent to kill?

If your argument is, that stomping on an unconscious person's head doesn't equal attempting to kill him, either you went too far in your defense of hiring Packer, and thus can't lose face by backing out, or there is something seriously wrong with your perspective. I sincerely hope it's the first!

Once again, as barbaric and disgusting Lui's assault was, there was no intent to kill (albeit I don't dispute it could have happened, because we all know one blow is enough).
Don't take my word for it, look at the way the courts judged both cases:
Lui was fined and released under probatory status for assaulting his pregnant g/f, while Packer was jailed with bail for assaulting a bloke in a bar, after being allegedly provoked.
How do you think that happened?

I honestly feel like you dilute another persons point by writing essays.

My point is that the way you have decided Packer's intent was to kill is due to the fact that the action could result in death. So using that argument how can you also say that Lui didn't intend to kill when his actions also could result in death.

I would argue that if Packers intent was to kill him he would stomp on his head repeatedly.

 

[gordjw]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

Who cares what his intent was?

He wasn't defending himself, he was the instigator. I hope the NRL ban him for life.

All the other violent arseholes who want to hit their gf/wife/whoever can **** off too.

 

[broncos4life]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

I honestly feel like you dilute another persons point by writing essays.

My point is that the way you have decided Packer's intent was to kill is due to the fact that the action could result in death. So using that argument how can you also say that Lui didn't intend to kill when his actions also could result in death.

I would argue that if Packers intent was to kill him he would stomp on his head repeatedly.

Anyway there is no point discussing this anymore because it just goes round and round and posters are acting like I'm trying to say Packer is a top bloke, when I am just trying to find out how you can be sure his intent was to murder when the evidence suggests otherwise.

But whatever, you win.

 

[Foordy]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

Anyway there is no point discussing this anymore because it just goes round and round and posters are acting like I'm trying to say Packer is a top bloke, when I am just trying to find out how you can be sure his intent was to murder when the evidence suggests otherwise.

But whatever, you win.

I have one more question fir you b4l, then I'll let it drop.

What does the evidence suggest to you about his intent when he stomped on a person's head (who was lying on the ground not moving).

Because he is clearly no longer a threat to Packer (if he ever was).

 

[Huge]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

Hello Internet "not champion". Please tell me what you think the intent behind stomping on an inanimate person's head was?
I don't have the burden of proof to make up my mind. The court transcripts for this case are a matter of public record. Feel free to read them and make up your own mind, instead of taking shots at others for their opinion.

I'm sure you never heard of prosecutors taking a lesser charge to assure a conviction or plea, right?
The judge who punished him with one of the highest penalties for the charge and denied bail must have been off his rocker (maybe he paid a visit to Dank before hand)...

P.S. For someone allegedly "pragmatic", your heart seems to bleed a lot for criminals and drug cheats...

Last first, there is no bleeding for drug cheats and criminals rather I take a balanced view, or if you like, an older wiser view of things. Strangely my views seems to consistently be supported over the longer time frames by the ruling bodies. I suffer knee jerk responses like most humans, I am disgusted by Packers attack and disappointed by the drugs saga however the difference between myself and others is that I calmly think things through and don't give in to my base instincts, going off wildly on tangents and working myself into a rage, posting without thought. Sometimes I even let a little time go by before stating my view, recognising that my emotion may be clouding my judgement.....a good tip for others I would think.

I don't remember taking pot shots at anyone unless you feel I was directly referring to you. That being the case you may consider it possible that you are being a little paranoid, it is possible to be wrong about something ! I find it hard to be absolute about a subject without all the facts and am constantly amazed by those people who are so certain about everything when in possession of no evidence at all. Certainty based on assumption and supposition ! I take comfort from the knowledge that in fifty years time, of the posters still living, the intelligent ones amongst them will have adopted my approach, the same approach that has stood the test of time.

 

[broncos4life]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

I have one more question fir you b4l, then I'll let it drop.

What does the evidence suggest to you about his intent when he stomped on a person's head (who was lying on the ground not moving).

Because he is clearly no longer a threat to Packer (if he ever was).

I believe his intent was to continue to severely injure (which I do not condone) but I can't see how anyone can say for certainty that his intent was to murder.

Do you not think he would continue stomping if that was his intent?

 

[Socnorb]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

Anyway there is no point discussing this anymore because it just goes round and round and posters are acting like I'm trying to say Packer is a top bloke, when I am just trying to find out how you can be sure his intent was to murder when the evidence suggests otherwise.

But whatever, you win.

 

[Cult]

re: [Confirmed] Russell Packer --> Panthers

Is implying that he attempted to murder him, when that was not what he was charged with, defamation? I've seen less get pulled up on here.