3 - 6 months jail would of been an appropriate punishment

He has applied for an ankle monitor in line with Victoria's new bail conditions. Unfortunately they only have right ankle ones available.

Edited 3 hours ago3 hr by Damo

9 minutes ago, chookrat said:

The sentence does seem really light on given the seriousness of the assault. I'm not sure what an appropriate penalty looks like but I think he is lucky to avoid jail.

As for the curfew it seems an overreach from the judge for him to not be granted an exemption to attend work. The point of a curfew is for him to keep out of trouble and if he's playing football on national television there is a good chance he will keep out of trouble. Assuming the judge had limited options re sentencing and so threw in the curfew to bump it up a bit.

In any case I reckon he would be relieved at avoiding jail.

How do you feel he was lucky to avoid jail? According to the nsw bureau of crime brief (2011), first time assault offenders on an assault occasioning actual bodily harm were jailed 6.9 percent of the time. He would have been un lucky to get jail. Maybe a suspended sentence may have been more appropriate being a public case (whatever that means) but i doubt even that would appease the blood bayers.

So if he gets done by the tribunal for striking on the field, does it breach his behaviour conditions?

Depends if the victim sues?

32 minutes ago, Jjrogan said:

How do you feel he was lucky to avoid jail? According to the nsw bureau of crime brief (2011), first time assault offenders on an assault occasioning actual bodily harm were jailed 6.9 percent of the time. He would have been un lucky to get jail. Maybe a suspended sentence may have been more appropriate being a public case (whatever that means) but i doubt even that would appease the blood bayers.

The blood bayers! Seriously? He demolished the guy. I’d have put him in jail. Imagine going out for the night and ending up in the wrong side of that beating? This guy could easily have hit his head and been killed or handicapped. There's no place for this. Our society is way too lenient on violence in my opinion. Don’t get me started on violence against women/wives/partners. Send them to jail and see if that reduces the violence.

1 hour ago, Damo said:

He has applied for an ankle monitor in line with Victoria's new bail conditions. Unfortunately they only have right ankle ones available.

Sentence him to full time ankle shackles but allow him to play and train?

I agree with many here - punch anyone in the head, particularly from behind or if they are down, and jail time should be mandatory. Far too many deaths and maimings for this to be allowed to continue.

1 hour ago, chookrat said:

The sentence does seem really light on given the seriousness of the assault. I'm not sure what an appropriate penalty looks like but I think he is lucky to avoid jail.

As for the curfew it seems an overreach from the judge for him to not be granted an exemption to attend work. The point of a curfew is for him to keep out of trouble and if he's playing football on national television there is a good chance he will keep out of trouble. Assuming the judge had limited options re sentencing and so threw in the curfew to bump it up a bit.

In any case I reckon he would be relieved at avoiding jail.

The magistrate issued an 18 month community corrections order which can mean being monitored by a corrections officer, a curfew and/or community service. So it’s at her discretion. And this is in lieu of going to prison after all.

She also apparently mentioned that the 6 game suspension by the club/AFL was not substantial enough in light of the seriousness of the assault (higher end of medium threshold) and that the whole point of the curfew was that it was punitive.

5 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

The blood bayers! Seriously? He demolished the guy. I’d have put him in jail. Imagine going out for the night and ending up in the wrong side of that beating? This guy could easily have hit his head and been killed or handicapped. There's no place for this. Our society is way too lenient on violence in my opinion. Don’t get me started on violence against women/wives/partners. Send them to jail and see if that reduces the violence.

Yes seriously. I'm not condoning what he did. It was a dangerous and thug attack. As you say, there is no place for this. But if you jail every first time offender for a punch or an assault you'd be needing a lot more cells. The sentence is pretty consistent here.

Edited 1 hour ago1 hr by Jjrogan

5 minutes ago, monoccular said:

Sentence him to full time ankle shackles but allow him to play and train?

I agree with many here - punch anyone in the head, particularly from behind or if they are down, and jail time should be mandatory. Far too many deaths and maimings for this to be allowed to continue.

Serious question. Would you jail connor nash? (The victim im the Balta case didnt get a concussion and had a 3 cm stitch i believe as a point of comparison). Do the rules of the land stop once you cross the white land. Should Miers have reasonably expected that contact? What about off the ball incident. Genuinely asking how we think about the difference in crime and punishment. I dunno.

Edited 1 hour ago1 hr by Jjrogan

8 minutes ago, Jjrogan said:

Serious question. Would you jail connor nash? (The victim im the Balta case didnt get a concussiom and had a 3 cm stitch i believe as a point of comparison). Do the rules of the land stop once you cross the white land. Should Miers have reasonably expected that contact? What about off the ball incident. Genuinley asking how we think about the difference in crime and punishment. I dunno.

You sign up for a violent game you have to accept there will be incidents where players get it wrong in the context of the game.

Miers' injury looked shocking but in reality to me is more like akin to Bolton kneeing Disco in the head in a marking contest than an assault.

Barry Hall on Staker off the ball - now that's entirely different. If Staker went to the police they would've been duty bound to investigate it as an assault.

Some really strange and baffling questions and observations in this thread.

"How will the curfew affect his gameday selection?"

This is the mother of all no brainers. He doesn't play, football is not above the law.

"He should have been jailed"

Right, how many first time offenders have you seen go to jail for this?

Some basic understanding of things goes a long way.

9 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

You sign up for a violent game you have to accept there will be incidents where players get it wrong in the context of the game.

Miers' injury looked shocking but in reality to me is more like akin to Bolton kneeing Disco in the head in a marking contest than an assault.

Barry Hall on Staker off the ball - now that's entirely different. If Staker went to the police they would've been duty bound to investigate it as an assault.

Would they? I'm not sure about that. Isn't there some law about implied consent (probably the wrong term) that once you are on the playing field, matters are allowed that might be considered criminal off it. The only incident I can recall that ever ended up in the courts was Leigh Matthews hit on Neville Bruns. There have been many more, both before and since, where the incident was more brutal than the Matthews/Bruns incident, but no criminal actions ensued.

3 minutes ago, Bowserpower said:

Some really strange and baffling questions and observations in this thread.

"How will the curfew affect his gameday selection?"

This is the mother of all no brainers. He doesn't play, football is not above the law.

"He should have been jailed"

Right, how many first time offenders have you seen go to jail for this?

Some basic understanding of things goes a long way.

It’s not about basic understanding, I understand the law and in plenty of cases I think it sends the wrong message. I get we do t send first offenders to jail very often but maybe if we did people would stop beating on others. Balta’s attack was way out of proportion to what he was apparently defending. 3 months in the can would get people thinking and likely save a few from being assaulted.

6 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Would they? I'm not sure about that. Isn't there some law about implied consent (probably the wrong term) that once you are on the playing field, matters are allowed that might be considered criminal off it. The only incident I can recall that ever ended up in the courts was Leigh Matthews hit on Neville Bruns. There have been many more, both before and since, where the incident was more brutal than the Matthews/Bruns incident, but no criminal actions ensued.

There was lots of talk about it with the Gaff incident. Including a local kid charged by police.

'He should be charged': Why a co...

Why a country football assault could be bad news for Andr...

A legal expert says a country footballer charged by police after an off-the-ball incident, in which a teenager's jaw was broken, could serve as a test case for West Coast midfielder Andrew Gaff.

I think the Gaff incident is right on the borderline and we've had several similar incidents that are somewhere between footy accident gone wrong and actual assault.

Players don't want to be seen going to the police against a rival.

But to me the Barry Hall one was clear cut and if that happened in todays climate I'd be shocked if police were involved in some way.

6 hours ago, chook fowler said:

should have got the chair

Well, Thursday night and beyond, he'll at least get the armchair...

25 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Would they? I'm not sure about that. Isn't there some law about implied consent (probably the wrong term) that once you are on the playing field, matters are allowed that might be considered criminal off it. The only incident I can recall that ever ended up in the courts was Leigh Matthews hit on Neville Bruns. There have been many more, both before and since, where the incident was more brutal than the Matthews/Bruns incident, but no criminal actions ensued.

Somewhat ironic that Matthews is calling for an order off rule. He would hardly ever have finished a game.

8 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

It’s not about basic understanding, I understand the law and in plenty of cases I think it sends the wrong message. I get we do t send first offenders to jail very often but maybe if we did people would stop beating on others. Balta’s attack was way out of proportion to what he was apparently defending. 3 months in the can would get people thinking and likely save a few from being assaulted.

Jailing people doesn’t work as a deterrent in the vast majority of situations and in a lot of instances it increases the likelihood of those people people committing more crimes.

Criminality is largely a social and economic issue.