Shipton granted parole changes

Posted on 24-06-2012 10:55 | By PLONKER

I would presume Shipton is now happy that he is able to rekindle the "close" friendship of the past that he had with his mates ... isn’t that just so nice for him!

Posted on 16-06-2012 15:06 | By PLONKER

Why? the victums don’t get "parole" from the crime inflicted upon them so why should he.

Posted on 12-06-2012 10:02 | By PLONKER

I believe so also, the most likely will be that this bunch will be back in court again, sooner than later I would think.

Posted on 10-06-2012 09:33 | By Tanz

Yep totally agree with you Yogi!!!!...

Posted on 08-06-2012 13:21 | By JAFFA

Drink driving is bad as, so also is what Shipton did also. Would say that just does not seem right that Shipton’s terrible actions get 1/2 a sentence and that he denied all until parole was available tghen meekly said "yes it was me" so then to get out early, means no principles here. not a good look.

Posted on 08-06-2012 09:32 | By Phailed

Drink driving can have many extremely bad consequences including death and injury. Not exactly the same as the Shipton case highlighted here but still bad. Drink driving is also an appalling offence. Remember that councillor last term (though not re-elected) who got caught. Wasn’t he also a member of the road safety committee on the last council? Talk about hypocrisy.

Posted on 07-06-2012 23:22 | By JAFFA

Hear he is from down your way, hear he and mates are a bit dodgy and some.

Posted on 05-06-2012 14:22 | By TERMITE

You seem to be on a tangent here, the page is about Shipton, not the raft of drunks on the road, I agree that not good in fact far from good, please take "Diversion" back onto the correct subject here.

Posted on 04-06-2012 16:02 | By Hector

Get bloody real, a repeat drunk driver who has major addiction issues should be put away before an innocent family suffers, I dont agree with the Shipton scenario either, but they are one and the same, one has done some time, the other in time will tear a family apart, nothing surer.

Posted on 02-06-2012 22:59 | By YOGI

I am sure it will not be a good picnic after that, no baskets left for sure.

Posted on 01-06-2012 16:15 | By Socrates

I think there is possibly more to come out on this case so time will tell whether the right decisions have been made here?

Posted on 31-05-2012 19:34 | By Scambuster

Wants to consort and associate with his co- offenders and be allowed to contact the media about the case why would that be.Some form of social interaction if that is the right word -you be the judge.

Posted on 31-05-2012 17:36 | By PLONKER

The truth is here he used the uniform and position in the NZ Police force, achieved a better result via the assistance of his mates and repeated often. The effect is that many have been effected and remain so. There is a huge difference in motive, desire, who is injuried. Now he is allowed to wander out and about to do whatever he wants where ever and take his good old mates along to.

Posted on 30-05-2012 16:00 | By Hector

in the legal world, all you critics out there, is this any worse than a 8 times convicted drunk driver, not getting 1 week in jail, fix the system and you fix the problem, pretty simple!!!!

Posted on 30-05-2012 10:22 | By RawPrawn

that in legalspeak eight and a half years never means eight and a half years, but all this pandering as well???? Could it be that their really is an old boys’ network and it’s alive and well in right here in li’l ol’ Tauranga?

Posted on 30-05-2012 03:18 | By TERMITE

This is like saying "Jonny stand in the corner for 5 minutes and then we will let you out to play again as soon as ..." not a good look for the unsuspecting and innocent world out there.

Posted on 29-05-2012 21:24 | By monty111

My guess is that we the taxpayer paid for his lawyer and all his appeals etc.

Posted on 29-05-2012 19:32 | By monty111

The sage says ’give him a break he’s done his time.’ 3 years out of 8/12 years is not doing your time in my book!

Posted on 29-05-2012 17:32 | By PLONKER

He wants to brag to the media, that is why he wants it lifted. I agree should be full sentance but of course he about faced on and admitted the crime so then he gets out early on conditions that he now is clearly watering down as fast as possible. PS Who paid the lawyer? Who was the lawyer?

Posted on 29-05-2012 17:22 | By KAMIKAZE

Very lucky to be walking around the streets and you would have to ask what is the motive in wanting to contact or associate with his co offenders and to contact the media to discuss the case.Perhaps its the gang mentality .Who on earth is his lawyer(?) making the inane statement that parole was creating a barrier to his clients employment. One would think it was the nature crime and the circumstances surrounding it that would be a put off for any employers.

Posted on 29-05-2012 17:14 | By PLONKER

Why is he allowed to do that? that one would think was at least part of the problem in the first place.

Posted on 29-05-2012 13:15 | By The Sage

He’s done his time. He should be able to get on with his life. How long do you keep punishing someone?

Posted on 29-05-2012 08:30 | By whatsinaname

what can I say. The law is an ***

Posted on 29-05-2012 00:20 | By monty111

Why exactly would this pack rapist want to contact the media about his conviction? Wouldn’t be for financial reasons by any chance. Why also did he only serve 3 years out of a total sentence of 8/12 years. Anyone who commits a terrible crime such as this should do the full sentence and not be allowed to cost the taxpayer any more with these ridiculous submissions.

Posted on 29-05-2012 00:11 | By YOGI

Shipton is ’unhappy" that he is having trouble holding down a job, oh dear how sad ... NOT! Well maybe he should reflect a little more seriously on the LIFETIME HARM he has caused all his victums. He maybe has served a sentence but has he really learned anything new. Why should he be able to associate with his co-horts in crime again, should the authorities at least try a little preventitive here?