Star Comment: Toughen up law on punching
Just one chilling punch. That is all it took to leave a Shropshire painter and decorator's life in tatters.
We make no apologies today for carrying a shocking image showing the extent of the injuries suffered by grandfather Scott Taylor, who has been left permanently disabled and brain damaged after having his skull caved in.
It was all over in a flash. The 42-year-old had been enjoying a drink at Bar Station in Wellington when the doorman asked him to leave.
An exchange of words followed, before bouncer Neil Hotchkiss knocked him out cold, causing him to collapse onto the pavement.
For Scott Taylor, those events of August 17, 2012 were life-changing.
Yet the father-of-eight who delivered the devastating punch escaped with a 16-month jail sentence, meaning he will probably be out in less than a year, able to resume his life.
It is little wonder that, in cases such as these, victims feel that the punishment never fits the crime.
Even the man who passed sentence on Hotchkiss acknowledged that the sentence was 'grievously inadequate'.
The problem in these cases is that there was no premeditated plan to cause the sort of injuries which have left Mr Taylor in a wheelchair.
It was a heat of the moment loss of control – a case of grievous bodily harm, rather than a more serious offence such as attempted murder.
But aggressors must know that it is simply not acceptable to punch another human being full in the face, whatever the circumstances.
And if they do cross the line, they should not expect the impact of their actions to be any less severe than the damage they may cause to the victim.
Maybe, if we are to give our courts the power to right what can feel like a rough justice, we should look south to our uncompromising Australian colleagues, who are in the process of toughening up their laws.
Premier Barry O'Farrell wants to pass a new 'one-punch law' which would carry a minimum sentence of eight years, and a maximum of 20 years in jail – even higher if drugs or alcohol are involved.
That's what you call being tough on crime, and tough on the causes of crime.
What's the worst that could happen if we did the same here in Britain? People might actually be slightly more inclined to think twice before letting the red mist descend.
