Thread: NZ man found guilty of murdering British backpacker, during rough sex

A 27-year-old man has been found guilty of the murder of Grace Millane, a British backpacker who disappeared a year ago in Auckland after going on a date.

Millane, 21, arrived in New Zealand in November 2018 as part of a round-the-world trip. She met the accused on 1 December for a Tinder date at the Sky City casino and later died in his room at the CityLife hotel after being strangled to death.

Her body was then contorted into a suitcase and buried in a shallow grave in the Waitakere ranges, a bushland area west of the city.[at]

The prosecution argued that the defendant used “reckless violence” while strangling Millane during consensual sex, and disregarded the risk to her life when choking her so hard and for so long that she died.

The defence counsel argued that Millane, from Essex, died accidentally in a “tragic” event that resulted from a toxic combination of alcohol, inexperience with BDSM practices and sexual passion going too far.

Originally Posted by Backspin

I guess this kind of behavior is considered normal now.

Yeah, that'll be why he'll spend the rest of his life in prison.

Numpty.

Originally Posted by Backspin

I guess this kind of behavior is considered normal now.

How dare i even say it right ? How dare i say it's questionable for 21 yo's to be flying around by themselves, having rough sex with strangers.

Twit, you posted this thread.

He just doesn't get it.

Read this slowly.

Nobody is saying that this lass didn't make some very unwise decisions.

Partly because it's so bloody obvious she did, also because she and her familly have suffered more than enough for them.

Your victim blaming stinks.

Since "Rough Sex" was part of the defence and the jury obviously didn't believe it, the title should be simply:

"NZ man found guilty of murdering British backpacker".

There is, however, nothing wrong with questioning her decision making. Perhaps she thought that only an imbecile would not realise that Tinder data would point the police straight at an offender, and didn't realise that she was going on the lash with a homicidal imbecile.

I do wonder why the accused was (and still is) allowed complete anonymity during these proceedings, and whether that will continue throughout the predictable appeals?

He can be named as of today.

Jesse Kempson age 27.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I do wonder why the accused was (and still is) allowed complete anonymity during these proceedings, and whether that will continue throughout the predictable appeals?

Well Harry we did have a spate of high profile and innocent people accused by Carl Beech and their names were all out in the public domain. Many were old men and some were sent to their grave with tarnished reputations after a lifetime of service to the country. Oh and Sybs Labour friend erm what's his name, e was front and centre goading on the police to arrest the accused and release their names.

Originally Posted by NamPikToot

Well Harry we did have a spate of high profile and innocent people accused by Carl Beech and their names were all out in the public domain. Many were old men and some were sent to their grave with tarnished reputations after a lifetime of service to the country. Oh and Sybs Labour friend erm what's his name, e was front and centre goading on the police to arrest the accused and release their names.

"We" might have, but this trial was in New Zealand.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

"We" might have, but this trial was in New Zealand.

Oh OK, didn't realise you were zooming in geographically i thought you were making a general comment about disclosure - hence my response about its impact.

Ah.

His name cannot be revealed because of a court order designed to ensure fair trials for the accused in high-profile cases. The guidelines, under the Criminal Procedure Act 2011, limit naming a suspect on a number of grounds.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/g...come-9ksx6ck0w

Originally Posted by NamPikToot

It's a proven fact, i extend people lives.

No, it probably just feels like it to them.

The New Zealand man found guilty of murdering British backpacker Grace Millane has been sentenced to life in prison with a minimum non-parole period of 17 years.
The man appeared in Auckland’s high court on Friday morning, and his sentencing was overseen by Justice Simon Moore.
The man had been assessed in his pre-sentencing report as being of “very high risk”, based on his “complex needs” and the severity of the offending.
“Manual strangulation is a particularly intimate form of violence … cold-blooded,” Moore said. “Your actions reveal a complete disregard for your victim.”
“You didn’t ring an ambulance, or call the police, instead you embarked on a well-planned and sustained and coordinated course of action to conceal any evidence of what had occurred in your room.”
There was no emotion shown by the man found guilty of Millane’s murder, and he listened to his sentencing impassively.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/21/grace-millane-man-jailed-for-life-for-killing-of-uk-backpacker

The Guardian following the name suppression order I see. Dunno why, his name is already widely known

he probably enjoyed the whole ordeal, another serial killer to be, but not smart enough as he got caught

How the fuck is 17 years life?

It's a statutory minimum of 10 years but depends on parole.

I'd love to see his Tindr profile.

You're a bit late he won't be available for the next 17 years or so

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

You're a bit late he won't be available for the next 17 years or so

He will be. And he'll wish he wasn't.

I think he just opened an account with Grindr.

Originally Posted by sabang

I think he just opened an account with Grindr.

That's not the only thing he'll be opening.

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

The Guardian following the name suppression order I see. Dunno why, his name is already widely known

I thought we would be allowed to know his name if he has been found guilty.

Surely name suppression is for the potentially innocent accused before and during trial, not the convicted guilty.

Originally Posted by Looper

Surely name suppression is for the potentially innocent accused before and during trial, not the convicted guilty.

New Zealand is quite unique in this - basically, in this case it's to 'protect' his family/iwi or whanau, a Maori family/extended family/village/social unit.
His lawyer actually put forth that he should be given leniency because he was estranged from his iwi/whanau, had a rough childhood and some other crap.

Animals like this, irrespective of ethnicity, should not see the light of day in freedom again . . . simply horrific.

Tinder . . . good grief

Oh, his name is out there now. Jesse Kempson.