Judge orders motel vandal to pay $1,000 for $5,000 damage

Often when people travel away from their natural environment, they tend to forget to pack their brains.

Fine upstanding members of the public that hold responsible jobs and usually process reasonable intelligence can quickly become uncoordinated, incompetent imbeciles while travelling. Once arriving at a motel, apparent simple tasks such as car parking, unlocking doors, turning on a TV or using the telephone can challenge many intrepid travellers.

Along with increasing levels of stupidity, some guests will also lose their usual levels of inhibition and are more willing to throw caution to the wind as restraints of acceptable behavior are willingly tossed aside.

Yesterday, the Northern Advocate reported:

"A Whangarei man who smashed up his Christchurch motel room after spending $300 on tequila shots, causing more than $5000 worth of damage, has been sentenced to community work and ordered to pay more than $1000 in reparation.

Benjamin Easterbrook, 33, appeared for sentencing in the Whangarei District Court on Monday after pleading guilty to a charge of wilful damage.

Judge Greg Davis said Easterbrook returned to his motel room on October 29, heavily intoxicated, to find he had lost his room key.

The judge said Easterbrook became abusive and aggressive towards the motel staff and when he got back into his room smashed the place up, including scrawling offensive words on the bedroom wall. "You said you did it because you had been locked out of your room."

The judge said the repairs cost more than $5000, but the insurance excess and cost of a replacement key left the motel owners out of pocket by $1086.

Defence lawyer Wiremu Puriri said Easterbrook had no recollection of the incident and was remorseful.

Mr Puriri said the first thing Easterbrook knew something was amiss was when he saw that he had spent $300 the previous night on tequila shots.

Judge Davis sentenced Easterbrook to 40 hours' community work and ordered him to pay $1086 reparation to the motel within 14 days."

Source: Click HERE

So while far away from home, a motel guest has a brain-fart and indulges in some reckless criminal activity that leaves a trial of destruction - so why does the motelier need to wear this damage via their insurance company?

And why has a judge determined that this criminal should only be accountable for a fraction of the mayhem he caused, just because the motelier had the foresight to take out insurance?

The pathetic 40 hours' community work aside, does the impost of a $1,000 court order for causing over $5,000 worth of damage almost make the adrenaline-rush of wanton vandalism seem worthwhile?