General Debate 2 December 2011

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment88

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (88)

Login to comment or vote

JamesS

Can someone explain to me why we are supporting these low lifes? http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10770310
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:03am
tristanb

Here’s another one:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/asia/6074259/Sisters-attacked-with-acid-after-proposal-is-spurned

Ahh.. the religion of peace. Praise Allah.

Unfortunately we’re not allowed to criticise religion. It’s against human rights to comment negatively about a culture with ideas such as “blame the rape victim” or “acid on face is a reasonable response”.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:12am
Bed Rater

“Unfortunately we’re not allowed to criticise religion.”

Maybe in your crazy little world tristanb.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:18am
nasska

JamesS

That’s what we all like…..an easy question to start the day.

It’s cultural, it involves the tender sensitivities of Muslims & defending the right of the savages to act like this gives politically correct hand wringers a warm feeling in their tummies.

In short our involvement in the situation is a made to order Lefty wankfest.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:18am
Scott Chris

Dog Accidentally Shoots Duck Hunter In The Ass:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/oddstuff/6069613/Dog-steps-on-gun-shoots-hunter-in-buttocks

Or did he? According to the report:

>>”Potter says the man was hit from about three metres away with 27 pellets of birdshot. He says the man wasn’t seriously injured, in part because he was wearing waders.”

3 metres? ~yeah right~. Unless it was a ricochet I suppose…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:18am
flipper

So, who is it exactly that Shearer and Cunliffe are trying to win over?
Is it, as Damien O’Conner put it so well (paraphrased): “A gaggle of gays and self-serving trade union functionaries”?
Or is it a large chunk of the population that is totally divorced from the “class warfare” that Labour attempts to perpetuate?
And two further questions: Take away the union reps, the ex government employees, gays and other factions, and whom does Labour represent?
Is the Labour Party now relevant?

DPF – Did I miss in your EXCELLENTdemographic analysis a descripotion of employment background?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:19am
Murray

You can kick the shit out of Christians all day long tristanb. Helln in this country they’ll propably give you a government grant to do it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:22am
david

And the pistripe dwarf, restrings the violin, resins up his bow and prepares to play the media in a merry tune of “will he – won’t he” Boy they don’t learn very quickly do they. What is the old saying? The definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6072903/Peters-won-t-rule-out-release-of-tea-tape

And the final election results are not even in yet. Its all about oxygen I suppose but sure as hell must be a slow news day.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:07am
AlphaKiwi

Young man talking about being raised by two lesbians. He seems to have turned out okay.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yMLZO-sObzQ
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:24am
wreck1080

Schools take the official line that they deal with bullying and have policies in place to ensure it is resolved . But…

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10770218

Tracey said the boy who initiated the violence was stood down on Monday but the boy who actually hit her son was not dealt with until Wednesday – something that has left her furious, as her son was too scared to return to Somerville in that time.
“They should have guaranteed that my son was safe to come back to school on Monday and that child wasn’t there. They are saying to me that he wasn’t there, but other kids are telling me he was.”
Principal David Ellery said the school had to speak to both sides as part of its investigation to ensure it had all the facts about what happened

I wonder why the bully not suspended pending the investigation?You’d have thought safety is the prime concern while the story is being ascertained.

And this is exactly why bullying victims need to strike back.Where are all the PC bullying experts while this young fellah constantly gets his face pounded? The system is unlikely to protect you so you must protect yourself first.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:40am
Martin Gibson

Very telling interview with Margaret Mutu this morning saying how good it was that none of her whanau had died in the fire but it was still sad because two . . . human beings . . . people; had died.

You could almost hear the mental arithmetic about the relative worth of human life in similar ratios to the Israeli release of hundreds of Palastinian hostages for one Israeli.

Old Gandhi was right in his view that “isms” of all stripes were at the heart of many of humanity’s problems.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:49am
bereal

Big girl.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2068547/Meet-worlds-heaviest-insect-weighs-times-mouse.html
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:11am
adze

Mutu is an old racist Martin. The political climate is forgiving for her particular brand of racism, however; many (normally strident) left wing blogs were silent or dismissive earlier this year when she said that white immigration should be restricted.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:18am
Yvette

Monday 14 November on Morning Report.
Winston Peters declares taping was ‘illegal’, ‘News of the World’ material.
– http://soundcloud.com/whaleoil/winston-peters-on-the-tea-tape [audio file]

17:33 Thu Nov 17 2011 by AAP
Peters reveals teapot tape details
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has started revealing what is on the “teapot tape” as police investigating the covert recording prepare to move in with search warrants on four media organisations.

Now –
NZ First leader Winston Peters is refusing to rule out reading a transcript of the teapot tape in Parliament – and experts say there is little to stop him.
The secret recording has been credited for Mr Peters’ return to Parliament. But he was tight-lipped yesterday on speculation he would raise the matter in the new term.
A political storm erupted last month after freelance cameraman Bradley Ambrose recorded the cup-of-tea meeting where National leader John Key publicly endorsed ACT’s John Banks.
The tapes are under wraps while police investigate – and a court refused to rule if the conversation was private.

Does anyone know the proper psychopathic term for this?
Winston’s behaviour, that is
Not my bloody obsession with it – [I know the cause of that: believing him two Elections back when he stated then too that he would stay on the cross-benches]
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:22am
bereal

Yvette
Take your pick from this checklist.
In Winstons case i think you will find quite a few traits you can tick.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hare_Psychopathy_Checklist
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:52am
Manolo

More lies from the warmists: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2068516/Doomsday-predictions-sea-level-rises-false-alarm–levels-fluctuate.html

And we’re all paying higher taxes, e.g., the ETS, to prop this scam.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 11:40am
NeutralObserver

See NZ public service ranks #1 in the world for absence of corruption. Makes news on BBC and other sites, not a peep from NZ or the government though. Disappointingly par for the course.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 11:53am
hj

Does anyone know the proper psychopathic term for this?
Winston’s behaviour, that is
….
flip flop???

the point is is there anything there that may embarrass Key and Banks? If there is I say fire away Winston.

Also did Winston know what was in the tapes before he flip-flopped?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 11:56am
oldpark

@hj(1794)Yes sociapath.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 12:46pm
Brian Smaller

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/6076010/Woman-accused-of-childs-assault

OK – what is the point in even reporting this? A [name suppressed person] is to stand trial in relation to the [suppressed case] of victim [name suppressed]. Really told us a lot, other than our name suppression laws are stupid.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 12:49pm
hj

oldpark (9) Says:
December 2nd, 2011 at 12:46 pm

@hj(1794)Yes sociapath.
………….
Anyone who sees large numbers of people arriving in NZ as a threat rather than a benefit is a sociopath?

John Banks sees one million more Aucklanders as a “great opportunity”. A little thought and it is a great opportunity for a minority (including John Banks and John Key’s buddies), for most people it will mean less grass, less sunshine and more traffic.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 1:50pm
Manolo

A great democrat in action: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/01/russia-election-monitors-idUSL5E7N13V620111201
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 3:25pm
Manolo

UN bureaucrats helping to prop up an evil regime: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/12/01/un-fights-to-maintain-food-aid-to-north-korea-despite-us-concerns-about-program/?test=latestnews
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 3:44pm
DavidC

Manolo, find something cheerful to read! Its the weekend FFS!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 3:50pm
Manolo

Not to worry, DavidC. The wine awaits at home. Cheers.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 3:54pm
F E Smith

And in other news…

Don’t you just hate it when a devious, lying ‘hired gun’ defence forensic so-called ‘expert’, who obviously is being paid to say whatever the defence wants him to say, bamboozles a group of obviously stupid Court of Appeal judges, deceitfully contradicts the obviously correct and unimpeachable police forensic experts opinion, and gets a murderer’s conviction quashed?

Those scummy defence lawyers should never be allowed to say that the man’s brother was the guilty party, after all, he wasn’t there to defend himself. The defence lawyers are outragously defaming a victim who cannot reply and they should be ashamed of themselves.

Just stinks, doesn’t it…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 5:05pm
nasska

F E Smith

Point taken but it has to be said that the original defense team didn’t seem to do a great job. Certainly reinforces my absolute opposition to the death penalty for any crime…it’s too late to say “sorry, we got it wrong”, after some poor bugger has been hung.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 5:58pm
reid

FES not sure if you’re familiar but if so, how come those alternative forensics weren’t raised in the original trial?

Lack of resources available to defence?

Poor bastard, FFS.

Comes home, sees his brother’s murdered his parents, kills his brother, gets convicted of his parents’ murders.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 6:03pm
F E Smith

Nasska,

I think my answer to reid might be the correct response to your point. I agree fully with your comment re the death penalty- we just cannot get the certainty that we are right in every case, therefore we just should not have it.

reid,

you are probably correct about the reason why the first defence team doesn’t appear to have made the same challenge. That said, the family doesn’t appear to be poor, so it may not be a matter of legal aid refusing, but just not having the same access to funding as the Crown.

Once the defence can properly rebut the expert, then we really have a proper trial.

Ironically, an inquisitorial trial would have made little difference, as the error was that of the expert, so the trial judge probably would not have called another expert to give evidence.

It should be noted that the (once again) accused man did plead guilty to his brother’s manslaughter back in 1995, so he didn’t come out of it completely exonerated.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 6:27pm
reid

Thanks nasska and FES for your clarifications.

If the police investigation showed this guy actually appeared to be what he looks like and if the key to his conviction was as implied something as tenuous as that exogenous carbon monoxide and if there was no evidence as to motive, then it’s quite frightening a conviction was obtained on those facts, albeit acknowledged this wasn’t the Law Report version.

But crikey, if that’s actually what the broad outline is, what has happened to common sense?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 6:44pm
F E Smith

what has happened to common sense?

It has no place in a criminal trial, in the Crown’s opinion!!!

Actually, it is something that I often ask myself, when theories are being advanced that just sound stupid to me but are taken very seriously by the judge and the Crown. The jury often just accepts that they must be correct because it is being advanced by the prosecutor.

Notwithstanding the rules against speculation, the Crown is still perfectly able to make up an entire scenario based on their ‘interpretation’ of the facts, no matter how few those facts might be and how implausible that scenario might seem.

Quite frankly, it scares me sometimes.

There have been a rash of exonerations in the UK in the last few years, mostly around murder convictions, where the experts have been completely wrong. It has lead to a lot of discussion, and some reform, about the actual role of the expert in a trial. The English tended to blindly accept what was said as incontrovertible, but now are waking up to major errors in some trials.

Which makes nasska’s point all the more salient.

It also means that we really must disagree with those who want to protect the ‘reputation’ of the victim in a trial at all costs. If the victim’s reputation needs protecting, then the media can simply not report the trial in full.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 6:57pm
reid

It also means that we really must disagree with those who want to protect the ‘reputation’ of the victim in a trial at all costs.

But then FES the law enters into the PR world where people like Weatherspoon just blow such objective arguments out of the water because correct me if I’m wrong but a Barrister is bound to run a defence his or her client insists upon and neither Sainsbury nor Campbell ever discussed that angle?

The law is indirectly shaped by public opinion aka political will aka what politicians not the public wants, and they don’t want stuff like that, and most of the public aren’t even capable of predicting Banks would win Epsom let alone what the law should be on something like this. Look at their complete silence on the scrapping of provocation and the retro-application re: the surveillance tapes.

Such stuff is anaethema and actually points to a serious hole in the good ship NZ, integrity-wise.

But apparently people and the media prefer it when people protest against easy-to-understand things, like the ~~GFC~~ banksters.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 7:12pm
David Garrett

Nasska: sorry old chap, but I just cant help myself….”men are hanged but pictures are hung”…drummed into me by… Miss Rigg I believe was her name….she bore very little resemblance to Diana….Good God, ten to eight on a Friday night, and I am reduced to correcting someone’s grammar….the lot of the solo dad who has the kids….
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 7:48pm
F E Smith

correct me if I’m wrong but a Barrister is bound to run a defence his or her client insists upon

Well, we are not completely bound to run a defence that our client insists upon, but it is a pretty strong rule that we act on our client’s instructions. The exceptions that would prevent us from doing so are ethical and involve our duty to the Court.

So, for the most part, you are correct.

I don’t see how Weatherstone blew any such objective argument out of the water at all. His defence was there to be used, and was not without some basis, if his evidence was accepted.

Now, that is not to say that Sophie Elliot was responsible for Weatherstone’s actions. The defence never said that, although it is what the media portrayed it as. The provocation as due to Weatherstone’s own personality issues, not Sophie’s actions, intentional or otherwise. There was sufficient expert evidence that Weatherstone’s psychological problems were such that there could possibly have been a reaction to provoction, even if unintended, so it was correct for the judge to let it go to the jury. I also think it was correct of the jury to reject it, but I didn’t see the entire trial so my view is merely my view, and not in any way conclusive.

In no way was Sophie Elliot’s reptuation tarnished by Weatherstone’s claims. Even if he had been successful, her reputation would still not have been tarnished. That is because a manslaugher verdict would have been about Weatherstone’s reaction, not about Sophie’s acts. That appears to be something that most people do not understand.

You are correct that the public really doesn’t know about the criminal law. What it wants is to be pandered to and be told we are getting tough on crime. The public only worries about things like retrospective application of criminal laws when it affects them. As most people won’t be affected by it, they don’t care.

But the damning, defaming and hatred of defence lawyers in NZ, by both the politicians and the media, means that when we say issues like the retrospective law change we saw proposed recently are bad, the media and public automatically thinks that it must therefore be a good thing.

I may have got off topic there, but that’s ok- it is Friday.

On the GFC thing, did you see the recent powerlineblog post on that?

EDIT: DavidG, yes, a fair point.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 7:53pm
nasska

David Garrett

No sweat…regrettably the fast pace of a blog thread, coupled with my hunt & peck abilities with a keyboard, often means that grammar doesn’t get checked. Good luck with the quality time with your offspring!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 7:59pm
David Garrett

Well, since it is Friday, my kids are watching DVD’s and FES is here….

The best argument against the death penalty has always been the “wrong man” argument – what if we get it wrong, and find out later we hanged the wrong man? It has actually happened: Timothy Evans was hanged in the UK for the murder of his daughter…it later was proved conclusively that the real killer was Evans’ landlord, Reginald Christie…he was then duly hanged also. By the same hangman as it happens….but I digress.

But that is the ONLY such case I am aware of in the UK in the 20th century, and to the best of my knowledge there have never been any executions which were later thought to be shaky here in the sense that the wrong man was hanged in NZ. So we have the remote chance of getting it wrong a tiny proportion of the time. Let’s assume all three of those executions now thought doubtful in the UK WERE in fact men wrongly hanged. They are 3 of several thousand (the exact number is hard to find) executed in the UK in the 20th Century.

Every year a few hundred people die on our roads. In a good number of cases, the victim is entirely innocent: the stereotypical “soccer mom” to use the American vernacular, driving the kids home when a pisshead comes aroudn the corner on the wrong side of the road. Every single one of those cases is a dreadful tragedy: for the victim herself of course, and for those he or she leaves behind grieving.

Is the net result in the two scenarios (the wrong man and the innocent soccer mom) really any different? both are just as dead, and both families are devastated by their loss. Yes, in one case the state is responsible, in the other it is another person who may or may not be innocent of any wrongdoing, but so what? Other than in philosophy 101 class does that actually make any material difference?

Let’s hear what the panel has to say!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:10pm
nasska

After the annual office Christmas party blowout, John woke up with a pounding headache, mouth like the bottom of a parrot’s cage, and utterly unable to recall the events of the preceding evening. After a trip to the bathroom, he was able to make his way downstairs, where his wife put some coffee in front of him.

“Louise,” he moaned, “tell me what went on last night. Was it as bad as I think?”
“Even worse,” she assured him, voice dripping with scorn.
“You made a complete arse of yourself, succeeded in antagonizing the entire board of directors, and insulted the CEO of the company to his face.”
“He’s an arsehole – piss on him!”
“You did,” Louise informed him. “And he fired you.”
“Well, screw him!” said John.

“I did. You’re back at work on Monday!”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:10pm
nasska

David Garrett

I can see a difference…..In the case of the drunk driver no one other than that driver could have influenced the circumstances of the woman’s death. In the case of the wrongful conviction a case was brought by the Crown & heard by & sentence passed by a Crown representative.

If we accept that the Crown represents us all then we are responsible for that person’s death, jointly & severally. Therefore to avoid that responsibility we should not risk the death penalty.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:27pm
reid

The provocation as due to Weatherstone’s own personality issues, not Sophie’s actions, intentional or otherwise.

FES thanks for explicating the considerations in that defence. The legal hole to me is how the heck could the law be framed as to entertain even the possibility of such a provocation defence being legitimately argued as such in this case and this is what I believe is at the heart of the public disquiet.

But the damning, defaming and hatred of defence lawyers in NZ, by both the politicians and the media, means that when we say issues like the retrospective law change we saw proposed recently are bad, the media and public automatically thinks that it must therefore be a good thing.

Yeah I agree, the dumbing down by the media of the complex debate serves no-one.

Frankly I don’t get why they feel they need to do it, not just in the legal but in all arenas. Everyone on earth is approximately the same IQ. What’s lacking is not ability but education. If only the MASS media played up intellectually rather than trivialised the daily news fest they would sell MORE papers and MORE viewers and listeners on what they said and wrote. But no. To them, that would be “boring.” Well only cause they’ve fooled the public into accepting pap.

Consequently we’re trapped in this mind-numbing desperate mind-numbing mind-numbing mind-numbing race to the bottom of the human intellect like a runaway sub whose reactor has scrammed, her fins are stuck at full down and her tanks are flooded.

This is why people are flocking to the web. I heard just a few hours ago 40% of Russians now only get their news from the web.

et al.

Thank fuck some of us are already educated otherwise one might fear for our children, lest they live in mud huts and wear sacks.

And it’s the entire exclusive fault of the MSM.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:36pm
JamesS

David Garrett you clearly are not an expert on the subject if that is the ‘only such case you are aware of’; a couple spring to mind – David Bentley (look it up), and James Hanratty (look it up).

As for shakey convictions and executions in NZ you have that fellow Bolton back in the 1950s.

The best argument I have always had against the death penalty is that when you execute someone they are dead – it is just like going to sleep; whereas spending 15, 20 or 30 years in a maximum security prison is an actual punishment.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:37pm
David Garrett

Nasska: yes, of course you are right. And I am taking the piss just a little of course…but my point remains – from the point of view of the victim and his family, he or she is just as dead and they are just as bereaved…whether the state did it or our drunk driver on the wrong side of the road.

The real question surely is: “Is the tiny – but real – risk of getting it wrong worth it for the greater good?” That is turn gives rise to a debate on whether the death penalty (CP for short) is a deterrent justifying the risk. The evidence on that question – even the reliable evidence – is incredibly equivocal, as anyone who has researched CP quickly finds…It is possible to find statistical analysss which show that CP IS, a deterrent, that it is not, and that it makes no difference. Even that when it is removed, (as in South Africa in the ’90’s) or restored (some US states last century) the homicide rate goes UP.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:38pm
JamesS

Actually I think the Bentley bloke was called Derek; Derek Bentley. Very sad.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:41pm
David Garrett

Well JamesS, if you knew as much about it as you claim, you would know that the Hanratty case was recently conclusively resolved – against Hanratty – by DNA evidence found on a handkerchief which the victim carried. Perhaps YOU should “look it up” old son….

Bentley’s case turns on what he meant when he said “let him have it” to his mate…. was he saying “give him the gun” or “shoot him”? Neither are cases where – like Evans and Christie – there is no doubt that the state got it wrong….

In Bolton’s case, you must not have read “Guilty on the Gallows” by Sherwood Young, published 1999. No serious criminologist now thinks that Bolton was other than guilty as charged….

Which other UK or NZ case are you aware of that you think I am not..?

But on one thing I agree with you: life on C block at Pare – especially “whole of life” which is now possible – is probably a much more dreadful punishment than 20 seconds of terror as you are hanged…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:46pm
ste3e

“For Shumpter, capitalism ‘generates a formal spirit of critique where the good, the true and the beautiful no longer are honoured; only the useful remains — and that is determined solely by the critical spirit of the accountant’s cost benefit calculation'” “Double Entry”Jane Gleeson-White

The reason we don’t allow the state to murder people is because murder is wrong. And this is so regardless of whether the books do not balance because of our humanity.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:50pm
nasska

David Garrett

You’ll have to accept that I’m a tractor driver & a source of good advice to my dogs. My legal expertise is a bit on the light side. I doubt that CP is much of a deterrent…most murders are usually caused by raw hate or emotion & the penalty is not a great factor in whether the killing happens or not.

Since CP would only influence a very few potential murderers it is probably of little use & therefore not worth the risk.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:51pm
David Garrett

…but there is a better argument against CP than any of the above…and I witnessed its effect first hand during my time in Tonga, where there were no convictions for murder for 20 years after the last hanging in 1987. Note I didnt say there were “no murders”…there were some shockers, but because of the influence of the churches, juries kept bringing in what lawyers call “perverse verdicts” – findings of manslaughter in clear cases of murder.

While the churches have no such influence here, if we ever reintroduced CP we would have the same phenomenon…and every bleeding heart liberal and Green Party member would claim that even the most heinous murderer had such a deadful background that he was a victim too…so much better to have LWOP (Life Without Parole) as a sentencing optiobn which solves all problems…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:54pm
JamesS

David garret are you seriously suggesting that you would, had you been sitting on the jury, bring in a guilty verdict against Derek Bentley? a fellow who was ‘not the full quid’, who was under arrest at the time (an important point), who did not kill the deceased and where it all comes down to his tone of voice when uttering 4 words????

You would not have kicked for touch and said manslaughter?

I take it you enjoy beating up on weaklings then?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:55pm
David Garrett

Sorry Nasska, I was typing my last missive while you were clearly working on yours…you will see that on balance, I agree with you…but I was hoping for a more spirited debate! JamesS was obviously unaware of the book I had published in 1999 on the subject of the reintroduction of CP so he was not much sport…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 8:58pm
nasska

David Garrett

LWOP….you’re onto it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:00pm
David Garrett

JamesS: Oh dear….Go back to my first post, where I referred to three or four cases in the UK which were doubtful…Bentley’s is of course one of the most notable….but there were several thousand executions in the UK in the 20th century…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:01pm
Andrei

I was in Florida when the Late Ted Bundy met his end on the Electric chair.

No tears for him but it was crass – people were cheering and holding signs like “It’s Fry Day, Ted” and worse. A media circus outside the prison – cheers went up when it was announced he was dead and all over Florida people honked their horns.

Pretty ugly really.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:03pm
JamesS

No I am not aware of the book but if you give me the title I will head to the library and read it (I, at least, have an open mind on things).
I see two problems with the death penalty;

1. Getting 62 votes in Parliament
2. Juries will simply bring in manslaughter verdicts.

I must admit were I on a jury and there was the possibility of the fellow being executed – even some low life like Weatherston – I could not, in all conscience, say guilty of murder. Would find it hard to sleep at night if someone ended up hanging because of me.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:04pm
David Garrett

James: You just make a dick of yourself if you sneeringly tell someone to “look it up” (Hanratty) when you are clearly not yourself aware that that case has now dropped off the list of “shakey convictions”….And do pay attention old chap….I have set the case for CP up and then destroyed it by my own arguments..
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:05pm
David Garrett

…and since you are so open minded, “Guilty on the Gallows” by Sherwood Young, 1999; “A life for a life: a case for capital punishment” David Garrett, 1999. “Crime in New Zealand” by Greg Newbold 2001 ….All available from the National Library if not your local one. Read all those and you will know as much as anyone about CP in NZ.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:11pm
reid

The evidence on that question – even the reliable evidence – is incredibly equivocal, as anyone who has researched CP quickly finds…It is possible to find statistical analysss which show that CP IS, a deterrent, that it is not, and that it makes no difference. Even that when it is removed, (as in South Africa in the ’90′s) or restored (some US states last century) the homicide rate goes UP.

David the only possible argument in favour of CP is deterrence and the US crime stats surely prove daily nothing is stopping the brutality.

I’ve never been in favour of it myself. Simply because I will only ever take a life only afer all choices and all chances are exhausted and that means, only when I, my family, my country can be safe only if I take that action. Since it’s possible for the country I live in to lock people up till they die, I think that is the ultimate penalty.

If we did have the death penalty, I wouldn’t treat them like the US DeathRow inmates, personally, I think that’s psychologically brutal. If you have to kill, do so quickly. Anything else is torture. I mean, if you can’t establish the efficacy of the case before you pass the sentence, then your justice system is a joke by definition. OK, so allow appeals. Expedite with all efficacy, all the way.

The length is a public charade so people get used to the fact and the heat dies away over the years the appeal grinds away. Regardless of the human being on the inside.

I find many aspects of US justice cruel and unnecessary, such as the fact that 40% of their incarcerated prisoners are there for reasons of self harm like drug possession, rather than harm to others.

I don’t really get their humanity.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:14pm
JamesS

Shall head to the library tomorrow and will be interested to read it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:18pm
David Garrett

Andrei: Quite right…but then the yanks have always been rather “odd” about CP….all the weird and wonderful methods of execution other than hanging and the guillotine originated there….all have in common a great deal of macabre theatre, uncertainty of efficacy, and delay….and that’s just the method of execution: the road to the death chamber is a shocker in the US…as you proably know, whether you “Fry” as Ted did (he was a considerable exception to several norms) depends on your race, your wealth, and where you comitted the crime….To the best of my knowledge (JamesS may be able to enlighten us) those were never factors in either the UK or here….
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:19pm
Andrei

If we did have the death penalty, I wouldn’t treat them like the US DeathRow inmates, personally, I think that’s psychologically brutal.

Kind of depends on the State Reid – in most States that have the death penalty the chances of it actually being carried out before the inmate dies of old age are really small. In Kansas, for example, they don’t even have the wherewithal to carry it out under the Statutes of Kansas

It does mean however that the person under sentence will not be getting out any time soon.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:23pm
David Garrett

Reid: Also quite right…I dont have a copy of my own 1999 book handy, but one of the chapters is headed something like “The United States – how not to apply the death penalty”

EVERTHING is wrong about their system – although of course we are in fact talking about hundreds of “systems” since there are thousands of police forces, and 50 entirely separate state judicial systems.

There is overwhelming evidence that if you are poor and black, and your crime was committed in a southern state – especially if the victim was white – you are dozens of times more likely to (eventually) be executed than if you are a middle aged white man like me, committing the crime in Ohio….
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:25pm
reid

Andrei just I wonder whether it’s kinder to end a terminal case or let him or her wither slowly over the years.

I’m ignorant but suspect probably your average state death row doesn’t have a whole lot of access to stimulating material apart from law books so they can research what they did wrong and I also wonder about the humanity of that but perhaps I’ve read too many John Grisham novels.

David but why do we need it when alternatively we could just lock them up for life and they die inside? That’s my central point.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:28pm
David Garrett

JamesS: you’ve gone very quiet…that’s probably wise…Sherwood Young’s book was published by Grantham House, mine by Hazard Press, both in 1999…read both – you will learn something more than you get from Wikipedia and Google…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:30pm
David Garrett

Andrei: You are right – we dont need it. The problem here in NZ is that until the Sentencing and Parole Bill (better known as three strikes) was passed last year, there was no provision in our law for a sentence of LWOP to be passed…there is now, but we still need some brave judge to do it in an appropriate case….

In the absence of LWOP you run the very real risk of some pack of fools on some future parole board letting Burton or Bell out when they are old men, and supposedly harmless….as to that, you might like to research the case of Stanley McKissock Reid, a rapist and murderer released at age 83 at the urging of a then well known do gooder named Fr. Jim Consedine…Within 6 weeks of his release Reid had tried to rape a nun …at age 83. Fortunately she was able to defend herself.

Reid: sorry, I meant to refer to your comment, not Andrei’s
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:35pm
Andrei

No David in the 1950s the majority of death sentences passed in the UK were actually commuted and the reasons for why they weren’t in particular cases is speculative.

Of course what gets celebrated depends upon the victim and/or the culprit thus Styllou Christofi, a Greek Cypriot grandmother went to the Gallows virtually unnoticed but a few months later when Ruth Ellis, a young blond woman was hanged the protests were so vocal they had to get the riot police out.

Likewise with Sophie Eliot, the victim being a young, upwardly mobile, educated middle class girl leads to a celebrated trial with a loathed defendant, whereas a dead prostitute barely registers on the public consciousness.

And that is why there will always be anomalies in who gets sentenced to death and who gets their sentence commuted and who doesn’t.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:39pm
David Garrett

Andrei: Yes, you are quite right about the complete lack of consistency of reprieves….I am not aware of evidence (perhaps JamesS can help me) that supports your claim that “the majority of death sentences… were commuted”…where does the evidence for that claim come from??
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:43pm
ste3e

If it is alright for the state to murder if it is aggrieved, then why should not the common man? The state says, “You did wrong therefore I am going to kill you” and sets up the example. If the moral boundary is crossed by one who is supposed to uphold moral boundaries then the boundaries fall; they are but conveniences.

No figures show that CP stops murder, it is doubtful any prove CP even prevents murder. The reason for its use is fiscal expediency. If you run a society that generates murderers in the numbers the US does then CP is cheaper. And either the US has weird genetic stock that it generates the numbers of murderers it does, or the US is a social model that generates murderers.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:46pm
David Garrett

The Reid case I mention earlier is another example, not of commutation exactly, but timing. Reid would almost certainly have been hanged for the rape and murder of his landlady in 1944, but luckily for him, the Labour government of the time had suspended CP…..Had he committed his crime two years earlier a nun would have been saved a most unpleasant experience forty years later….
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:46pm
reid

Reid had tried to rape a nun …at age 83.

I see.

Dave sorry if you disagree with my perspective but not sure your argument holds a lot of water.

Care to expand?

Edit: Oh, I see. You just did. Thanks Dave. Warning: Next time, I’ll take offence, who the fuck do you think you are, you arsehole?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:47pm
David Garrett

Ste3e: (interesting nick…) there is actually lots of evidence that “shows” CP IS a deterrent, just as there is an equal amount that “proveds” it is not. There are some interesting appendices in Sir Ernest Gowers’ book ” A life for a life” published in 1951 if memory serves me. Gowers was the chairman of the UK Committe on CP which recommended abolition.

Having made an extensive study of the subject, my one firm conclusion is we can learn nothing of universal application, and little of any use at all, from the US experience!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:51pm
David Garrett

well Reid, I am an “asshole” who is happy to use his own name…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:52pm
reid

Dave to bring it back and don’t do that again, why do you think killing people as opposed to locking them up for the rest of their lives is on balance the way to go?

reid is also my own christian name dave I live in eastbourne wellington and the only reason I don’t tell you my full name is same as why you don’t give out your address here, isn’t it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 9:54pm
David Garrett

191 Kanohi Road Kaukapakapa…but do treat the sign on the gate seriously….

But you must be unhinged… or drunk….the “Reid” I was referring to was Stanley McKissock Reid, rapist and murderer, not you….
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:00pm
reid

Why chose that particular name Dave out of the many thousands of examples you could otherwise have cited.

Don’t push my benevolence David. I don’t understand even why you want a fight. I don’t. I want the truth. As always.

Why not discuss my above question without rancour?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:02pm
David Garrett

Christ, you are unhinged…how many 83 year old rapist murderers do you think have ever been released in New Zealand who then went on to try and rape a nun? REID happened to be HIS NAME !! His surname….Perhaps I should have called him “Poor old Stan” as Consedine did….
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:09pm
David Garrett

Care to explain what you mean by “dont push my benevolence”…Reid??

I’m just going outside to check the moon….

You now know my full name and address Reid…what’s yours?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:11pm
Andrei

I haven’t got the reference at my finger tips David but there was a Royal Commission on Capital punishment late 1940s early 1950s.

As you may know a conviction for murder in the UK at that time the Death Sentence was mandatory, there was no discretion for the sentencing judge at all but the evidence given to the Commission showed that, from memory, about 8 or 9 cases out of ten were reprieved which makes sense if you think about it.

They did rework the Death Penalty in the UK in the later fifties to abandon the mandatory sentence and allow for mitigating circumstances etc
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:17pm
reid

Take care David.

Kind regards,

reid

P.S. Shame. Would have loved to debate the topic.

Reid Watson Booth
10/354 Muritai Road
Eastbourne
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:18pm
David Garrett

andrei: I have the Gowers book somewhere which is a summary of the findings of the Royal Commission which he chaired…I dont recall reprieves were anything like that high, but I havent read it for 10 years….

The Brits abolished CP altogether in 1964 I think…I think Ruth Ellis might have been the last judicial hanging?

Reid: When your meds kick in, come back and read the whole of this thread….you will find we were on the same side…and please dont threaten me…not even in a veiled way…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:23pm
Andrei

No David, Ruth Ellis was the last woman hanged – quite a few after that. The last in England was in 1964. CP was suspended not abolished in 1965
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:31pm
Andrei

It was Sir Geoffrey Palmer that finally took it off the Statute books here btw but it hadn’t been used for years and years before that and only applied to High Treason when he finally nailed it
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:33pm
reid

please dont threaten me…not even in a veiled way…

Heaven forfend David and as I said above, why cite out of thousands of possible examples the one case which perchance mentions the name of your momentary protagonist? Why?

I mean I’m more interested in CP but you seem as distracted with this as a seal with a ball.

How extraordinary.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:36pm
David Garrett

OK….They didnt hang anyone after 65 though did they?

Did you know that late in his life Albert Pierrepoint reversed his opinion (expressed in his 1974 autobiography) that CP was totally ineffective? He said shortly before his death that it wasnt a deterrent when he was hanging them – and he was probably pretty much right – but by the 1990’s when he changed his view, murder in the UK – as here – was completely different both in rate and type from what it had been in the 1940’s when he was most active…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:37pm
David Garrett

Andrei: yes, you are quite right about NZ abolition and Sir Geoffrey….abolished for murder in 1961 and for “all crimes” by him in the 1980’s ….but it wasnt just treason: I think “arson in the naval dockyards” or something remained a capital crime in NZ after 1961!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 10:41pm
The Scorned

Reid….Read what DG said above. Its a pure coincidence that the old murderer had the same last name as you….and there are not thousands of examples that fit the criteria DG was referring to. Get over it..if anyone’s making a song an dance over it its you.

Looking a bit precious,sad and desperate dude…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 11:23pm
Nostalgia-NZ

reid (9,206) Says:

‘December 2nd, 2011 at 10:36 pm
please dont threaten me…not even in a veiled way…

Heaven forfend David and as I said above, why cite out of thousands of possible examples the one case which perchance mentions the name of your momentary protagonist? Why?

I mean I’m more interested in CP but you seem as distracted with this as a seal with a ball.

How extraordinary.’

Particularly when we have an extraordinary capacity to wrongfully convict, and an extraordinary capacity to quote single convictions against 1 or 2 individuals which make up something below 0.00001% of cases so as to pass new laws.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 2, 2011 11:57pm
F E Smith

Aagh!!!!! Look at that- I go out for the night and you lot go and have fun behind my back!!!

Very disappointed, and my apologies for posting and running!

Just my 2 cents worth: I have no moral objection to capital punishment and do see it as an effective deterrent to a point, but I would restrict it to cases where there is a certainty of guilt. Weatherstone would, in my view, qualify. Scott Watson would not. Nor would David Bain, notwithstanding the view of most people posting on KB.

I note the mention of reprieves above: I was reading about crime in the early modern period and into the Victorian era the other day, and the statistic that I took from that was that only about 1/3 of death sentences were carried out. Most were, apparently, reprieved, either to imprisonment or transportation.

David, I read about the Hanratty case last year and you are completely right. What is interesting is that his family kept up a campaign for a pardon for many years after his execution, only for recent DNA analysis to show that he was in fact guilty.

Having read a fair bit about the miscarriages of justice that have occurred in the UK in the last 25 years, however, still don’t think that we can yet trust the system, neither the Police nor the trial system, to be accurate enough to ensure the death penalty can really be properly implemented either in the UK or here. And definitely not in Aus!

I laughed at your description about the Tongan juries. It isn’t an unknown feature of juries when there was capital punishment either. And most juries are never told that they can bring in a rider with their verdict if they want.

Right, that is enough for one night. See you all tomorrow, hopefully with a better performance from the Black Caps….
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 3, 2011 12:52am
David Garrett

Hi FES….yes your contribution was missed! but what a fun discussion….

Go back and read the exchanges between me and Reid…how anyone could take such umbrage because I referred to a notorious murderer who happened to have the same name – its not even the man’s surname! – is beyond me.

Then we had Mr JamesS (retired from play injured quite early in the piece) who derided my supposed lack of knowledge of the subject but then quickly showed his own woeful ignorance….

One of the perverse verdicts in Tonga during my time was a real shocker…a soldier was suspicious (without foundation as it turned out) that his wife was having an affair. He went to the army barracks and checked out a pistol. He had to make a false declaration to do so. He then kidnapped his wife and held her hostage – with the gun to her head – for some hours while he tried to make her confess. He finally shot her, the Tongans having no AOS or equivalent to end the situation. The jury brought back a verdict of manslaughter. From memory neither insanity nor provocation were offered as defences.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 3, 2011 5:41am
Nostalgia-NZ

The DP must be off the agenda when it is so obvious that our Justice system remains in fragile state of delivery of Justice, quite often elements of witchcraft remain where a public fury drives an investigation, and where there is a ‘choice’ by police or prosecutors as to who is guilty of a particular crime. Following which, evidence is ‘produced’ to fit the the theory or motive that must be sold to a Jury and contrary evidence is hidden or not pursued. Overall the ‘imagination’ of the conceived scenarios most often lack credible basis, for example Thomas was said to have still burnt a candle for Jeanette Crewe despite being happily married to another, from what I know of the Watson case there is no credible motive that endures despite encouragement by the police of two prisoners who claim details of a lurid detail sexual type ‘confession’ by Watson to 2 men he didn’t know. Well yes, Thomas driven by some sort of rage that Jeanette had never opened a gift he sent her years earlier before marrying the beautiful Vivian and Watson ‘unseen’ by all those accompanying or noting the missing couple before their disappearance, rather conviently spilling the beans to a couple of good old stool pidgeons right out of paper thin credible hollywood movie in which Humphrey Bogart turned down the lead role in favour of a musical.
So the science of credible Justice still evades us mere mortals whether we might be sated by the belief of power of judgement over all evil or not, and a tardy and tired concept by our Judges of being unwilling to search into the law for common sense and to reject checkered pieces in the mosiac of credibility and fairness, leave no realistic place for consideration of whose lives might be taken by the state.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 3, 2011 8:44am
Nostalgia-NZ

Bugger – pigeons.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 3, 2011 8:48am

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« A four year term

MPs salaries »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.4K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Links

Justice in Brazil
No Right Turn
The Presidential Bicameral Adjournment Clause Is Almost An American Equivalent to Prorogation
Utopia
"Seymour is only doing openly what M?ori nationalists and their Pakeha allies have been doing, quietly for the past 50 years."
Not PC
This Weeks Email To Prime Minister Luxon.
No Minister
Daily review 22/11/2024
The Standard
More young offenders will get boot camp, bus drivers will get some protection – and there’s relief for southern farmers
Point of Order
Sowell says
Hompaddock
New Zealand government urged to back ICC arrest warrants for Israeli leaders without equivocation
The Daily Blog
The transgender agenda sunk Kamala
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
What does “reciprocity” mean in New Zealand laws?
Croaking Cassandra
A Day of Reckoning
NZCPR
Media Link: “A View from Afar” on the US elections.
Kiwipolitico
This will not end well
Offsetting Behaviour
Top 14 Predictions for Round 10
Stats Chat
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d