Staggering that. A variation on the "I'm just following orders" defence. And then to say it was ok because the judge and prosecutor didn't complain. I understand the need for a lawyer to advocate positions that he may not personally agree with but this is taking it to such a low it is mind boggling.
Surely that was the defence lawyer giving the defendants side of things and in the context of the trial is relevant to showing the defendants true belief.
That this is universally damned by all of society and the courts is the shining light to changes in society.
This was a real defence not so long ago.
Like the one Bazley conducted half a decade ago after the Louise Nicholas complaint, you mean?
Well somewhat, but not quite. The Bazley report was a one off, with yearly audits to see how they're going on the recommendations.
The Bazley report has identified some serious issues and now we're waiting for the police to deal with them all. The power and timing is back on the police now.
In order to deal with systemic corruption a solution is to appoint a board of outside experts, with wide-ranging legal powers, independent counsel and investigators, and require police and other individuals to testify like a court of law. And the ability to lay charges itself. Ongoing until it's happy it's dealt with the problem. Power is taken away from the police since it's assessed they can't deal with their internal issues.
I'm not suggesting that as a solution here, this feels more like a culture problem rather than corruption.
I’m not suggesting that as a solution here, this feels more like a culture problem rather than corruption.
A culture problem is what exists in the minds of the police and causes them to prejudice their dealings with victims of sexual assult. The corruption lies in what they have failed to do about it, preferring to protect their own rather than serve the public and denying victims the opportunity for justice, IMHO.
This is horrible and something every New Zealand police officer - especially Peter Marshall - needs to see. Trigger warnings apply.
this feels more like a culture problem rather than corruption
Isn't that what Bazley said? They've had ages to fix it too.
Next move, fire those who have failed to do so. Appoint a change agent at the top. It's what any other organisation would do with sustained poor performance.
Marshall's term ending in a few months is a perfect opportunity if they're serious.
Had a quick glimpse of the Sensible Sentencing Trust's Facebook page on the RoastBusters debacle - I looked at it so you don't have to - and with a couple of exceptions the commenters have thankfully steered clear of playing the uncovered meat card or taking the law into their own hands. Still surprised they weren't more publically vocal about it.
The next Police Commissioner should look something like this:
Why are you surprised?
Maybe it's starting to hit them just how irrelevant they are to society.
Thank you for sharing this
Just thought I'd pass this on from Toto in response to the e-mail I sent them. I presume others got the same letter and apologies if this is a repeat.
Toto Restaurant as advertisers have had a long relationship with Radio Live. That does not extend to our business having any editorial influence over the content of the programmes in which our advertisements appear. As a general rule, we believe it is important that editorial and advertising functions are best kept separate.
We were disturbed by the tone of last week’s interview of Amy by Willie Jackson and John Tamihere. The use of phrases such as “mischief” to describe alleged serious sexual misconduct trivialised a very serious issue.
Once we understood what had transpired we immediately contacted the management of MediaWorks - Radio Live to review our relationship and have decided to cease any advertising and or sponsorship forthwith. We fully endorse MediaWork’s decision to stand Messr’s Jackson and Tamihere down and as a result will consider advertising on the network again.
To all of our friends, loyal patrons and future guests we sincerely convey that the views and expressions of Messr’s Tamihere and Jackson were not those shared by the Owner, Management or Staff of Toto Restaurant.
Indeed. Marshall might be personally a nice guy, but he has very shallow principles and has been promoted to his level of incompetence. The torrent of scandals that is gushing out now proves that. They happened under his watch, after the Bazley report. Strutting about in a shiny hat with the expectation of a knighthood won't cover that.
A bit of spin from those in the force who think they're in the running to be the next Top Cop spot.
Sources have told The Press that Gordon Stanley Meyer's supervisors at Christchurch South police station were not told about the 2007 complaint until after his 2011 offending came to light.
Police National Headquarters said last night there were no "lawful grounds" to tell them about it.
Promotions are at risk, the truth must not come out.
On a brighter note for once, the boys in blue have just made a big money laundering & drugs bust at the nation's biggest casino. Then again, it's the work of the SFO/OFCA unit of the police, so it's probably not the same officers in charge of chasing rapists.
There were always stories about various Cop Shops in Christchurch.At their most benign it was the cops signing the ceiling of the cafeteria when they leave/visit the South Cop Shop.
This is the graffiti of public property you & I paid for. In other towns kids have been stabbed to death or sentenced to prison for such acts.
The other stories are consistent with Meyers actions but not limited to him.
This report should read as the rough draft for another Underbelly series.
... rough draft for another Underbelly series.
...in deference to our new dairy overlords,
the Canterbury bite from this franchise
would have to be... Udderbelly
"It can't happen here". How many times do we hear that? It's not just the corruption, but the cover-up that is the problem, which is also corruption. It's been under Marshall's watch and the buck stops at his desk. Did he know, and if he didn't, why not?
I applaud the sentence of Home D. here
Named, shamed and restrained, by the conditions of his sentence. I just wished the Justices would have as fairer view of the normal suspects before them.
A systemic breakdown of communication
And in shocking news, the IPCA said "no individual could be criticised" for that breakdown in communication. Most obviously because anyone who does name names is likely to be sued, which is why we have bodies like IPCA who are supposed to criticise on our behalf.
I wonder if they're taking tips from the PM's office, or is this an independent loss off control?
independent loss off control
or 'slight bladder weakness' as advertisers would have it
"no individual could be criticised" for that breakdown in communication.
not even the person who failed to communicate?
nice try, guvs.
So somehow nobody, not even those who failed to communicate, can be criticised for failing to communicate. Can anyone be held to account for the fact real people's lives are still being screwed around with?