Up Front: All Together Now
291 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 Newer→ Last
-
Good day to you too Chris.
Here's something for you -
Steven Crawford
I stopped reading the linked article when I reached this bit.
Secondly, it's very rare that I have any sympathy or find much agreement with right-wing blogger Whaleoil (Cameron Slater)
Whilst I don't agree than name suppression was appropriate in the case of the musician up the alleyway, I absolutely don't agree that publishing sex offenders names is always in societies best interest. Especially when other people, (not just the principle victim) could be adversely effected by stigma.
Neither do I. Later in that paragraph I point out I am only addressing the musician case. I was not supporting Cameron’s actions in regards the other case.
Stephen Clover,
I do know that the musician was wasted enough to do that, admitted he did it because he was wasted and didn't remember it the next day.
Do you actually KNOW all that, or do you just think you know?
Well, the musician’s lawyer seems to pretty much back chris up: “Mr Mansfield said the man had been drinking and had no recollection of what happened the next day.” From here.
-
Few ordinary "joe bloggs" who assault their partners can afford $150,000 Kyle.
You've only quoted half my paragraph:
You're also assuming that an ordinary "joe bloggs' who assaulted their partner wouldn't get a similar treatment. Conviction without jail time and alcohol/violence treatment would be a common sentence for a first time conviction.
There's no evidence that the payment of money led to him getting any better deal in the courts than he would have got if he hadn't paid the $150,000. Your assumption is that the prosecution team, and the judge, aren't sufficiently onto it to treat each case on it's merits. The penalty applied wouldn't be unusual in a domestic violence case.
If I was to get up in arms about a case of money helping, a few years ago there was a rich businessman busted for (I think) cocaine possession. The judge didn't fine him the ~$3000 or so because "he was so rich that it wouldn't matter to him at all". I failed to see why he shouldn't just be fined anyway, like everyone else.
Oh, and I should have been onto "What would Kyle think"?
:)
-
Weigh it up, should I report the abuse? Or should I blackmail the attacker to pay me? Either message could be inferred.
Chris: With all due and sincere respect, I'm really sick of the word "blackmail" or "extortion" being used in the context of the Veitch case. I know this comes across as terribly old fashioned, but I believe words have meanings, and when those words denote serious criminal offences I throw them around with some care.
If nothing else, I'd have been suing the arse off anyone who defamed me as an extortionist or a blackmailing bitch in Kristin Dunne-Powell's position. Then again, I'm also a vindictive prick with a short temper.
-
Thanks for the heads up about any lack of clarity there Craig,
I wasn't referring to Kirsten Dunst-Powell, I was hazarding a guess at possible inferences of the message the Vietch judgment may send to people involved in future violent episodes, in response to;Let's also hope that others have taken a message that reporting abuse should always be the first avenue to try.
Weigh it up, should I report the abuse? Or should I blackmail the attacker to pay me? Either message could be inferred.
Specifically thinking in relation to violent crime and heaven forbid, our smacking legislation, ie, not so much the Vietch case itself as the precedent and message that has been sent by the ruling.
"I'm sorry for beating you yesterday son, here's your candy"
"I said $1000 compensation daddy!"Thanks for the song Sofie. I just couldn't find a better word in that case Craig.
You're also assuming that an ordinary "joe bloggs' who assaulted their partner wouldn't get a similar treatment. Conviction without jail time and alcohol/violence treatment would be a common sentence for a first time conviction.
There's no evidence that the payment of money led to him getting any better deal in the courts than he would have got if he hadn't paid the $150,000. Your assumption is that the prosecution team, and the judge, aren't sufficiently onto it to treat each case on it's merits. The penalty applied wouldn't be unusual in a domestic violence case.
He broke Kirsten's back Kyle, it's millimetres away from permanent paralysis or death. Most of the charges were dropped, it's not your average domestic violence case. One of the primary purposes of the compensation was to avoid the New Zealand legal system. If that's what NZ is going for, then it can only be classed as an unmitigated success.
-
-
So you seriously didn't participate in talkback before your exile?
You'd be a natural.words have meanings
In China it seems they are whatever you want them to be
-
I'm glad someone else is watching.
Specifically thinking in relation to violent crime and heaven forbid, our smacking legislation, ie, not so much the Vietch case itself as the precedent and message that has been sent by the ruling.
"I'm sorry for beating you yesterday son, here's your candy"
"I said $1000 compensation daddy!"That gives a whole new meaning to the term 'logical leap'. More like a logical quantum leap.
-
Actually, that was a bit rude of me. Sorry.
-
O, yes cripes.It was Sacha, but I love you, I was a jumpy goat yesterday and accused you of throwing horses at me, so no problem.
Significantly in Veitch's case, I think it's safe to say it wouldn't have even gone near a court (as was the case for a fair old while) had someone not outed them in the News. I'm perhaps naive enough to assume that it's not an isolated incident.
If you prefer a system where people are making deals to bypass the courts, I'd have to agree that that's a sound method to reduce domestic violence statistics in New Zealand, and free up the courts system. (which can only be a good thing, no?)
But, honestly I don't think it does much to address the endemic violence in New Zealand.
It's a huge leap I'll acknowledge Recordari, but The main problem is, if anyone at all were to follow Tony and Kirsten's example then we won't hear about it and the violence won't be addressed.
ie. there was no "attempting to subvert the course of justice" charge brought. It was overlooked.
If Clayton Weatherspoon, had only made a couple of non lethal stabs, paid for his victim to be sewn up and reached a compensation deal, which would result in Clayton still walking around having avoided the courts altogether. Would you be living in a safer country? Because after all how far was Veitch from committing a homicide when he broke Kirsten's vertabrae?
I apologize if that tasteless example causes offence. I admire your forgiveness and empathy towards Veitch. But I can't see how creating a domestic violence black market is going to make things less violent.
-
words have meanings
In China it seems they are whatever you want them to be
That's quite apt Sacha, I didn't think much of using the word 'blackmail' at the time, but, (while still in talkback rant mode), try this on for size;
A New Zealand (recently) ex-colleague at my company was last December offered this ultimatum by his 34 y/o student;
She would tell the school they'd be in a relationship for the past two years unless he paid her $1000 (NZ). He paid, she told.
As the whole exchange had occurred verbally, the admin refused to address the extortion issue, she remains a student. There was no going to the police as she is significantly richer than him. I'd classify that as blackmail and/ or extortion in most locales. If my use of the word seemed careless. My apologies to all concerned. I just don't see those kind of scenarios as that far out of leftfield in a capitalist justice system.
As you were.
-
He broke Kirsten's back Kyle, it's millimetres away from permanent paralysis or death. Most of the charges were dropped, it's not your average domestic violence case.
It's a wee cord surrounded by some small bones. Anything that happens to your back is "millimetres away from permanent paralysis or death". Sadly, it's by no means at the more serious end of domestic violence, which involves years of physical, emotional, and sexual abuse, including child victims, and at the more serious end of the scale, death. Domestic violence files are not pleasant reading, as I found out one summer job.
The purpose of the domestic violence strategy, in cases such as this, is to get the offender into a programme which tries to address their issues and prevent re-offending. At the more serious end of the scale, they'll seek jail time.
And to be honest, what else would you have the prosecution side do in this case that would do anything useful? Castration?
-
Well at the very least Kyle, I think ensuring Tony was forced to participate in a non-violence program rather than leaving that decision in the hands of his parole officer would have been a start.
He pleaded guilty to injuring with reckless disregard - which carries a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment - and was sentenced by Judge Jan Doogue to nine months supervision, 300 hours community service and a $10,000 fine. If his parole officer deems it necessary, Veitch must also attend a Stop Violence programme.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2339278/Veitch-sentenced
2002-2005 was years of domestic abuse, but you are right Kyle, there are certainly more serious cases out there. That's what concerns me.
Personally I feel a message should be sent whereby acts of violence are taken more seriously than preserving people's reputations. I feel that violence should be dealt with by the police and courts, with no allowance made for under the table deals, and that any attempts to subvert this process shouldn't be tolerated. But foremost as you just said; "get the offender into a programme." Not just threaten them with it.
-
Weatherspoon...I guess a freudian nod to an argument against capitalist justice.
-
Off topic, but I now know how US citizens felt under George W Bush.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/3288431/Pope-attacks-British-human-rights-reform -
It may just get us back on topic just thinking (apologies again Emma)... I'm guessing that this clown's "natural law" is related to the one whereby females fantasizing about group sex are just gagging to be raped.
Is there some word to describe this act of saying the exact opposite of what you mean?
''In some respects it actually violates the natural law upon which the equality of all human beings is grounded and by which it is guaranteed.''
Post your response…
This topic is closed.