Posts by Russell Brown
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: About Chris Brown, in reply to ,
Point of information: Convictions don’t actually get wiped under the clean state legislation.
No, true. They're removed from the public record, you don't have to declare them to anyone and it's an offence for anyone to reveal them from the record. You can't even find out about your own convictions.
-
Hard News: About Chris Brown, in reply to B Jones,
It's not the state's job to forgive anyone - it's their job to either punish someone or stop punishing someone. Forgiveness is a totally different concept.
Genuine question: have you always held that view of the Clean Slate Act? Do you think no one should be allowed to move on after paying their penalty? Should someone busted for a joint or shoplifting in the 1980s still have trouble travelling or getting a job?
-
Hard News: About Chris Brown, in reply to simon g,
No such need exists for fly-in fly-out foreign celebs, so Brown is a safer target.
Also, Tamihere, Jackson and Henry haven't savagely assaulted anyone. And they're not seeking an immigration waiver.
-
Hard News: About Chris Brown, in reply to B Jones,
It was a while ago, you can't hold a grudge forever, give a guy a chance to turn his life around and be a good role model, he makes lots of people happy. We don't do this for fraudsters. We don't do this for thieves.
We literally do. The Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Act wipes the convictions of thieves and fraudsters and many others after seven years clean, so long as they haven't had a custodial sentence or committed a "specified offence".
I think even Veitch's 2009 conviction will expire next year. But of course there's the social sanction of the internet. I doubt he'd have any luck pleading the "right to be forgotten" from Google. It's just that the official record will show no conviction against his name.
PS: Note also that past convictions can still be revealed and reported by the media.
We don't do this for child abusers.
No, and that's a specified offence.
-
Hard News: About Chris Brown, in reply to Sue,
I think neither Veitch or Osbourne were not charged in court, we not convicted, there is a difference between a person with a record and one who does not. so i think they are irrelevant to the discussion
Veitch pled guilty to the most serious charge, of injuring with reckless disregard. The Crown did not present evidence regarding the other six charges, and they were dismissed – it took a battle to get the full police file released – and he got supervision, community work and a $10,000 fine.
But if you doubted what a creep he is, this from Wikipedia:
Since the sentencing, questions have come to light over the accuracy of some of the character testimonials submitted during the sentencing phase of the case. It has been alleged that Veitch amended character references or procured some testimonials from prominent New Zealanders by saying that their testimonials would be used for a passport or job application. These testimonials were used by the judge in setting Veitch's sentence. In particular, Dame Susan Devoy and Dave Currie have said that testimonials written by them to support a passport application were edited and submitted on this unrelated matter. The Crown will take no action on the matter.
-
Hard News: About Chris Brown, in reply to B Jones,
Veitch's employers have a right to employ him if they want, but he doesn't have a right to be employed.
Let's put it this way, then: he has a right to seek employment.
-
Hard News: About Chris Brown, in reply to HORansome,
I wouldn't be surprised if there was a little overlap between those who oppose Brown's entry to the country and yet happily listen to Veitch;
I suspect you're correct.
-
Hard News: About Chris Brown, in reply to HORansome,
This wasn't a case of giving Tony Veitch a job in shop or a factory making furniture; this was a case of giving Veitch another prominent media position, one in the public eye. Really, the only case for Veitch ever getting another media role, would have been if he was a) the only sports broadcaster in the country and b) we were legally mandated to have at least one sports broadcaster. As neither of those are the case, his remarkable return to the media really was a slight to the victims of domestic violence.
In which case, our quarrel is with Veitch's employers.
-
Speaker: 11 ways the Opposition has…, in reply to Joe Wylie,
According to Tim Fulton in today's Press, operating consents for the Canterbury Councils-owned scheme have since been hocked to major banks as a condition of funding. In case of default, they'll own the water.
Arrrgh.
-
Speaker: Rugby, Racing and Emotions, in reply to Kyle MacDonald,
I only recently learned that New Zealand's tour to South Africa in 1976 caused African nations to boycott the 1976 Montreal Olympics. An uncomfortable side note is that the absence of those nations (arguably) made possible John Walkers 1500 m gold medal...
I was 14, old enough to feel ashamed of my country. 20 African nations weren't there because of us.
In sporting terms, yes, it did deprive the Games of another Walker-Bayi matchup (after the 74 Commonwealth Games, where they both broke the world 1500m record in the final), but I think Walker would have won that one.
And I do still remember where I was when New Zealand's hockey team won gold. Down at Burnside Park, about to play rugby ...
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 276 277 278 279 280 … 2279 Older→ First