Mark Munroe hanging on
September 30th, 2005 at 10:55 pm by David FarrarWell just when I thought the Capill saga was buried and had even praised Christian Heritage for getting Munroe to resign, it seems has has been asked to resign, but is refusing.
No tag for this post.
September 30th, 2005 at 11:28 pm
Perhaps he is trying to hold off until the great redeemer is released??
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 7:45 am
Well he can be sacked then and then the Police can do a search warrant on his computer, given his remarks justifying paedophilia, he has to be a person of interest.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 9:40 am
To be utterly cynical and worldly for a moment, I wonder if Munro has been going over his contract with an employment lawyer?
Vote:October 3rd, 2005 at 12:08 pm
Does the National Party still regard CHP as a suitable coalition partner and, if so, what policy trade offs will it make?
Vote:October 4th, 2005 at 8:56 am
Regardless of what you believe about the death penalty, or whether you agree Capill should be hanged or not, Munroe’s email in no way (as the Herald said) “defends Capill’s actions”.
The point of his email was simply to question whether Capill deserves the death penalty. Hanging someone, after all, is a BIG DEAL. Munroe is a supporter of the death penalty, but a thoughtful one, so he wants checks and balances rather than knee-jerk reactions.
Munroe is absolutely NOT a supporter of child abuse, Capill’s abuse included. His point is that we must have checks and balances before we execute someone. Wouldn’t we all? (Once again, all this regardless of whether you believe in his particular checks and balances or not.)
One other thing for Mr Farrar: it’s very bad form to publish a personal email of whatever description, whether it was “leaked” to you or not. Also, whether his email had the victims’ names or not (I don’t think it did), someone sending any private email does not breach a court order. Court orders are about publicly published stuff, not private emails, or goodness knows what emails we couldn’t send…
Vote:October 4th, 2005 at 8:59 am
Regardless of what you believe about the death penalty, or whether you agree Capill should be hanged or not, Munroe’s email in no way (as the Herald said) “defends Capill’s actions”.
The point of his email was simply to question whether Capill deserves the death penalty. Hanging someone, after all, is a BIG DEAL. Munroe is a supporter of the death penalty, but a thoughtful one, so he wants checks and balances rather than knee-jerk reactions.
Munroe is absolutely NOT a supporter of child abuse, Capill’s abuse included. His point is that we must have checks and balances before we execute someone. Wouldn’t we all? (Once again, all this regardless of whether you believe in his particular checks and balances or not.)
One other thing for Mr Farrar: it’s very bad form to publish a personal email of whatever description, whether it was “leaked” to you or not. Also, whether his email had the victims’ names or not (I don’t think it did), someone sending any private email does not breach a court order. Court orders are about publicly published stuff, not private emails, or goodness knows what emails we couldn’t send…
Vote:October 4th, 2005 at 9:13 am
Oops, sorry about the double post, guys. My dial-up was going slow, so I thought it hadn’t gone through.
Vote:October 4th, 2005 at 11:36 am
The issue is not whether the death penalty applies or doesn’t, but the fact that Munroe is attempting to minimize what Capill has done. CHP has realized this, and as it is completely undefensible position, has rightly asked him to resign.
David’s analysis of the email is spot on.
Vote:October 4th, 2005 at 12:48 pm
No, Munroe is not attempting to “minimize” what Capill has done. Nowhere in his email does he say or imply he’s soft about Capill’s crimes. He’s simply responding to Flannagan’s “Capill should be hung,” and says that given his understanding of the Bible, Capill does not deserve death. Nothing more, nothing less. We’ve got to read the Munroe’s words, not the media’s idea of his motives.
Of course, no one’s denying Capill needs to serve his sentence justly. And, regardless of whatever technicalities might be involved, given his hypocrisy, I think it was (at least) foolish of him to appeal his sentence.
Capill’s crimes are a wake-up call for us all. Jesus said that if one of us even looks at a woman lustfully, we’ve committed adultery in our heart. That reminded me, for one, that I’m far from perfect.
Vote:November 2nd, 2005 at 7:27 am
Regardless of the intention of Munroe’s email, what politian with any political savvy would comment on such a hot subject, especially in such an easily duplicated medium as email.
Vote:November 2nd, 2005 at 8:34 am
Ben – the intention and the interpretation may be different. Normal practice for a political official who causes embarassment of this magnitude is to fall on their own sword.
Normally the official is willing to put the party interests ahead of their own interests, but in this case it doesn’t look like Munroe will.
Vote: