John Dewar
Make sure you read this Herald profile of John Dewar. Speaks for itself.
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
Tags: New ZealandJohn Dewar
46 Responses to “John Dewar”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
August 11th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
All we have had is Margareet Bazley’s Commission of Inquiry, related soley to the sexual misbehaviour of Police. It was pretty damning of Police and the Police Complaints Authority
Isn’t it time we had a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the criminal behaviour of Police Officers, which at the present time is investigated only by the Police Complaints Authority, whose Transparency is not covered by the Official Information Act? What does a Police Disiplinary Board accomplish or a Code of Conduct drawn up by Police. BA?
These people are all in The Service of the Crown and cannot disadvantage themselves to the disadvantage of others? But they do wkth the backing of politicians.
August 11th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
And Russell Brown had the manipulative audacity to post on his blog Public Address – a set up post that I was a scary nutbar for suggesting Tom Lewis’s book Cover Ups & Cops Outs was a farce with no element of truth contained in it whatsoever. Good way of getting rid of me Mr Brown . We will met one day . Are all labour party sycophants suffering from the mutational process called nimbyosis Mr Brown ??
What you say now Mr Russell Brown?
August 11th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Not one police officer came forward to say what good bloke Dewer was, no one. And yet he ran his whole case on that premise which got rejected by the High Court jury. I am still fuming at the slackness of the way Dewer was able to evade justice for many many years, the reasons why that delay occured has never been explained. It is my view the reasons for that delay needs further examination because the events we are talking about occured 10 years ago.
August 11th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
Still waiting to hear Police commissioner Broad’s reaction to this debacle.
Has the cat got your tongue Howard?
August 11th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
What goes around comes around. Dewar has just found that out. Good riddance.
August 11th, 2007 at 2:14 pm
Frank, you raise a very good point. No one should argue that it would be traumatic and leave psychological scares to be pack raped. However, I would also argue that it would be very traumatic to be the victim of a severe police bashing.
I am thinking particularly of the 55 year old miner in the South Island walking home from the pub. He committed the serious crime of tapping on the bonnet of the police car. The case has been on TV at least a couple of times. He was left black and blue over most of his body after being bashed up by four police officers. There was a payout of I believe about 35k. However not long after one of the police involved in this vicious and cowardly assault receive an award.
Should not male victims of police brutality also receive justice.
August 11th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
“Good way of getting rid of me Mr Brown . We will met one day”
Was that a not so thinly veiled threat of physical violence D4J? If so I suggest you be more careful about sharing your maniacal urges to in public forums – it might just get you into trouble one day ….
August 11th, 2007 at 2:34 pm
Freddy: Police Commissioner Howard Broad is the Invisible Man. We have Hon Annette King Minister of Police fronting for Him most of the time, voicing her confidence in him, when she has information to the contrary!!
His latest “fronter” was the New Zealand Police Association Vice President commenting on the Dewar case, and ‘assuring the public that perversion and defeat of the course of justice was unlikely to occur again”. And it’s flourishing unchecked at this very moment?
I have no proof that Police Commissioner Howard Broad ever sees correspondence addressed to him.
Copies of Correspondence, addressed to him received back under The Official Information Act 1982 show only the Received Date Stamp of Police National HQ No signed memos or replies to his correspondence by the Commissioner. Always the correspondence has been referred, but with no copy of the referral, to some other stooge who then allegedly perverts and defeats the course of Justice with the Commissioner’s apparent blessing?
August 11th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
That was no threat roger nome you twisted demented nutbar , NZ is a small place weirdo !! stop trying to distort things you inspid nimby creature !!
August 11th, 2007 at 6:40 pm
Chuck Bird, absolutely male victims of brutality should receive justice. It sounds as though in the case you speak of at least the victim received acknowledgment the brutality took place & hopefully didn’t have to wait decades to receive it. Unlike LN & the other women that endured henious violence at the hands of SS&R( & their cohorts), and then when their official complaints were lodged Dewar threw one court case & didn’t submit the claims for the other offences. Dewars guilty verdict is a good outcome for a long litany of lies, deception & corruption. I salute prosecutor Stanaway & the Austin police investigaters for their committment in securing conviction against at least one of the perpetrators in this sordid business. It remains an absolute bastard the rapists themselves benefited from an antiquated judiciary process that doesn’t allow for an ‘unproveable’ verdict. There is however comfort they have been exposed for the villains they are and their lives will never be the same and they will be accountable…. at some sweet time, they will be accountable!
August 11th, 2007 at 7:24 pm
The Police shouldn’t worry too much about this minor turbulence; next year they will revert to their traditional role of sticking the boot in to opponents of the National Party and its rich mates. Remember the 1981 Springbok Tour anyone? IMHO, the establishment of the day turned a blind eye to Police excesses in return for services rendered and will almost certainly do so again.
August 11th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
Yes the old 81 bok tour, how could I forget the police minto bars or should I say the teenage girl baton bar ? ooops sorry miss manderson and greg the egg o’conner.
August 11th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
how many of these FAT ex pollce really rich sexual predators,are thumbing their noses at us . That fat pig rikards must laugh out aloud when he checks his bank statement in his unplaned retirement( THE TEENAGE PACK RAPIST)is paid with the sweat of my brow,ps does rickards have kids and a clothes dryier , sexual predators start or finish with kids, my thought .R
August 12th, 2007 at 6:51 am
“a somewhat minor misdemeanour”.
That says a lot about the reporters, not Dewar. Leaving the police is allowed you know. You wouldn’t have thought so by that report.
August 12th, 2007 at 6:56 am
Lisa wrote: “It remains an absolute bastard the rapists themselves benefited from an antiquated judiciary process that doesn’t allow for an ‘unproveable’ verdict”. But you also claimed that Louise and others had been subject to ‘heinous violence’.
I think you might find a course on logic useful. If something is unproven, then by definition it is not known what, if anything, happened. Unless of course you know things that the rest of us mere mortals don’t.
August 12th, 2007 at 8:42 am
Lisa, I am glad you support male victims of police brutality receiving justice. However, the man I referred to received hush money not justice. The criminals who assaulted him were not held to account. I do not think the victim of the rape at the Mount would be satisfied with case payout in lieu of the rapist going to jail – nor should she.
I am not talking about a police officer backhanding and cheeky youth but vicious and cowardly attack on a defenseless man by four men in a prolonged attack. Male victims of violence often do not receive justice. This is even more the case when it comes to domestic violence. Look at the latest policy of only asking women when admitted to hospital.
August 12th, 2007 at 8:49 am
Just for the record the same dirty animals ( Greymouth Police ) that attacked Mr Menzies were responsible for para -medic’s visiting me in the Greymouth PoliceStation cell block . These dirtbags enjoy pulverizing the innocent and vulnerable ! – Ouch that hurt Howard and Egg !
August 12th, 2007 at 9:13 am
This just begins to expose what really happens in the NZ Police force. Kiwis have long been ignorant about police behaviour – because they hadn’t personally seen any police wrongdoings, assuming they were all fine upstanding coppers protecting the citizens and catching criminals. The cops have long been a law unto themselves and to believe otherwise is naive.
I’ve been roughed up twice by NZ cops (in the 1980′s & 1990′s) having done nothing more than standing in a retail arcade and resembling someone they were looking for, and sitting in my car outside a school dance waiting to pick up my daughter. I never laid a complaint at the time, knowing it would be a waste of time, and I’m sure many many others have been in the same situation. The assaults never left cuts or bruises, and ripped clothing evidence would have been laughed out of the station. I know this is trivial compared to LN and others, but I knew it wasn’t unique to me, and the recent court cases begin to reveal the true level of police corruption in NZ.
I’m glad that the spotlight is finally falling onto some of these bastards – may it continue until they learn that they too are subject to the laws of the land.
August 12th, 2007 at 9:25 am
I’m glad this piece of filth has been convicted. But l’m not so sure about this article. It strikes me as a gleeful hatchet job with no right of reply. Not exactly good journalism.
August 12th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Odious little man, always was and should have been sorted. The feeble response of the police which took years and years, makes me think there are odious little men like Dewer everywhere.
August 12th, 2007 at 12:05 pm
Chuckbird, that policy of asking the ’3 questions’ to all females that present for any medical care is a nonsense. Sure we want to protect victims of violence but how on earth asking a patient who presents with asthma or cellulitis going to reduce the statistics. Me thinks the real victims of domestic violence will be prevented from seeking medical care by their abusers so they wont be subjected to the questions that may expose the violence.
Ross, I will write this slowly for you. The case against the rapists was stacked against the complainant for many reasons including;
~ the time that had lapsed between the offences and the time the case got to trial (Dewar is partly responsible for that!) therefore there could be no DNA evidence, no scene examination & witnesses from both sides proved unreliable
~ the rapists had the advantage of being semi educated & had all held ‘responsible’ positions & were well familiar with court proceedings versus the complainant who was not
~ the very evidence that was relevant to the trial AND went to the character of the rapists was suppressed (ie 2 of the trio already convicted of group rape with restraints & batons) & of impending further charges for offences of the same nature!!! Furthermore the prosecution were not able to put character witnesses on the stand that could portray the real character of the defendants…including the long line of female employees that had worked for Shipton whilst he was a bar owner in Tauranga and had ‘experienced his character’ first hand, nor the female colleagues of Rickards who had ‘endured his charm’ first hand or their male colleagues who did nothing because of his connections to the heirarchy. I heard of Rickards that one of his colleagues said he was the first man you would want as backup at a situation, but the last man you’d invite for dinner…quite telling really. One doesn’t have to delve very far to find much anecdotal stuff as to these guys characters but again all anecdotal and therefore not admissable.
~ The character of the complainant (ie the innocent party) was assassinated both inside the court and outside by the rapists supporters, during the trial. Particularly Shiptons venomous brother Greg who continued to protest his brothers innocence despite all the while knowing he was already a convicted rapist in jail
~ The intimidation tactics of the rapists, think Rickards turning up in police uniform for a case AGAINST him whilst he was a serving police officer…unsurpassed arrogance, the rapists families and support people(including Dewar it now transpires) taking over the court public gallery and the media courting waiata and karakia. One might question what kind of people would want their children (particularly) sitting through testimony of such an evil nature levelled at their fathers. Shipton putting his wife on the stand ( to also be crucified).
My point remains that it was always going to a difficult case for the prosecution to PROVE, however as most commentators seem to agree there was more than enough circumstantial evidence for there to be much doubt as to their innocence and therefore an ‘unproveable’ option within our judiciary may have better served justice.
Furthermore Ross, two of the trio are CONVICTED rapists who inflicted henious violence & that LN also endured sexual violence has not ever been in dispute… so I’m not sure why it is me you think requires logic lessons! It may be that you are too close to the action to be objective Ross.
August 12th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
Yes Lisa, the Labour Social Engineering Feminazi Whores have made it harder for the genuine female victim of DV, as the jake the fake type women bashing coward will threaten the bash if the victims’ seek medical assistance !
This Labour Government must be destroyed as they have LOST THE PLOT !!
August 12th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
I’m glad everyone seems to agree with the idea of justice for male victims. Perhaps ACC might take notice.
Female victim: I got drunk and had sex but now I think its rape. ACC: Ok take the left dorr pick up your $20K cheque as you leave bye.
Male vicitm: I got kidnapped by a pack of thugs. ACC Piss off.
I too am glad this filth has been taken down – right justice, wrong reason but in this case we’ll let the ends justify the means eh?
August 12th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Lisa – well put.
Ross – you must be the last person in NZ to beleive that RS&S are lily-white or hard-done-by. They squirmed out, but most people can make a judgement call for themselves. Would you be happy with any of those 3 taking your teenage daughter out?
August 12th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Porcupine, you and a few others on these threads seem hell bent on perpetuating the myth that women who have endured sexual abuse get lump sum payouts from ACC. You are wrong. I wonder if it the campaign by a Dunedin law firm a few years back that ‘invited’ sexual abuse survivors to test their eligibilty for ACC is what you are so bitter & twisted about. At that time anyone who had ALREADY filed an ACC claim for sexual abuse were able to be assessed as to whether they has suffered psychological harm from the abuse and IF that was VALIDATED, they were able to APPLY for compensation which was ASSESSED and depending on the % of harm a payout may have been made. SOME of these claimants received a ‘lump sum’ payout backdated until the time they had lodged their ACC claims. Now for the record and on good authority( you just need to believe me here), these assessments were and still are vigorous. ACC tend not to emply push over psychologists/psychiatrists into these roles as of course they wish to minimise payouts. Key points to note ~ A claim had already have needed to have been made for any backdating to be considered (think about it,of course there required strict criteria to stop opportunists from feigning a claim) ~ If it were as simple as you say there would be good cause for public backlash (even from rape survivor sympathisers I should expect) ~ In my experience any payout has been significantly less than what is likely to have been spent in counselling/therapies/ medical appointments by the women themselves out of their own pockets.
I think it is a slippery slope to bang on about this myth at every opportunity as no doubt there will be some amongst the readers who will take what you say as gospell and it is simply not so. By all means feel aggrieved if you believe ACC dont meet their obligations with other claimants ( as in your example of the man beaten up by thugs) but I encourage you to make a distinction in who is the villain here. It would be intersting to do some investigation into ACC claims it would be my pick that male claimants would significantly outnumber female claimants but that’s just a hunch. Never the less I am continually gobsmacked at the perception that women fare better in these matters based on gender. It is my assertion that it is simply not the case.
August 12th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
Lisa, how many cases would you like for me to prove that ACC have paid out for psychological trauma to victms after alleged sexual abuse where the perpetrator is not criminally culpable ? These cases date back to early 80′s to present day , nothing but lies then cash !!
The basic facts would be more appropriate to be argued in a Court in a law than here ?
August 12th, 2007 at 1:30 pm
Perjury anybody -ACC is a feminazi rort – how do you plead Ms Dyson ?
August 12th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
D4J
Just one will do
August 12th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
~ the time that had lapsed between the offences and the time the case got to trial.
Lisa, you obviously mean “alleged” offences.
~ therefore there could be no DNA evidence.
Hmmm, considering that the group sex was allegedly consensual, I’m not sure how hlepful DNA evidence would have been.
~ the rapists had the advantage
You obviously mean “alleged” rapists.
~ the very evidence that was relevant to the trial AND went to the character of the rapists was suppressed (ie 2 of the trio already convicted of group rape with restraints & batons).
Why was that evidence suppressed? Not because it would prejudice Shipton and Schollum but because it would prejudice Clint Rickards, and of course it would have. He had no convictions, so there was no reasons why he should be prejucided by the convictions of others. This begs the question: why wasn’t Rickards tried on his own? I’m sure Phil Kitchen will answer that question in due course. Yeah, right.
August 12th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
A GREAT post Lisa, you say it how i think the average New Zealander thinks(ie a thinker not how a socialist thinks)again a will thought out post, and remember the fat tossier rickards is recieving a great salary every week, for being the token maori in high places in the police ( what is it with groups of cops bonking teenages , do they have small batons)and do these cops love watching there mates bonking teenagers, (a porn movie could be made by our elderly police and their memories, R
August 12th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
What I find most disturbing about the case against the evil three is the manner in which the Judge allowed the submission of a hearsay document said to have been made by a Flatmate and on which the whole case turned. As reported at the time, and again in Saturdays Dom Post. The witness has recanted on this document stating she stayed in Australia and refused to come to NZ to give evidence because she was in danger of being done for perjury if she said on oath what was in the document. Det Ch. Insp. Rex MILLER who took the statement from her was not called as a witness in the case to produce and be examined about this document. If he had been he would have testified that he believed it was a pack of lies and the person making it was unreliable. Incredibly the Judge not only allowed the statement to be produced by the Crown Prosecutor which allowed the Defence to crucify Louise Nicholas when she gave evidence, he also directed that one line in the document be deleted, that line was to the effect that the witnesses group sex with the evil three was only consensual because she was intimidated by the big man arriving together and demanding sex. The Dom Post says the the admission of such an unsworn document being presented in evidence in this manner was a rare occurrence. I would go further an say it is unique and it would now seem a precedent to be taken advantage of by all defence solicitors in rape case.In my opinion NICHOLAS was betrayed by the Prosecution in this matter, why? I have no idea, but something smells rotten in the state of Aotearoa.
August 12th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Lisa, I’m not aware of any cases of lump sum ACC payouts for sexual abuse since they funded the testimonies in the Christchurch creche case. I do know that you can only claim ACC for psychologic trauma if you were sexually abused and I have the letters from Dyson and Goff to prove it.
I notice the one law for “us” and one law for “them” machine is gearing up to suppress news reports of the Kahui masscre now that the estabilishment have their vote winning conviction of someone for the LN affair, where there was ablsolutely no request to stifle media hysteria (such a well named word isn’t it?).
August 12th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
No Ross, I mean offences. The unproveable ones that the court was not able to convict on but most with half a brain knew had occured. I can predict your response already…. mere mortals and all. There would have been DNA on the baton that was ALLEGEDLY passed around the police bar as a trophy by the rapists and that many of their colleagues felt disgusted by and which compelled some of them to provide testimony to the prosecution. Yep Ross that baton that you continue to believe did not feature in the pack rape but the ‘boys’ took delight in passing it around their mates & hanging in front of the bar. Ask some of your mates that were around at that time, perhaps you yourself were there. Oh yes it did happen Ross but perhaps you think it was consensual…that the complainant agreed to having this baton rammed into her vagina and then her rectum, tearing her to bits. Maybe you think it was ok because they lubricated it first???
Perhaps Rickards should have been tried seperately but the outcomwe would likely have been the same, for all the same reasons. Rickards is a scumbag & has been pretty much all his life. He got to live a lie for a while but as sure as can be sure ‘your sins will always find you out’ & no matter how many times you repeat the lie, it remains simply that…a lie.
The three of them are vicious rapists, two of them convicted, one not, but they are all rapists Ross.
August 12th, 2007 at 4:10 pm
What I find most disturbing about the Sewar case was allowing testimony from someone alleged to have had group sex with Dewar – this should have been inadmissible becuase it was totally irrelevant – just like they hyped up hysteria in the Cartwright inquiry by allowing the so called “baby vaginal swabbing” smokescreen. different era, same methods, I wonder why…..
August 12th, 2007 at 4:15 pm
The absolute bottom line is what the lefties always say to us “we are all guilty as a society” of paying peanuts and expecting more than monkeys in the police force. We’ve brought this on ourselves by paying pen pushing criminal apologists in the bureaucracy more than the police who have to face the scum each day. Well done NZ, another “social first” we can all be proud of.
August 12th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
Porcupine, it was not irrelevant. Dewar had maintained he did not have a relationship with Shipton and this womans testimony provided the evidence that he did. A rapidly blinking liar and now a proven manipulative,
crooked ex cop. Interesting to read Shiptons family were in court to listen to all the testimony. Man, how much perverted antics would one want to hear about ones off spring??? & why? Perhaps a genetic thing as brother Greg is allegedly hardly a pillar of society either. Surerly the pics from the video stills run by the Sunday News gave them some proof of their sons after hours behaviour. Weird family me thinks.
August 12th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
Alongside all the obvious aspects that have been explored here; this case also uncovers another lessor can of worms, but one that may have ultimately been the cause of Dewar’s downfall… workplace bullying.
The so called “caring occupations” quite ironically enough seem to attract a disproportionate share of psychopaths. Teaching and nursing are the worst, but the police forces (everywhere in the world) accumulate a particuarly nasty type as well.
These “high functioning psychopaths” wreack at trail of havoc wherever they go. The first person to really identify and describe these people was Robert Hare, and the best online resource is at :
http://www.bullyonline.org/
The diagnostic symptoms:
1. Described as “manipulative” and “divisive” by ex-colleauges.
2. Promoted to a senior role despite a history of clearly inappropriate behaviour.
3. After leaving the force he moves to another similar organisation, St Johns, where the same story unfolds. Absolutely classic.
4. And the final quote, “”He is quite simply an absolute bloody maniac,” said one former officer.” Not something lightly said, nor likely completely without justification.
One of the most pervasive failures that I have seen repeated over and again, in all sorts of organisations, is the tendency of too many senior directors and CEO’s to promote the wrong people into positions of responsibility. Over and again they make the mistake of thinking that the ability to push people around is the same as the leadership potential. Far too often I have seen people with real ability, talent and committment, get passed over for the aggressive or manipulative slimeball who has mastered the art of keeping his tongue firmly inserted in the right orifices. It has gotten to the point where I can predict these things with perfect accuracy.
The more hierarchical and power oriented the organisation, the more prone it is to making this mistake. Nor do I think it is fair to single out the NZ Police as “corrupt” on these grounds alone. The vast majority of Police were motivated to join the force with some notion of “making a difference” and ” duty to the wider community” in mind. And most go on to a fulfil their sworn duties as Police officers with decency and integrity. It is deeply unfair to taint them all with the failing of an acknowledged minority.
The real issue at stake here is for the senior Commissioners to recognise that their organisation has a significant number of these evil, two-faced manipulators, like Dewar, in positions of real power, not over junior staff, but over the wider public as well. It is actually not that hard to diagnose them, the tell-tale signs are well-known…the real challenge is having the balls to deal to them. The good news is that Operation Austin seems to have been a major step in the right direction.
August 12th, 2007 at 5:14 pm
Oh, FFS, Porc – Dewar wasn’t convicted by a jury of his peers after more than 9 1/2 hours of being a kinky fucker in the bedroom bur perverting the course of justice. Sorry, but am I really expected to believe that the man-hating, anti-cop Liarbore Feminazi Dykeocracy is that all powerful?
(Before the likes of Redbaiter & D4J get their froth on – STFU and don’t bother, because I’m just not interested in anything you have to say.)
Serious question, Porc: Do you actually believe in the rule of law – and that it applies to everyone without fear or favour, or not? How about the concept that a civil society depends on its insitutions – and the people who work in them – being not only free from corruption, but open and accountable for their actions? Or does that just apply to everyone except the Police?
There are days I’m just embarrased to be on the right – at least, I’m ashamed to be associated with the kind of drivel I’ve seen regarding this issue around here.
August 12th, 2007 at 6:01 pm
Redrag has some interesting points about the caring professions. It is certainly a well documented phenomenen within the healthcare professions, much of it steeped in tradition and some of it perhaps attributable to the oppressive environment in which health professionals work (I’m talking public hospitals here). It is still common practice for a junior doctor to give up their chair for a consultant, and to speak only when spoken to. Nursing is rife with the much spoken of horizontal violence ( ridiculous name for bullying) which mostly stems from non health professionals treating the workers with contempt. It seems certain types get appointed to these roles for their capabilities of keeping the health workers at arms length, not placing much value on their contributions & arbitarally making decisions without consultation. Seems to transfer across many settings huh and the police are obviously tainted with the same brush. Funny how a little authority, used inappropriately can wreck havoc, some things coming to light many years/decades later. But as I’ve said before things have a way of catching up with you & sometimes, just sometimes there appears to be justice for the aggrieved.
August 12th, 2007 at 6:29 pm
Craig, I have consistently said I think these freaks are scum and deserve what they get, that is not worth debating.
What I oppose is the increasing 2-facedness of the state and its apparatus, such as the judiciary and the police which would have us believe that
rich and/or powerful = always wrong
poor and weak = always right.
The robin hoods promote this myth hard out with the help of the MSM and there is almost nothing that can be done about it to the point we have this police rape situation which is just the tip of an enormous corrupt iceberg hiding under the surface of our so called democracy. So
“Do you actually believe in the rule of law – and that it applies to everyone without fear or favour, or not? ” Yes I believe in this and so our government used to. But now there a re so many so called laws designed for the purpose of social engineering that I have no respect for “their rule of law” anymore and will not live by them.
“How about the concept that a civil society depends on its institutions – and the people who work in them – being not only free from corruption, but open and accountable for their actions? ”
yes, if I ws religious I would even pray we had a society like that, put we have a politicised society, where you can see from the threads here that what side you are on is more important than the truth. I am guilty as much as the next person of this, I admit and will keep trying harder, although it is hard to see whether the situation is salvageable. If you want a bigger sample craig think of the election and its aftermath – how on earth could labour have been re-elected by rational people and how on earth could they remain in power with this level of corruption.
“Or does that just apply to everyone except the Police?”
No it applies to the police as well. We are suffering from 50 years of police bashing from the left because they used to break up their strikes protests and pot parties. In the early 60s a sargent earnt as much as a back bench MP and does 10x as useful a job.
We had a free and equal society bar one or two things that needed changing (equal pay, gay unions etc), but the left found themselves in a curious situation of what do you do when you are “antiestablishment” but the things you have fought for are now “establishment”. Well in good loony tune left style the answer is obvious – you tear it all down again of course.
So if you feel embarrassed by people who belive in equality of opportunity and universalism then you feel embarrassed by me. I repeat I rail against the bad parts of thwhat has happened over this police fiasco but I agree there is a culture that must be stopped.
Finally
“am I really expected to believe that the man-hating, anti-cop Liarbore Feminazi Dykeocracy is that all powerful?”
Yes you are. I refer to the Cartwright inquiry which has been resoundingly debunked just about everywhere for every year since it happened except it is untouchable by the MSM. And I’m sure you have your own list of false gods that the MSM/opinion formers from far left to far right wouldn’t dare touch with a barge pole. Read my post on my site about the Cartwright statistics. The shit will hit the fan later this year, yest agina to be ignored by the MSM of course.
I think you’re a bright guy Craig, you know the halls of power better than I do – if you’re on the “logic” side which most of the time I try to be on you will know the answer – why did HC turn up to the Muliaga funeral (good) but not the Starship, where did the 3-year pressure for this case come from (good) but the 20-30 year ignoring of child abuse went on.
Sorry for the long rave, but you talk about transparency which we do not have in this country – I agree these scum should go down for a long time, I just feel I am mature enough to know how what money and politicking went on behind the scenes. All I can do is assume from analogous situations – the unfortunate experiment witch-hunt and the spending of $500K of taxpayers money to get rid of a doctor who photographed his testicles. (Am I supposed to know that? The waiting lists could have done with the doe).
Apologies to those I offended defending these creeps, its just the two-faced system gets to me occasionally
Rave Ends
August 12th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
Yes Redrag, this is an endemic problem. It really stems from the alpha –person syndrome. In days gone by the alpha people knew who they were because they were born into the aristocracy and no one would dare question them and this kept the alpha-people in the population under control.
Now we have these “people who would be kings” elected, appointed or promoted to power. Hence the public institutions are rife with them as is parliament and charities/trusts etc. anywhere there is power for nothing and your money for free.
A totally agree you can spot them a mile off. Often just looking at their photo is enough or sometimes one of their reported actions like a certain MP I’m not allowed to run down on this blog. I don’t think there are many amongst the doctors and nurses but the “allied health professions” are crawling with them aided by the right and their “corporate pyramid structure” and “business model” (not) crap and the left with their “EEO” crap whereby incompetent people are promoted because they are too thick to get a real job.
What is the solution? We know what the solution is. The solution is to accept we are a participatory democracy, and “us who would not be kings” get into a position of power and oust these turkeys one by one. As you say they are easy to recognise so they are sitting targets. Lets all pull the trigger together instead of fighting each other.
August 12th, 2007 at 7:16 pm
Craig the only froth I enjoy is in a cold glass when I am relaxing sitting on a bar stool getting served by a spunkie barmaid . I am ashamed you would think anything less !
August 12th, 2007 at 7:22 pm
Redrag, these people firmly believe in the idea that the scenery only changes for the lead dog, and will do anything to keep their position.
We need normals to run, why dont you?
August 13th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Craig wrote: “Dewar wasn’t convicted by a jury of his peers after more than 9 1/2 hours of being a kinky f****r in the bedroom but perverting the course of justice”
So what you’re saying is that this evidence was irrelevant. The only problem was that it was admitted at his trial. If the “rule of law” isn’t to be brought into disrepute, irrelevant and unhelpful evidence should be excluded. But when that happens, inevitably some people claim that there’s been a jack up.
Witness the furore over the fact that Shipton’s and Schollums prior convictions was not admitted at the Nicholas trial. The media just couldn’t get it through their numb skulls that the reason for this was simple: admission of this fact would have prejudiced Rickards’ chances of a fair trial. But all we heard were women’s groups complaining of the unfairness of it all. But would those same women have complained if S&S’s priors had been admitted and all three had been convicted? I think we all know the answer to that.
August 13th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
All the civil libertarians get on their high horses when the priors of some underclass homocidal maniac are released to the public before the end of the trial. But when there is total uncontrolled publicity in cases like this you never hear a peep from them.
August 14th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Ross You could always pose your ethical concerns to Rickards himself. I understand he is currently completing ethics papers at Ak Uni.Oh the irony! Should do well in the assignments as he will have a vast pool of knowlege from which to draw from.