Garrett set to leave Parliament
September 19th, 2010 at 8:18 am by David FarrarThe HoS reports:
Disgraced MP David Garrett is ready to quit Parliament for the good of the Act Party.
Garrett said last night it was “very much more likely” he would stand down from Parliament before the next election. “I am in a very dark place right now,” he said.
To be fair to Garrett, he has done the right thing in quitting ACT – and so quickly. Unlike others who went to court to fight for their right to remain, he has put the interests of his party ahead of himself. I also give kudos for his resignation statement which said:
I can do nothing to change the past. For any number of reasons, I wish I had not done such a stupid and dreadfully hurtful thing in 1984. When my wrongdoing was revealed, the worst aspect of it all for me was reading the letters written by the mother and sister of the dead boy whose identity I used to obtain the passport.
As a result of my own actions, my political career is almost certainly over, but that is not my greatest concern. The worst aspect of all of this for me is that those who have seen fit to do so have opened the wounds of the boy’s mother and sister all over again. As the person who inflicted those wounds in the first place – however unwittingly – I must take ultimate responsibility for that.
I wrote letters of apology at the time – letters I realised were woefully inadequate, but there was nothing else I could do. I wish to reiterate my profound regret for the distress and hurt my thoughtless actions inflicted on two women, one of whom is elderly. I am simply unable to imagine how it must have felt at the time they first learned of what I had done, and I am equally unable to imagine what they must feel now.
I still well recall my horror when I read the letters from the boy’s relatives, one of them in the handwriting of a clearly elderly lady. I do not think I have ever felt worse.
There is certainly no excuse for what I did, and I make none.
His statement reeks of sincerity.
I have little doubt Garrett will resign from Parliament, and not try to stay on as an Independent MP. And this was before the extra complication the HoS reports on:
Their willingness to put the party’s interests ahead of their own came as a Howick woman, who met Garrett on an internet dating site, revealed he tried to woo her with a McDonald’s dinner and a private viewing of the film Casablanca.
A McDonald’s dinner? No wonder it didn’t work out!
Related posts:
- Garrett to resign tomorrow
- My thoughts on Garrett
- Garrett under fire again
- David Garrett on why he is against the death penalty
September 19th, 2010 at 8:27 am
“I also give kudos for his resignation statement”
Y’know, I have to disagree. On two points-
1) The use of the baby’s name is hardly the real issue here. It was 26 years ago for chrissake..!!
2) Garret has done nothing that is worthy of resignation. He should have stood firm and fought back against the jackals of the mainstream media. Articulated a counter argument and stood by it. Good god, there are people (in the past) who have remained in parliament after much greater transgressions than this and nobody in the media really turned a hair. This was partisan bullshit from a media that daily brings itself into even greater disrepute, and Garret should have confronted them rather than resign.
This will most likely see the defeat of ACT entirely and there is no way this issue was ever worth a shift in the NZ political center of five to ten degrees to the left. (unless you’re a leftist)
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 8:30 am
Don’t diss the McDonald’s dinner, there is a significant portion of the population who would like that.
This is a sad thing, for Garrett and for Act. To an extent it has been self inflicted, or at least they didn’t do enough to prevent it. I don’t share the media glee over a juicy story, people are involved and it can have a major effect on people and their lives. But I guess so can political decisions.
Also sad is one of the biggest advertisements Hide is pushing for his party now is that a vote for Act will prevent the need for the Maori Party to have more power in coalition.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 8:37 am
RB, while the media have blown this up into a major, as they do, it has more to do with personal stupidity and indiscretions (Garrett), poor choices and political management (Hide) and nasty internal party conflict.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 8:41 am
“Don’t diss the McDonald’s dinner, there is a significant portion of the population who would like that.”
That such a personal issue needs to be brought up at all is merely another indication of the politically partisan nature of the attacks on Garret. So nasty and so cowardly.
Its too late of course, but he needs to think about the old adage- “You don’t fight, you lose”. The mainstream media are the first front of Progressivism in NZ. You want to remove the Progressives from power, you need to first recognise the media as your first and most bitter enemy.
(They’re the same subversive bunch as in the US who today, through like vicious and cowardly attacks on the Tea Party, fight hard to turn Americans away from a return to Constitutional government.)
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 8:43 am
If ever you wanted confirmation that the Herald has lost all sense of propriety, you have it in this salacious report of some dopey bitch who has bleated about Garrett offering her a feed and a cuddle on the lounge watching a movie. Does anybody actually know what the movie Casablanca was about?
Why is this dreary garbage bin which calls itself a newspaper not demanding Shane Jone’s resignation? He sure as hell was not watching MGM reruns when he was spending my money on movies for his own gratification.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 8:43 am
For my money it doesn’t really matter a damn what this little dipshit did or didn’t do … … if he has been expelled from his party, then there is NO WAY he should be allowed to stay on in the parliament because he is a LIST MP!!!! He did not win an electorate and he holds his seat in the parliament solely courtesy of the party.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 8:44 am
“it has more to do with personal stupidity and indiscretions (Garrett), poor choices and political management (Hide) and nasty internal party conflict.”
No it hasn’t. Whereas the root is clearly inter party personal differences, the rest is merely the mainstream media meme, and as usual you, always so easily manipulated by left media, have brought into it hook line and sinker. There was nothing in this worthy of resignation.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 8:46 am
Yes, we’re political partisan. And we are overjoyed that Garret is one further nail in ACT’s coffin, we have worked, plotted and schemed to ages to take down this party.
And yes, we will fight and resist any further attempts by the Hard Right to establish political legitimacy in NZ. We will take them down at every opportunity, we will use every tool at our disposal.
We will never rest until the Hard Right are totally and utterly destroyed.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 8:47 am
I am with you Redbaiter. Although, I think he had no choice but to quite, the David Garrett episode reveals how tragically biased the news media is!! How come Hone Harawira with over 30 convictions isn’t mentioned. I suppose now the colour of your skin determines the type of media coverage you get. Unfortunately, the public is buying it. One thing I have never got out of the news, FACTS.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 8:52 am
“Whereas the root is clearly inter party personal differences,”
No, it’s intra party.
On The Nation they all agreed that this didn’t represent a victory for investigative journalism, it was more akin to a military operation.
The MAIN FACT is that Act are not a happy camp, and some are using the media (who are the ones being manipulated) to push agendas, be it power struggles or revenge.
RB, I know it fits your narrow agenda to keep painting the media as a leftist tool, but in this case in particular it just makes you look like a silly tool.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 8:54 am
And here’s another lefty coward.
Political punchup over call-girl claim
STAFF REPORTERS – Sunday Star Times
Last updated 05:00 19/09/2010
Unrepentant Manurewa MP George Hawkins is refusing to apologise to a political rival he accused, under parliamentary privilege, of making up a story about a teenage prostitute.
Hawkins made his comments about Colleen Brown during a debate on street prostitution. Brown is standing against Hawkins for a place on the Manurewa board of the new Auckland Super City.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 8:54 am
“We will never rest until the Hard Right are totally and utterly destroyed.”
Hahahha.. hard right ACT??? What a joke. That the media run with this idiocy is only more proof of how they have so totally distorted and misrepresented the political spectrum in NZ.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 8:58 am
Actually, jackp (8.47am), that is a very valid point you make. Very valid indeed.
I still think, also, that this whole Garrett fiasco has been created and fed to a compliant media by soueces from withing the National party so that they can stick a knife into their main challenge from the ‘right’ and rule with the Racist party alone, free of any interference from ACT.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 9:09 am
Dave Mann, no facts at all for what you are trying to accuse, and contrary to just about all electoral wisdom.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 9:11 am
Naah Dave. It’s definitely them Jooos. Can’t be anyone else can it? Waaaall, perhaps it the mining companies? Naaaah. Must be the bloody Libs in Australia. Couldn’t shift Gillard so they turned on ACT.
Have you got any more bright ideas?
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 9:17 am
Hide, in trying to defend the hypocrisy on name suppression accusation, has just said that he didn’t know Garrett had name suppression in the passport case. So he kept quiet just to keep it quiet, not because he thought he had to.
Hide generally handles aggressive interviews very well, but he gives the impression of adept bailing of a ship with too many breeches of it’s hull.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 9:19 am
@ Adolf and Pete.
Its a hunch, thats all; I admit it. But it makes sense doesn’t it? Adolf, I don’t always agree with you, but I’ll grant you know more about the workings of the National Socialists than I do. You were a cheerleader for the maoris way before the last election if I remember, and almost everything you said came to fruition. Your views are probably more prevalent in this party than most people realise.
In my view the National Socialists are totally in thrall of the Racist party and as long as they fall in line with the Racists’ ultimate apartheid agenda, they’ll get almost anything they like from them in the way of support in the parliament…. so why would they need ACT?
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 9:20 am
“RB, I know it fits your narrow agenda to keep painting the media as a leftist tool, but in this case in particular it just makes you look like a silly tool.”
I don’t care what I look like to desperate propagandising commies like you Pete, and maybe you could spare other readers the boredom of your expression of such personal idiocies at every opportunity.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 9:23 am
No. Key and National wouldn’t want a disintegration of their most right partner party. It is smart and convenient to have two alternatives in coalition. And National have supported Hide in Epsom, virtually given him a free ride there. So it makes no sense that they would be trying to sabotage Act.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 9:33 am
Pete, it also made no sense (on the surface) that the National Socialists invited a bunch of racist separatists with a known aparteid agenda to form a government with them, did it? This was contrary to what probably 90% of those voting them in would have expected and it took the country totally by surprise, didn’t it?
In politics what ‘makes sense’ and what doesn’t is often a very difficult thing for ordinary decent honest people to work out, unless you know the agendas they are trying to fulfil.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 9:42 am
NZ needs to go bankrupt before we get rid of these slimy hands in my pockets socialists and control freak communists.
Vote:The sooner we have fast broadband the better then we can all turn our TV screens to the rest of the world rather than these slimballs that pass for journalists in NZ.
Mind you its usually the dumb that have to get their entertainment by watching and believing the News. No brain power to actually think about stuff.
September 19th, 2010 at 9:48 am
Act has been there with the government doing the hard yards unlike the Maori party. So National owes them a favor or two including not putting up a candidate against them in Epsom. I feel sorry for Garrett, but he made his own political coffin by taking such an uncompromising stance on law and order issues when his own background was not flash. I do feel that Hide should step down as Leadwr and for Boscowan to take over perhaps later this year,and for boscowan to take on epsom. Epsom voters are pretty smart people, they know a National government dependent on the Maori party will be he’ll on earth.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 9:54 am
“he made his own political coffin by taking such an uncompromising stance on law and order issues when his own background was not flash.”
Good god, you really cannot see the difference between Garret’s passport offence 26 years ago that hurt nobody and the wave of rape and violence and theft that is sweeping NZ today and that Garret was fighting against?
What a nation of clueless easily manipulated morons. The left media just have to press your buttons and your off jerking away like a population of mindless left wing robots.
By your ridiculous standards, set for you by a deceitful left wing media, there is nobody in NZ who measures up.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 9:57 am
Has anyone else been watching Q&A this morning? Whatever one’s view is on the Garrett affair, the bias of Holmes and the whole panel is breathtaking. I expected Johannsen at least to be objective. Bring back Therese!
PS Espinor & Tolley on now – can’t even be bothered with that.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 10:02 am
I think that is necessary too, if Act is to have any chance of recovering. Hide has been spread too thin (and hasn’t always made the best of decisions).
….unless, why don’t Act appoint a non-MP leader, someone who can dedicate full time to the most important job they have right now, to repair and rebuild. Don Brash wouldn’t be a bad option for them.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 10:07 am
tvp, I would agree with all of your comment except the bit about “Epsom voters are pretty smart people, they know a National government dependent on the Maori party will be he’ll (sic) on earth”
The huge majority of voters in this country don’t give a flying fuck what the National Socialists or the Racists are up to. New Zealand is effectively being dismembered right under the noses of the voters and thay are unaware of the consequences and/or too apathetic to bother. This is equally as true of the voters of Epsom as the electorate as a whole. Why else would the people just sit back and yawn while these vermin strip the crown (i.e. us) of our own seabed FFS?
There are probably only 800 or so people in the country who have ANY IDEA what is going on here and all of those read this blog – but most of these people even don’t seem too concerned by what is probably the biggest sellout in New Zealand’s history.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 10:08 am
RB, in 2005 it appears that Garrett made a false statement to a judge. Even though he may consider himself innocent in the Tongan assault case, by law he was convicted. As a lawyer he would have known the seriousness of deliberate concealment.
Do you think lawyers should be given special leniency by our courts? Do you thing the “getting tough on criminals” campaign should only apply to people you disagree with?
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 10:10 am
# Viking2 (2,558) Says:
September 19th, 2010 at 9:42 am
The sooner we have fast broadband the better then we can all turn our TV screens to the rest of the world rather than these slimballs that pass for journalists in NZ.
Mind you its usually the dumb that have to get their entertainment by watching and believing the News. No brain power to actually think about stuff.
When you do get your fast broadband you’ll find the NZ slime are fairly representative of their fellows internationally.
Those supposedly right-wing are in fact just another form of communist – individual thought is only permitted along party lines, god-bothering is mandatory and wanting to improve yourself or your situation (to progress) is severely frowned upon.
The rest of course are simply non-thinking lefty mouthpieces.
The “blogosphere” is no better but you can often read several different views on the same subject and make your own mind up based on that.
While doing so don’t disturb the halfwits who are too bloody lazy to see past their preferred viewpoint no matter what the evidence is – they’re f@#$ing noisy when woken.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 10:27 am
Except the family of course. But never mind that. And never mind that it is an offence punishable with up to 5 years in jail.
And never mind that he lied to the judge about another conviction, which may have not let him get off without conviction.
But blame the media. Of course, it’s their fault.
You are such a hypocrite, Red.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 10:28 am
“The rest of course are simply non-thinking lefty mouthpieces.”
That is you of course, for what you say and think about Christians comes directly from Karl Marx. It is a viewpoint that has severely weakened the resistance to socialism, split the vote and allowed the socialists at least a 10% advantage in every election. Secularists who have an obsessive hatred of Christians are among the left’s best political friends.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 10:35 am
“You are such a hypocrite, Red.”
Gawd I’m so sick of you commies calling every body else a hypocrite at the drop of a hat. I’m so sick of your comparing hypocrisy with mass murder and child molestation. You don’t even know what the word means, or you wouldn’t ever elect politicians like Helen Klark and Chris Carter to parliament.
Garret cannot campaign against the torrent of violent crime that is swamping this country, and take his concerns to parliament, because 26 years ago he committed a crime that was so serious he was discharged without conviction?? And this is an example of hypocrisy that should exclude him from parliament?? What pathetic illogical garbage.
And while Garret stands naked before us exposed as the serial murderer (or hypocrite) he is in the eyes of NZ’s gaggle of wet weak Danny Watson listening rubes, people who do not (as Garret did) challenge the progressive world view skulk in parliament without a skerrick of scrutiny from those self appointed protectors of morality and decency and who stand ever alert on the watch towers with eyes keenly peeled for any approaching HYPOCRISY.. oooh aaah.. there’s some approaching right now. Morons.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 10:36 am
Thank you Red, my communist friend.
You have backed up my comments admirably.
I enjoyed reading Marx almost as much as I enjoyed Rand.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 10:39 am
Redbaiter foams again Secularists who have an obsessive hatred of Christians are among the left’s best political friends.
To be secular does not imply a hatred of xianity, or in fact, any religion. It is possible to mix secularism AND religious belief.
Of course, red would love to see us under the mergent theocracy of the USA where the separation of church and state is now well nigh impossible.
In a religiously neutral state it doesn’t matter whether the president is a Jew, a Christian or a Muslim, because he and his constituents consider religion to be a private affair. In such an environment, the president will not even say what his religion is; he would also not say what religion he doesn’t follow. In a state tormented by religious divisions, religious neutrality seems the sole solution to prevent a tearing apart of society
(…)
Religious neutrality in religiously pluralist societies like France and the United Kingdom – and the United States — is the path to tolerance. The only question is: When will the American president and the American people acknowledge this?
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/political-bookworm/2010/09/defeating_religious_extremism.html#more
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 11:15 am
“To be secular does not imply a hatred of xianity, or in fact, any religion.”
I didn’t say it did. In fact by my phrasing I clearly differentiated between secularists and “secularists who have an obsessive hatred of religion”. Go away you slow witted time wasting obsessive moron. It makes me puke to reply to you.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 11:36 am
Pete George, the political wind in Parliament is to support the ffs bill. I am suspicious of the timing of all this news about Garrett when he was the only mp vocal against the FFS. He was exposing Finlayson to guarantee the word FREE was in the act. No doubt the news media is run by Labour being part of the largest union in New Zealand, the EPMU, so to think it is National conspiring against David Garrett leaves some room for thought, They both are almost the same. I think National’s highest priority is to pass the FFS bill as soon as possible without revealing too much of the bill because this will siphon billions to the Maori elite. I haven’t read anything in the news other than what Finlayson has proposed and Why Hone is against the bill. I haven’t seen a debate on tv about it. The focus now is on Garrett and now the bill can pass its first reading almost undetected while Garrett is dominating the news. John Key doesn’t need Act. He only had them on to keep the far right support. But since he has stolen Labour’s votes, being left conservative, he won’t have to worry about next year. The public has no idea what is happening, they don’t care. I talk to people about this bill and everyone doesn’t even know who Chris Finlayson is.. they just say, oh gosh, John Key wouldn’t do that… Look what he did for Maori to sign the UN Rights of Indigenous people… Now when New Zealand becomes a republic, that’ll be the criteria for more settlements. A foot note, Act didn’t even know about the signing.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 12:14 pm
One interesting thing – many have been at least implying where the Act knife was, but this morning Holmes was suggesting it wasn’t from the Roy camp. So who?
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 12:22 pm
“Holmes was suggesting it wasn’t from the Roy camp.”
So who cares what this little past his use by date Progressive puke asserts about anything? This was clearly a hit on Garret from Progressives within ACT, (Roy most prominent example) aided and abetted by their comrades in the mainstream media who have wanted to get Garret and ACT for a long time. Its a flow on from the Roy disagreement and she won’t be happy until the party is dust. Woman scorned and all of that. Has self destructive female spite written all over it.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 12:24 pm
Pete George, very good question.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 12:29 pm
RB, you seem to be simply guessing. Holmes seemed adamant (repeated three times) it wasn’t from within Act. There is the distinct impression (if you listen to the media and not just jump to prejudged conclusions) there is quite a bit more known about this by the media (and they must know who sources are) than they have so far revealed.
And RB, you have ignored the lawyer lying in court thing from 2005 – you must think that’s no big deal, or it doesn’t suit your argument to talk about it.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 12:41 pm
“if you listen to the media”
You will never be able to think clearly about any issue if you do that ( as you demonstrate yourself so often).
“you have ignored the lawyer lying in court thing from 2005″
Its a false allegation. Tonga is not NZ. Furthermore, I am not going to nit pick over such an unclear and minor issue when the Labour Party (and other parties) are full of crooks and liars who make David Garret look like a shoe in for the next Pope.
The pitiful sook Garret should never have resigned. He should have fought the media like Sarah Palin. That’s it though. Today, the only men in politics are women.
Oil rig worker? That pussy whipped piker Garret wouldn’t go the distance on a Massey Fergusson with a post hole borer attached.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 12:56 pm
“You will never be able to think clearly about any issue” if you ignore inconvenient facts.
RB, if you regard this as nit picking then you are more of a nit than I thought
Hide accepts it as unacceptable, Garrett acts like he knows he’s in legal crap, RB doesn’t understand.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 1:10 pm
I would trust anything coming from the Herald or TVNZ about as far as I could kick Annette King. I prefer to wait and hear Garret’s side befiore rushing to judgment on the basis of the reporting of those mainstream media turds.
Furthermore, what Garret is reported to have said above is not necessarily untrue. It may have been unwise not to explain the detail in full, but that is hardly anything atomically explosive in terms of the lies that are so profusely told daily by others in parliament.
Garret may believe he is innocent of the charges and the conviction may be set aside under appeal. He has not been subject to any “disciplinary proceedings”.
This whole issue is a politically motivated farce, and Garret has been found guilty in a kangaroo court of the kind that would make Joseph Stalin proud. Much more significant than Garret’s indiscretions is the partisan position of NZ’s stinking so called journalists who profess to report objectively on political matters when they really do nothing more than (Soviet Union style), follow the orders of their political masters.
NZ’s democracy is in sad shape when the political mood is so easily controlled by such a collection of charlatans fakes and frauds.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 1:18 pm
Fact 1 – Hide dropped his support for Garrett as soon as the court affidavit issue became known.
Fact 2 – Garrett resigned from Act as soon as it became known.
Both of these occurred behind the scenes, aware from the media circus that they had weathered up until then reasonably well. Garrett may believe he is innocent in the Tongan case, but he will also know that not revealing that case in his affidavit was more than a “prank”.
But good to know you won’t jump to conclusions until you have heard both sides of any issue.
I agree that the political mood is too easily influenced by the media. And by those who know how to manipulate and use the media, here and in the US. Works both ways. Bleating “poor us, only ‘the left’ do it” is a bit ridiculous.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 1:29 pm
redbaiter there was a victim in Garrett taking a dead child’s identity and that was the family of the dead child. And Garrett being a prominent person brought the whole thing up again for the family. I lost a nephew about 25 years ago aged 3 and I would be livid if his identity got stolen and I would go after the person who stole his identity in what-ever way I legally could. What Garrett did was very very bad. He should never got the section 106. I can see why Rodney overlooked this but he should have got full details before endorsing him as a candidate Then I suppose Garret owed Rodney a big big favour as a result, and you never know when you might need a favour in politics. And that is when I smell a big fat rat.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 1:39 pm
“redbaiter there was a victim in Garrett taking a dead child’s identity and that was the family of the dead child.”
What pissant wet liberal crap. It happened 26 years ago. It was meaningless than and its even more meaningless now. Just another mainstream media manufactured politically partisan fantasy. Garret was working to save the lives of children and his work did not need to be halted on such feeble and falsley emotive grounds as this. If you truly cared about children and their welfare you would not be using such a transparently false and manufactured argument to hound this man out of parliament.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 2:52 pm
Redbaiter:
I’ve heard this said repeatedly by people defending this dissembling little hypocrite. So it’s okay to lie (by omission) about a conviction in Tonga? Or just one for assault? Or just one for assault where the other guy got fined more? Or is it all crimes for which you have a conviction in Tonga? Is murder okay? Rape? What about stealing?
Any other countries in which we can gain convictions and not have to tell about them, even when asked in court and before assuming public office, or is it just Tonga? Some states in Australia have legal systems with less-than-expemplary records. Is it okay to leave out any convictions gained in Queensland?
And as for your rhetoricals about “Why isn’t the media hounding Shane Jones” etc… why indeed. I couldn’t agree more. But just because they aren’t doing their job on slimey leftists doesn’t give slimey rightists a free pass.
And your point about Harawira’s convictions – he wears them like a badge of honour, he doesn’t cover them up, and the Maori Party voter appears not to care.
The irony is Act could have played this differently from the outset; presented Garrett as poacher-turned-gamekeeper, a reformed thug who had repented of his ways, accepted he got off far too lightly, and wanted to toughen sentencing to ensure it couldn’t happen to the next generation of crims. He’d have won points from some for his honesty and the criticism he would have copped from others would have been dealt with up front rather than half way through a term of government.
But no doubt his hubris, in wanting to be seen as the uncompromising barrister, superior to those he criticised, led him to demand of Hide that it be covered up.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 3:01 pm
Hone’s message. Did he leak the information from Heather? Be afraid.
The Maori party is a dangerous beast, we need to call for the abolition of the Maori seats as being undemocratic, without merit and racist.
What a hypocrite, Harawira is, what about his assault convictions? Where is the scrutiny of the Maori party & their motives?
Harawira scathing of Garrett and Act
By NEIL REID – Sunday Star Times 09:43 19/09/2010
Firebrand Maori Party MP Hone Harawira has labelled disgraced MP David Garrett a “bastard”.
He says revelations of an undisclosed assault conviction, possible perjury and the theft of a dead child’s identity are the final nail in Act’s coffin.
Harawira is no stranger to controversy himself but he told the Sunday Star-Times he wasn’t wasting any tears on Garrett.
“Good riddance to that bastard,” Harawira said. “I swore last year [in emails] and if you had have been able to crucify somebody, I would have been crucified, burnt at the stake, and really, the condemnation on this guy is mild in comparison.
“I knew it [the controversy] would build and I knew there was more to it. Anybody who can be so scumbag as to do something like that has surely done a lot more in his life.”
Garrett quit Act on Friday after it emerged he lied to keep an assault conviction secret from the judge who discharged him without conviction for stealing a dead toddler’s identity, something Garrett dismissed as a prank.
Harawira said Act was “dead and buried” because of its own foolishness.
“Rodney Hide thought he could slide in a guy like Garrett, and there was the boorish and idiotic and testosterone way in which they dumped Heather Roy, an intelligent, hardworking MP and from all accounts a good associate minister of defence. Tariana [Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia] had high regard for Roy and her ministerial portfolios. And she doesn’t necessarily have high regard for many.
“By showing how disdainfully they can wipe away a woman who dares to show a bit of strength, it signals to all intelligent and strong women that Act is a waste of time. They are goners. Act is not going to be an influence at the next election.”
Act has been a crucial member of the coalition government, which also includes the Maori Party, but Harawira believed the coalition was safe.
He said the Maori Party could gain the most as National looked to lock in support before next year’s election. “The coalition has a future. The Greens – and I love nine out of 10 of their policies – have staked their flag with Labour. Phil Goff is a nice man but he isn’t going to win – that is the truth of it.
“With Act gone, that means we are again a pivotal player.”
Harawira is at odds with his own party over the Marine and Coastal Area Bill. Harawira opposes it, saying it would mean foreigners – including Osama bin Laden – had more rights over the coastline than Maori.
“The fact is that if he got off the plane today and bought some foreshore or seabed, he would have more rights than I would under this bill. That’s just wrong. It doesn’t fit the Kiwi sense of rightness.”
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 3:02 pm
Redbaiter (11,388) Says:
September 19th, 2010 at 1:39 pm
“redbaiter there was a victim in Garrett taking a dead child’s identity and that was the family of the dead child.”
What pissant wet liberal crap. It happened 26 years ago. It was meaningless than and its even more meaningless now.
Sums up your attitude to the law quite nicely. Any crime committed by your team is not a crime, eh? The fraudulent obtaining of a passport is never meaningless, whether its Garret or Mossad – it is a crime.
Still, you seem to support all the frauds.
Carly Ortiz. Sarah Palin. G W Shrub.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 3:12 pm
It happened 26 years ago. It was meaningless than and its even more meaningless now. Just another mainstream media manufactured politically partisan fantasy.
You are wrong here Redbaiter. It is a very serious crime, and even more serious now than 26 years ago. Ask US Consulate if you don’t believe me.
A member of my own family has been denied a Green Card recently for far less.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 3:24 pm
[Redbaiter 1:39 pm] Compare this to any Socialist MP in a similar situation. No whining. No blaming their secretary, or colleagues. No whining about mummy and daddy not buying them a train set when they were five. No blaming the gummint, or the VRWC. Just gone by dinner time. And no crying on TV.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for a Socialist MP to ever do this. After all, resignation implies them being able to understand the concept of shame. Amoral people can’t do that.
cheers
David Prosser
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 3:30 pm
Rex, like the journalists have you any clear unequivocal evidence that Garrett is a thug? or is it your measure of anyone that takes a strong stance on recidivist criminals.
As far as I can tell there appears to be no such evidence so if you have some will you share it with us all.
Thankyou.
You appear to happily allow determined thugs to blame not enough suckling and all sorts of other various excuses for their violence but because we have a Barrister been beaten up by a thug he becomes fair game for bullshit stuff.
We have a long list of criminal politicians gone before but nowhere is your nor anyone else’s strident voice heard to nail them to the mast. But because one person achieves what you and your mates could never do you bleat on like a stuck pig.
Long may recidivist offenders like Burton stay in jail.
And before you decide to attack me or my stance recall that I regularly support your view that we have a huge problem with the number of men who go to jail and what happens to cause that and what happens to them after wards. Difference I suppose is that I use my small efforts here in NZ to assist by mentoring young men so they don’t finish up there, giving them work and assisting occasionally with men released again with work. I think I can claim some moral ground on this.
I don’t know how you think we can change a bad situation by alienating a population that’s been crying out for bad bastards to be locked up forever, for a very longtime. What Garret achieved many will be thankful for. If you don’t think so then put yourself up as an opposition organization to SST. The numbers will tell the story.
But you won’t.
Your reality seems to be that any criminal is capable of rehab. Well no. 3% of the population are born hard wired bad. Another 5% will be bad but not totally hardwired like the 3% and another 10% will be criminals forever unless faced with a life or death choice to change.
Its just statistics.
Simple old 80/20 rule of everything.
Spend your energy helping those that can change and will change. The rest you can do nothing about. Same for alcoholics, drug addicts, embezzlers, card cheats and financiers who rip off their investors.
Today it seems that the News Media actually run Parliament. Clark of course was good at it and it seems others such as Roy and Hone are as good as she was. How we can ever believe we will have a govt. that’s not controlled by the press after this is a subject for lots of discussion. Maybe its time the Parliament actually took a good look at their freedoms and its abuse for their can be no doubt that this is bullying and abuse of a person. Perhaps that’s what Parliament is now destined to be; a bully chamber rather than a contest of idea’s?
Vote:http://lindsaymitchell.blogspot.com/2010/09/on-garrett.html
September 19th, 2010 at 3:38 pm
Does anyone know and can tell us how many passports are stolen or hijacked in someway or other everyday in this world?
Vote:Thousands one suspects and given that many countries have no BMD there will be plenty of fakes around.
The left’s favourite Muslim came to NZ and destroyed his fake one on a plane leaving us earners in the tax pool to pay how many millions to keep him here.
Asians who come here are picked up consistently with fakes.
Garretts was not the crime of the Century, it was what people do to test the system. I’m more concerned about the bloody welfare bluggers who use their multiple identities to defraud the NZ tax payer and despite dozens of assurances they will get caught still don’t get caught and keep on keeping on defrauding those that work.
But they vote left so that’s all ok.
September 19th, 2010 at 3:57 pm
Stealing a dead child’s identity is like digging up the body and misusing it. I well understand how that family felt especially as losing a small child is a heart breaking event for the parents and the immediate family. Redbater if you do not understand that you do not understand death and loss, but maybe one day you will.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 4:27 pm
The pity is that Garrett had studied the foreshore and seabed legislation, and the legislation pertaining to the Waikato River in real detail. He was the only M.P. to put searching questions to Chris Finlayson, who repeatedly slime balled his way from giving an answer.
Vote:I was looking forward to his analysis of the Waikato River big big give away. None of the Waikato region’s M.P.s would have Garrett’s intellectual rigour to pursue such a task.
Intellectual rigour might seem an oxymoron when discussing somebody who has behaved in the dim dark past, as Garrett has. But I believe that Parliament will be a poorer place without him.
September 19th, 2010 at 4:37 pm
I second that.For the sake of some piddly irrelavant bullshit in his long gone past NZ loses a very good MP and servant who had actually delivered for it and was set to do much more.Has NZ got a good deal from the tearing down of David Garrett…? Hell no.We are worse off. Shooting ourselves in the foot…the great Kiwi tradition
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 4:54 pm
There appears to be some confusion here, so just for the sake of clarity:
HIDE DECIDED TO KEEP GARRETT’S BACKGROUND QUIET BECAUSE HE KNEW IT WOULD COST ACT VOTES. HE KNEW GARRETT HAD COMMITTED AN EFFECTIVE FRAUD AND THEN SACKED HIM WHEN HE FOUND OUT HE HAD TOLD ANOTHER LIE.
The hypocrisy of Hide/ACT/Garrett is exceeded only by commentators here who seem to see nothing wrong with the actions of Hide/ACT/Garrett. How you can make any sort of distinction between this and the conduct of the previous Government/Peters is beyond belief. If you can justify their behaviour on the basis of your perceptions that Hide/Garrett are doing a good job then YOU FALL PRECISELY INTO THE SAME CAMP AS THE JUSTIFIERS OF THE GUTTER/SLIME LABOUR GOVERNMENT.
FFS, get a grip.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
As a matter of interest, can someone fill in the gaps:
1. Baby dies in 1962.
2. Garrett applies for passport in 1984.
3. Garret doesn’t use the passport and destroys it when it expired – presumably 1994.
4. Prosecution takes place in 2005.
What brought it all to light? Did internal affairs write to the baby care of the parents concerning renewal? Any ideas?
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 5:05 pm
“HE KNEW GARRETT HAD COMMITTED AN EFFECTIVE FRAUD”
Maybe. Certainly dishonest but no apparent material gain. Material gain = getting your rocks of in a pub and then asserting to the employer (us) that it was an employment expense which is to be repaid (without ever saying what it was). Interesting that MSM now concentrate on the lie but, at the time, ignored the lie and had a laugh at the porn.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 5:07 pm
“Certainly dishonest but no apparent material gain.”
Good grief.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 5:14 pm
By which I mean that he did not use it for advantage as one might usually do with false ID. I’m not excusing him. He had to go. My point was to identify two separate lies, one from which there was material gain and one from which there has been no identified material gain and the different ways with which they have been dealt. If that causes you grief, so be it.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
How you can distinguish a findamental point of principle that goes to standards of behaviour/ethics on the basis of “material gain” is beyond me. But since you choose to clutter your objectivity with that irrelevancy, consider the fact that the material gain in this instance was quite possibly the seat in Epsom and the list MPs that went with it. Yours is precisely the sad-arsed self-justifying rationale and hypocrisy that Labour supporters employed to justify the outrageous behaviour of their Government. But then, maybe you didn’t have a problem with what they got up to – I guess not.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 5:26 pm
“What brought it all to light? Did internal affairs write to the baby care of the parents concerning renewal? Any ideas?”
When the Police were investigating the Mossad passport case they obviously did a data check comparing passports to death certificates and investigated all matches.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 5:35 pm
Maybe I will spell it out simply as I can. Garret lied. He offended the parents of a dead child. He has no place in parliament. His pockets did not fill. He gained nothing but a shit load of custard over his face and the end of his career. He is gone. Shane Jones lied about his expenditure. He gained financially. He is still there. Why the fuck is that? And if you really read my post rather than close your eyes and shoot from the hip, where could you ever get the idea that I am a labour apologist?
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 5:40 pm
Relevance of material gain:
Garrett gets false passport, sticks it in his draw and burns it 10 years later. It never sees the light of day.
Garrett gets false passport. Opens bank account in false name. Uses account for nefarious purposes. Makes a shitload of money as a result.
Are they the same?
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 5:40 pm
Perhaps you should try reading yourself. I wasn’t suggesting that you are a Labour apologist. I was however, suggesting that you set the bar at the same level in terms of what you regard as acceptable behaviour.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
I find neither acceptable. I dont think Bill Wilson should be there either and he didn’t say anything. I draw the line at double standards. Jones and Garrett should both be goneburgers.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 6:33 pm
Along with shall we say, English, Heatley etc etc etc. for they did act for pecuniary advantage in a fraudulent manner.
Apparently the Standard is far higher for ACT than the rest.
Best way I can think of to scuttle everyone.
NZers and the slime will get unfortunately a stinking piece of fish with this Seabed and Foreshore stuff. Findlayson will screw the lot of ya.
Vote:Oh plenty will just leave as they have before. Great nation building.
September 19th, 2010 at 7:23 pm
Garrett copied a name and a set of numbers.
That is all he did – snotting a Tongan tosser is a badge of honour. There certainly was no “identity theft” or anything similar.
A question;
I have no idea of the name he used but if, for example he chose John Smith, born 01/01/1962 does that mean that all people named John Smith born on that day world wide have the same identity?
Rex, did he steal your cream bun or something?
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 8:47 pm
I posted a couple of days ago that there were 4 people with the same name living in the town I live in with just 80k population. Two of us lived within 200 yards of one another, one was a National MP and the other a prominent sports man. We managed just fine.
Saturday, 18 September 2010
Badly Behaved MPs
Following the scandal surrounding David Garrett it seems pertinent to remind people of a few things. I thought I’d list some of the various misdeeds of a certain group of MPs:
Helen Clark: Fraud – signed a painting she didn’t paint. Had her electorate secretary burn it. Ordered the DPS to break the law when driving her Crown limousine. Refused to back them up when they were subsequently tried and convicted. Bailed out hubby when he got into trouble at LAX.
Dover Samuels: Committed statutory rape, pissed in a hotel potplant.
Phil Goff: Vandalism – tried to tear a NZ flag from a cenotaph and replace it with a North Vietnamese one.
Trevor Mallard: Assaulted Tau Henare.
Taito Phillip Field: Corruption and fraud – obtained cheap labour in exchange for granting residency.
Ruth Dyson: Convicted of drunk driving.
Chris Carter: Troughing.
David Benson-Pope: Lying over the Madeline Setchell firing, dodgy teaching practices.
Marion Hobbs: Claimed a Wellington allowance while still living in Wellington.
David Parker: Filed a false companies return.
Lianne Dalziel: Lying in Unison scandal
Shane Jones: Taxpayer-paid porno
Georgina Beyer: Former prostitute, former man.
Darien Fenton: Former Heroin junkie
This is the party passing judgement on David Garrett. Interesting.
Posted by Blair Mulholland on Saturday, 18 September 2010 at 03:31 PM | Permalink
Comments
ScrubOneHD
And that’s not even close to a complete list!
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 9:13 pm
“And that’s not even close to a complete list!”
Damn right. I’ll bet David Garret never sunk so low as to spit on NZ soldiers returning from Vietnam.
Vote:September 19th, 2010 at 9:36 pm
Viking2 asserts:
I’m sorry Viking2, but you’re totally wrong there. I utterly condemned Taito Philip Field and particularly Labour’s blase reaction to his offending. I don’t think he should be loafing in jail costing society another $90,000 a year but out in the community working to repay it for his offending. For a very long time. But I find his conduct reprehensible, and have said so on many occasions.
I think holding public office is the greatest honour one’s country can bestow. A Governor General is appointed by one person. An MP by many thousands. I don’t think anyone should be disqualified from standing no matter what their past may hold, but they owe a dutyt o those whom they are asking for votes to disclose it. Then people can make an informed choice. Harawira has done that, and people still choose to vote for the party that harbours him. More fool them, IMO, but they do so knowingly.
If you think I’m in favour of getting the likes of Burton out, you haven’t read a word I’ve said on this topic over many years.
I do broadly the same thing in Australia, though more around ensuring they actually get opportunities for rehabilitation in prison rather than loafing about there and then being dumped on society unchanged, or worse still, hardened.
Because we’re also locking up people who aren’t bad bastards and turning them in to bad bastards. I’m not advocating for the Burtons, I’m advocating for the lost youth of this country for whom prison is not the answer. And the odd old lag (the non-violenet sort), drug addict, mentally ill and other categories of recidivist who’d do better elsewhere too.
The bad bastards do need to be locked up for a long time. You’ll get no argument from me on that.
If I ever get the chance to return to NZ (which I’d very much like to do) then that is the first thing on my agenda. In the meantime I work through a number of organisations in Australia, including as State Director for Civil Liberties Australia in WA and a member of the Board of the Institute for Restorative Justice and Penal Reform.
So please also don’t imply I don’t put my effort – and vast amounts of time, where my opinions are. As, evidently, do you. And I commend you on that.
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 10:45 am
I feel McVicar has got off lightly..Garret and Hide have shown themselves to be fools but who played these fools? McVicar played them . He is the only one to have got what he wanted…Hide exchanged votes for Garrett in a short term survival effort..Garrett got a short spin in a career he wanted..but why the silence from McVicar over Garrett’s victims or is McVicar only interested in a certain type of victim? McVicar was happy to mix with and promote a criminal when it suited his own ends.
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 10:57 am
Joana, people are getting mighty sick of you liberals and your desperate attempts to keep criminals on our streets and committing rapes and assaults and burglaries and other crimes. You have nothing but talk, and you rant and rave and criticise McVicar and all the time the blood keeps flowing and the violence keeps occurring and the crime keeps happening. You (and Rex) have a lot to answer for and a lot of innocent human tragedy on your hands.
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 5:05 pm
Redbaiter Garrett’s political carreer is not in tatters because he was charged with assault and may be not even the more serious issue of identity theft (Although unlike you I find that hard to defend even if it was 26 years ago). He is finished because he has been more than a little economical with the facts. Even after the assualt issue came to light he was asked if their were other convictions or undisclosed misdemeaners. He had the opportunity at that point to come clean and he may have survived but he elected not to. When the passport issue then came to light his political credibility was toast and he had to go. It is not about the time that has elapsed or even the seriousness of the offending, it was the concealment and the fact that Hide knew before he came to pariament and agreed to the concealment has stuffed Act.
What I cannot understand is why you are attacking the media here. If I was a member of the Act party I would be incensed at the actions of Garrett and the damage he has inflicted on the Act Party and saying good riddance. I would be even more angry with Hide whose leadership has been sorely exposed. If Act has any chance of surviving the next election it has to deal with this issue quickly and as cleanly as it can given the crap it is in. Hide’s position is now so compromised with his own issues around Travel Expenses, his poor management of the Heather Roy issue and now his apparent complicity in the Garrett cover up of his past misdemeaners he can only be seen as a lame duck leader. Heather Roy must be sitting back in parliament like the cat that got the cream.
Act may be able to survive this but it has to lance the boil so to speak. Playing the ostrich card and hoping that this will all ends up as next weeks fish and chip wrappings is not a strategy that has a hell of a big chance of success.
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 5:30 pm
“What I cannot understand is why you are attacking the media here. ”
Well I am not going to go over all my arguments above that I presume you must not have read, but in essence its a fucking beat up and in spite of your views (that I consider are formed for you by that media) Garret has done nothing to earn the degree of approbation that has been dumped upon him and is still a much more honest and law abiding person than so many of the scammers and liars and racists who still exist in the parliament, and do not suffer anywhere like the degree of scrutiny or criticism that Garret did.
The media never approved of Garret or ACT and have been out to get them for some time. I assert that most NZers are fucking political neophytes who have yet to awaken to the fact that the media is a front for Progressivism and they are not ever going to do or say anything that doesn’t in some way or other assist that political endeavour.
Its why their (the mainstream media) hated in the US (where the public are much more aware of the con) and so many politicians on the right just refuse to have anything to do with them any more. They are not reporters or journalist or editors or any of that they are fucking lying left wing propagandists, and in the states they’re under previously unheard of pressure for being so. Their cover is blown there and it will be blown here one day too.
Its a matter of time, made longer in the NZ instance because of the country being more firmly in the grip of left wing culture. A little island that the left have encircled with their own ideological Berlin wall, and those imprisoned behind that wall do not have a fucking clue what goes on outside of it. Hence their amazing ignorance concerning anything that challenges the Progressive status quo. Sarah Palin, The Tea Party, to name just two examples.
Attack the media??? If there was ever any justice in this country, the fascist bastards would all be hanging from the lamp posts one day after the revolution. Along with Katie Couric, and the editors of the Washington Post and the New York Times.
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 5:34 pm
Correction- “Its why they’re (the mainstream media) hated in the US”
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
If that was truly the measuring stick we’d have zero MP’s, and Helen Clark would have not survived 9 months in power, let alone 9 years.
No, the reason he’s finished is because the rabid mob that passes for our MSM are constantly baying for the blood of anyone who’s to the right of hard-left socialism… while they play lip service, if not turn a blind eye to any failings of the left.
It’s a well established pattern of character assignation.
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 6:23 pm
Redbaiter asserts:
That’s one hell of an assertion to make, Redbaiter. So you’ll no doubt be able to point to a single comment of mine where I suggest letting out a Graeme Burton type, or softening the sentence for a Clayton Weatherston, won’t you. Or else you’d just be pulling emotive accusations out of thin air.
What you will find is lots of comments where I suggest:
- devoting resources to identifying the truly dangerous psychopaths earlier, and dealing with them by locking them away indefinitely (would have worked for Burton, not alas for Weatherston).
- making non-violent offenders (Taito Phillip Field, for instance) work to repay society, not waste their days in a prison cell you and I are paying for.
- crack down hard on young offenders with a “broken windows” approach to “petty” crime (the “reflective jackets and a squeegee” approach to graffiti, for instance).
- devoting resources to genuine rehabilitation in prisons (we have to let the majority out some time, better they’re rehabilitated – and thus the community is safe) than not.
- supporting newly released prisoners better than we do at present so they have no excuses about lack of money, a home etc if they reoffend.
… and so on. How, pray tell, does any of thise give me “blood on my hands”? I’m getting tired of being accused, by you and others, of “supporting the likes of Burton (or some other murderous waste of skin”.
krazykiwi says:
I’d argue that it should be, and if that was the price (a regular clean-out of lying MPs) Parliament and the country would have been better for it.
Heh heh… I know it’s teh internetz but that typo just conjured up a mental image of Garrett, disguised as a character from some book or movie, in the midst of an assignation
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 6:41 pm
“… and so on. How, pray tell, does any of thise give me “blood on my hands”? I’m getting tired of being accused, by you and others, of “supporting the likes of Burton (or some other murderous waste of skin”.”
Not talking specifics like Burton here Rex. I was not even thinking of him. I was looking at it from this perspective- Garret is there. He got there and HE WAS DOING SOMETHING to get these fucking psychopaths off the streets. Where’s the action from your camp? All we have is grandiose theory and a lot of talk and the crooks are still running free and old ladies and wimmen are still frightened to walk the streets day and night. This is a fucking emergency situation. I’ll listen to you once we’ve got things back to a tolerable level. Right now, I want action and Garret was working on that action. To turf him out on such parlous concerns while he was doing such work and actually getting something done is a fucking disgrace.
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 7:03 pm
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/local/4141404/Strike-1-against-young-sex-abductor
An 18 year old attempts to abduct a 14 year old girl to rape, and in another incident an 11 year old girl. He has now got his first strike. For having the frame of mind that he does I feel sorry for him, but I think it is right that his crime is flagged as an indicator of a serious recidivist offender.
Vote:Frankly I think immediate, strong and long intervention is the only way this kid can hope for any semblance of a normal life in the future, but while I can feel sympathy for his plight I also think the first step is to segregate him from his prey. Their safety comes first.
I doubt this guy will ever actually be ‘rehabilitated’ and be able to lead a normal life. In his position I would seriously consider voluntary castration. It might be the best chance he has for anything near a normal future.
September 20th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
@Rex – Ug… Bloody spilling chicker… I kneed a knew won
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 7:19 pm
His statement reeks of sincerity.
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 7:28 pm
RightNow:
That’s the perfect example of someone for whom two of my strategies would come into play:
- devoting resources to identifying the truly dangerous psychopaths earlier, and dealing with them by locking them away indefinitely and
- devoting resources to genuine rehabilitation in prisons.
There might be hope for him, but to treat him like a 30-something year old recidivist rapist or as a relatively harmless “young offender” would both be wrong.
An intensive effort needs to be made now to change his ways – not because we should feel sorry for him but to protect potential future victims – and the results monitored closely. Not just while in prison and during some arbitrary parole period when an overworked PO will barely have time to make sure the basics are ticked, but for as long as the experts think is necessary.
Then, having done our very best to change him, if he offends in the same way again, he’s a case for indefinite detention (and further rehabilitation if it’s felt there’s some hope).
The thing about “3 strikes” and other such bullshit one-size-fits-all solutions is nothing (other than the threat of another strike) is done to prevent further offending. Meanwhile, if the criminal is truly a psychopath, the victims mount up.
And – like all prison terms – it assumes someone like this will be fixed (and / or deterred) by X years inside. Didn’t work? Well X years x 2 is sure to then. Wrong. 1/2 X might fix him. Or he might never be fixed. We need to take account of that, and sentence accordingly.
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 7:31 pm
Rex- you’re in Perth right? How long have you been away from NZ? It seems to me you may not know just how bad things are here.
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 7:46 pm
Red:
Yeah been here 8 years. I have lots of family back home though and still follow the news via KB and the MSM (yes, I know all about them…)
Here’s a thought. How many of your old ladies are, statistically, at risk from a Burton-type versus how many are at risk of having their handbag snatched or their house burgled (and possibly of being assaulted if they put up any resistance) by some young thug?
The SST claim to support “broken windows”. There’s very little argument (even from “my lot”) that, implemented properly, it can work – unlike “3 strikes”. So you’d expect their glove puppet in Parliament to go straight to the crimes that affect the greatest number of NZers, and some of the most vulnerable. At least I did.
But no, he went straight for a tiny percentage of criminals and – here’s what annoys me – used them to portray anyone convicted of a crime as the worst scum deserving of the harshest treatment (let’s not forget his “advice” to the young, the vulnerable, the mentally ill, the first-and-only time, the non-violent prisoners who risk being raped by one of prison’s real animals).
Act / SST had one chance in the term of this Parliament to tackle crime. And they blew it on Garrett’s and McVicar’s egos instead of a measure that would do the greatest good for the greatest number of potential victims.
Vote:September 20th, 2010 at 8:13 pm
Rex & Redbaiter – I’ve contributed to this discussion over at todays GD.
Vote: