Why just home detention?
February 8th, 2013 at 10:00 am by David FarrarDavid Clarkson at Stuff reports:
A Christchurch Christian journalist has admitted making intimate videos of a student at home and a 5-year-old girl at a church expo.
John Raymond McNeil, 67, was granted home detention at his Christchurch District Court sentencing, but his internet access will be blocked as part of the sentence.
He was found with 1000 child-pornography images on his computer, which he had viewed on the internet, and three videos he had made.
It’s one think to view pedophile videos others have made (still very sick and wrong and illegal), but quite another to also make said videos.
One video showed a student at her home, one was videoed up the skirt of a 5-year-old girl at a church expo and the third was taken up the skirt of an unidentified young woman walking in the Halswell Quarry.
McNeil is well known in his community, and the court was told that people now knew of his offending.
He is described as a veteran newspaper and radio journalist and South Island editor of Challenge Weekly, a non-denominational and independent Christian newspaper.
I’m sorry but he shot a video up the skirt of a five year old. Why is he not in jail?
A suitable address had been found for him to serve a home-detention sentence, an issue that had led to sentencing being delayed in December.
He said McNeil would be able to continue with his work on computers, without having internet access.
Oh yes it is important he can still put out his newspaper preaching against sin!
There is a fair degree of hypocrisy here. In 2003 McNeil said:
The Government is using the pretext of helping children who are victims of family breakdown as a lever for continued social engineering.
Along with other legislation, e.g. the Families Commission, the forthcoming Civil Union Bill and the Care of Children Bill seek to replace the primacy of married parents with other types. It’s doing this piece by piece in a process we call ‘legislative creep’. All three Bills promote diversity from different angles and through incremental change. …
‘Creep’ will ensure continued change masquerading as ‘reform’. The social fabric is being re-defined through a few key pieces of legislation. Instead of encouraging diversity of family types, it is better to assist those having difficulties, while advocating and supporting marriage as the best environment for nurturing children.
Pardon me while I vomit about the concern he expressed for nurturing children.
Related posts:
- The cost of breaking home detention
- High risk and violent but on home detention
- Mashpit Comedy
- 11 fatal accidents a week in the home
February 8th, 2013 at 10:34 am
I was surprised at just home detention, that doesn’t send a very strong signal of disapproval. But at least there was no name suppression.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 10:35 am
This creep just has to be against the marriage act changes, homosexual law reform and much else. I just loathe these christian hypocrites.
February 8th, 2013 at 10:37 am
The making of child pornography is more serious than the possession of child pornography, and is punished accordingly.
However, what is charged here was not the making of child pornography. It is the unlawful making of an “intimate visual recording”. This is far far less serious than a child pornography charge.
Which is why it was treated less seriously.
For the possession of child pornography, the sentencing process basically recognises four categories of child pornography. The lowest level of child pornography (usually referred to as sexualised nudity) frequently results in a sentence short of imprisonment. Category 3 and 4 material will usually result in imprisonment, often quite serious time, depending on the charge. My assumption is that with this sentence, the material is likely to be toward the lower end of what counts as child pornography.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 10:40 am
Personally I’m more worried about how many New Zealand schoolteachers are fiddling the kids these days- Think how easy they have access etc But I guess that’s not quite as ‘fashionable’ as bashing all Christians for the actions of one perverted creep…
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 10:41 am
….”He was found with 1000 child-pornography images on his computer, which he had viewed on the internet, and three videos he had made.”…..
It’s a wonder he had time in his busy schedule for Godbothering & moralising.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 10:42 am
So the tradition of christian hypocrites lecturing the public on the immorality of homosexuality etc, whilst touching/fucking/videoing small children behind closed doors still continues?
If they were smart they’d establish a fund to support each other’s efforts. The Graham Capill Memorial Scholarship or something…
February 8th, 2013 at 10:51 am
Is the judge an old white man per chance?
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 10:53 am
I look forward to hearing what our own Christian Taliban from NZ Conservative have to say about this!
They were very vocal about the Aaron Ellmers case recently.. will it be the same when a Christian values crusader is caught with his pants down?
February 8th, 2013 at 10:56 am
Yup, he belongs in jail.
The silver lining is that stories like this gives DPF an opportunity to dog-whistle for a baying anti-Christian mob. Works every time. As Longknives says, it’s rather fashionable to bash Christians by association
February 8th, 2013 at 10:56 am
Possession of child porn should be treated as being party to the original offence which is the making of the filth. After all much of this stuff is made because there are so many out there prepared to download it and presumably pay for it. If that was not the case the original offence may not have been committed.
Vote:Being a party to an offence means the offender can be sentenced as if they committed the original offence. Such scum deserve nothing less.
February 8th, 2013 at 11:05 am
Fixed that for you, kk
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:06 am
Fixed again
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:07 am
Non Christians oppose child porn but many non Christians are kiddy fiddlers. Lets hear it about non Christian hypocrites also.
In reality we are all hypocrites to some degree. For example we don’t want anyone to lie to us but we have all told lies. We all expect others to maintain a certain standard but often fall short of that standard ourselves.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:07 am
And again
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:11 am
Need I continue?
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:15 am
Again, I agree. Fact is, had the guy not been a christian journalist, the story would never have made it to the news.
And against the prevailing tide of opinion here and probably elsewhere, I don’t think putting this guy in jail would do much good.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:15 am
One guess, the term “child pornography” has been used to describe material that is not what would be treated as such elsewhere (e.g. the USA).
Usually people think it involves at least nudity or illegal sex, but the descriptions here are not of that. So no, he hasn’t produced child pornography, it is lazy journalism. He has invaded privacy, and been offensive, but to equate it to child pornography diminishes what that actually is. There is a lot of hyperbole in the censorship world, which is almost impossible to independently research.
Now images on his computer are something else, he is an accessory to the original offence and should be treated as such.
What isn’t widely discussed is the fact that in many countries the biggest creators of child pornography are the people “starring” in it, because increasing numbers of young teenagers make their own self taken images. The law as it stands doesn’t take account of this, as it was never conceived that it would be so easy to produce and distribute pictures of yourself to anyone you wanted.
However, don’t expect rational discussion about this. Already in the US there is a girl who is now a registered sex offender because she did just that and the criminal justice system tolerates no leniency – completely victimless and pointless.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:18 am
” many non Christians are kiddy fiddlers. ”
My bad. Should read “many kiddy fiddlers are non Christian”.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:20 am
The guy’s a journalist!
I’m sick of journalist hypocrites.
There fixed that for you.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:26 am
Ya know whats interesting about child pronography? the lack of credits…
so, this shit bag gets to stay at home, all toasty and warm. no Internet?? hmm
in this modern world of smart phones, whats to stop him acquiring a pre paid sim? then just turn said smart phone into a wifi hotspot and hes away. hard to trace too! just pay cash for top ups etc. burner phones?!
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:31 am
I disagree that the this was lazy journalism.
The article is actually very clear:
A Christchurch Christian journalist has admitted making intimate videos of a student at home and a 5-year-old girl at a church expo.
It explicitly states the charge “making intimate videos”. This is not child pornography, and the article doesn’t say it is.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:34 am
But hang on, John Raymond McNeil has been convicted and sentenced for his perversion.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:42 am
For some reason, I always enjoy being on the same side as the lefties….a rare but enjoyable occurrence.
A number of points worth making: it is not ONLY news because he is a proselytising God botherer…there have been a number of these “upskirt” cases reported in the media over the last few years; this is the first God botherer I recall.
Yes, it is worse that he is a God botherer, and an active crusading one. Capill is of course the very worst example (some of the reasons are the identity of his victims, which is the subject of suppression orders, but join the dots people…), and that even after his conviction he was still denying liability, and bleating about supposed consent. (AND of course that he was a former police prosecutor who well knew that consent could never be a defence in such a case as his_.
All of that said, if this is all they have the guy for (which of course doesn’t mean it is all he has done) then I probably agree with Graeme E that this is not a case for jail. The guy is now on the police radar….
(And for completeness, before the inevitable accusations of hypocrisy arise about me, my offence of 30 years ago was entirely unconnected with the violent crimes which I crusaded against when in parliament and subsequently…And even if I HAD been convicted of armed robbery 30 years prior, crusading against such crimes 30 years later is not hypocrisy in my view …. one is expected to evolve and change over 30 years…. I do not plan to respond to any “dead baby” references on this thread)
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:43 am
Pauses and asks – Why not just home detention?
Vote:I don’t want to understate this guy’s crime, but really, it’s sick rather than heinous. The depravity and criminality has been recognised as much by the conviction, as by the penalty.
DPF, can you imagine the gravity of a sentence which includes your being denied access to the internet?
February 8th, 2013 at 11:44 am
old christian white guy, presided over by an old white guy – he was never going to get jail!
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 11:52 am
Please, give me prison rather than give me home detention without my internet – for seven months
Please. take away my food, my oxygen … but don’t take away my internet.
Surely as case of Cruel and Inhumane punishment.
Vote:Surely a Bill of Rights breach.
February 8th, 2013 at 11:53 am
You’re fine DG – I don’t expect anyone here is really twisted out of shape enough to try to draw lines of moral equivalence between a stupid student prank and child porn or pedophilia!
(But plenty of us here will help deliver a good kicking if they do…
)
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 12:35 pm
Nope, you didn’t ‘fix’ anything. You demonstrated over several comments that you support bashing of a minority, on the grounds that some do likewise towards other minorities.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 12:48 pm
@tropicana
You seem to be unaware that there is no Internet access in prisons either.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 12:52 pm
There is internet access in prison available to most inmates.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 1:31 pm
your knee is jerking again Farrar.10 demerit points
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 1:31 pm
There is no internet access in prison.
http://www.corrections.govt.nz/utility-navigation/faq/questions-regarding-prisons-and-prisoners.html#email
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 1:36 pm
Clearly RRM and Nasska hate their fellow atheists – the majority of prisoners – by calling for the God-botherers to join them inside and bother them!
They also from time to time condem Cristians for saying that God hates homosexuality – but both whole heartidly and happily support the ATHEIST IDEAL that gays WILL NEVER GO TO HEAVEN!
Classy!
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 1:39 pm
oh….so the 4 that gave me the thumbs down, are obviously happy with home detention for that sick fuck…..so what else do you support? Man/child love?? It would appear so,.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 1:47 pm
OOH OOH OOH!
OOH OOH OOH!
OOH OOH OOH!
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 1:53 pm
Au Contraire, Krazykiwi…
McNeil and Capill really, really are hypocrite christians who spouted christian morality and brimstone while at the same time being kiddy-fiddling perverts.
But yes I’d happily bash them
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 2:03 pm
Yea, it coudn’t possibly be because of your race bating…
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 2:09 pm
How is that comment race baiting. Its factual – maybe you could give me the reasons why a man with 1000 child pornography images on his pc, images upskirting a 5 year old, that he has been in contact with…. why this man gets home D? But hey if you support the sentence, dont accuse me of race baiting, because I dont support the sentence
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 2:10 pm
If you can’t read, don’t write.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 2:11 pm
And since someone sensible might bring it up, yes, I condemn this man’s crimes and the sentence he was given without reservation.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 2:18 pm
Gracious – That was answered before you even asked it, in the third comment on this thread.
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2013/02/why_just_home_detention.html/comment-page-1#comment-1093519
I can see you’re new here. For future reference: Read anything Graeme Edgeler says, he is generally always correct.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 2:23 pm
Seems home detention is par for the course if you’re a prominent person.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 2:24 pm
Thanks RRM
– does a judge have no discretion of his own?
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 2:34 pm
gracious
….”does a judge have no discretion of his own?”…..
Surprisingly little it would seem. The issue has been discussed at depth on these forums several times & it seems that judges are bound by previous sentences with little discretionary leeway. If they do go overboard the sentence is usually appealed successfully.
Governments set the maximums…..that is where the pressure for realistic sentences must be applied.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 2:40 pm
I’ll tell you why he only got home d ..in 3 words…Judge Raoul Neave.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 2:41 pm
@Longknives
You are wrong.
Inmates in NZ prisons are not allowed to use computers with Internet access.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 2:43 pm
A five year old? Imagine if it was your daughter he’d done that to.
It’s got nothing to do with race – he’s simply a fucking dirty old prick.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 3:06 pm
gracious: Much would surely depend on the precise nature of the “pornographic” images on his computer, which may be loose use of words by the writer of the story……as Graeme E has pointed out, there is considerable difference between objectionable images – which for me would include images of fully clothed little girls wearing “I’m a slut” T shirts (go to your nearest shopping mall), high heels and heavy makeup – and pornographic ones….
This is clearly a disturbed man who deserves the opprobrium he is no doubt getting…but it is never wise to judge cases from media reports…Home D and public outing among his God bothering community may well be an appropriate sentence…
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 3:14 pm
Cha – “…Seems home detention is par for the course if you’re a prominent person…”
You’d get life.
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 3:22 pm
Thanks David, I still think the least the could throw in would be public castration, but maybe Im just bored lol
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 3:28 pm
David Garret#
If your familiar with the Daniel Morcombe case here in QLD, the trial has got the go ahead, but the accused who killed the 12yr has just changed his name by deed poll to ‘Shadow Hunter’ – and Daniel also has a twin brother.
That guy IS a real sick fuck!
Vote:February 8th, 2013 at 10:20 pm
Oh look, last week there was a pedophile who was an old, non Christian, white guy (much like Nasska, or DPF). Moralising basterds. Hypocrites. I now hate all those old white guys. Especially non Christian ones.
/sarc
Wouldn’t it be more honest to say that some HUMANS are shitheads? Some bash their kids. Some are pedophiles. Some fly planes into buildings.
Vote:February 9th, 2013 at 1:48 am
i said to my dear wife , can I go out look up a little girl underdress,she said husband, i have seen you with my own eyes you are a strong man, and it is what is in your heart of photo nhat is good , the little girls and their fathers trust you, we have serious and
Vote:proper relatiionships