Should Maori get reduced sentences?

November 21st, 2013 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

Martin van Beynen writes in The Press:

Lawyer James Rapley, representing Fabian Mika, has certainly stirred up a hornet’s nest in arguing that offenders are entitled to an automatic consideration of the history of the people when sentenced.

The Mika argument appears to be as follows:

- Sentencing is largely governed by the Sentencing Act. The relevant section says the court must take into account the offender’s personal, family, whanau, community, and cultural background in imposing a sentence.

- The court must recognise Mika’s Maori (cultural) background.

- The cultural background section of the Sentencing Act is partly designed to address the overrepresentation of Maori in the prison population (about 51 per cent).

- In Canada, under different legislation, the courts take account of the fact an offender is from an indigenous background.

- Maori should have a special status to recognise them as victims of colonialism, displacement, high unemployment, lower educational attainment and a higher level of incarceration.

- Maori are not entitled to an automatic reduction in penalty, but the court must take their Maori background into account in a meaningful way.

- Maori do not need to show a link between their cultural background and the offending. The devastating effects of the historic and systemic discrimination and deprivation of Maori and its intergenerational effects on Maori should be a given.

It looks very much like an argument ahead of its time.

Although it’s a carefully nuanced train of thought, the argument will no doubt be treated as advocating a penalty discount just for being Maori.

Which it is.

Sentencing took take account of an individual’s circumstances, but arguing that every Maori offender should get a reduced sentence due to colonialism is pretty insane.

If the Mika argument was put into practice, sentencing judges would have to start with a consideration of the offender’s ethnicity, a fairly tangled question in itself.

If Maori, the judge would then have to consider how generations of deprivation or dysfunction have shaped this individual.

Sentencing would become a lottery.

If the court makes allowances for being Maori, then red heads or left handers or gays might also have a valid case for special treatment.

Many will criticise such allowances as damaging the important principle of everyone being equal before the law.

And it would damage it massively.

Tags: ,

85 Responses to “Should Maori get reduced sentences?”

  1. Colville (1,780 comments) says:

    Should Maori get reduced sentences?

    No.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 39 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. wikiriwhis business (3,309 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 30 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Chuck Bird (4,415 comments) says:

    Why shouldn’t they plenty of other people do? That is just one example. I am all for one law for all but that should also apply to sex and a person social standing and who their parents are.

    Jury not told of mum’s threats
    PHIL KITCHIN
    Last updated 05:00 21/11/2013

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/9423760/Jury-not-told-of-mums-threats

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. liarbors a joke (1,069 comments) says:

    How about they just take responsibility for their own actions rather than trying to weasle out of their punishment.

    Simple really, don’t do the crime if you cant do the time…why do they continually think they are so fucking special and above all laws these maori…’ our people’…ppffttt.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Jack5 (4,231 comments) says:

    Lower sentences, separate justice system, separate schools, separate State-funded TV systems…. whether for good or bad it’s neo-apartheid, and in an increasingly mixed-race society because of intermarriage, just plain weird!

    The link belong elaborates on what wikiwiri is talking about:

    http://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/journals-and-magazines/rise/issue-six/gisborne-leads-the-way-in-innovative-court-collaboration.html

    For a link to Von Beynen’s piece on this topic today in the Christchurch Press see the general debate thread.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. UglyTruth (3,156 comments) says:

    “One law for all” means assuming that all people suffer from the human condition and are subject to their rules.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Interested (13 comments) says:

    So, if a Maori murders someone he gets a reduced sentence because he is Maori… but what if his victim is also Maori , would that make a difference…or a Pakeha victim?????

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. dime (8,790 comments) says:

    Yeah bro! Its not this guys fault hes a baddie!

    His great great grandfather was oppressed!

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. nostrils (53 comments) says:

    “Jury not told of mum’s threats”

    That is a disgrace – I wonder if the defence lawyer sleeps at night!

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. metcalph (1,293 comments) says:

    The Canadian practice has been to take in the account of ethnic background only if the offender was living in a traditional community. A similar rule is observed in practice in the remote parts of Oz (Speared offenders get reduced sentences) but it’s difficult to see how it would apply here.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. rouppe (852 comments) says:

    Should Maori get reduced sentences?

    No.

    I know I’m going to get smashed for this, but Maori need to remember that colonisation would have occurred anyway, whether it be from the English, the French, the Dutch or someone else. Maori need start looking at the situation they are in, and contrast it with the situation for, well, every single other colonised country in the world.

    Would Maori rather be in the situation Australian Aboriginals find themselves? Indians? Zimbabweans? Indonesians? Zairian? Algerian? Even looking at English colonisation, not one single other country had any sort of treaty offered. Colonisation was by force. Don’t say we’d rather we hadn’t been colonised because that is just not the reality. Someone would have.

    Yes I know that the agreements were not honoured by the New Zealand Company employees, and the militia that backed them. Yes compensation is warranted for egregious breaches. However it has now got to the point where every year I feel like I have been tried, convicted and sentenced to a heavy fine for crimes I did not commit.

    The simple fact is that if you don’t rob, burgle, assault, steal, deal in drugs, or whatever, you won’t end up in front of a judge and you won’t have to worry about it.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. wikiriwhis business (3,309 comments) says:

    ‘but it’s difficult to see how it would apply here.’

    Probably a choice of venue for the defendent

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. wikiriwhis business (3,309 comments) says:

    ‘The simple fact is that if you don’t rob, burgle, assault, steal, deal in drugs, or whatever, you won’t end up in front of a judge and you won’t have to worry about it.’

    This implies we have a perfect society free of care and want.

    Tui moment

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 27 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. kowtow (6,734 comments) says:

    metcalph

    By “traditional community” do you mean ones where there are no welfare cheques from Ottawa,no rifles for hunting,no outboard motors for the boat,no diesel for the heating?

    Didn’t think so.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. David Garrett (5,159 comments) says:

    God help us…As the chardonnay (I think it’s pinot gris these days) socialists say, this is wrong on so many levels.

    For a start, it is predicated on the argument that “colonization” is the root cause of all bad things that have happened to Maori – both individual and plural. While there is no hiding from the fact that colonization resulted in some serious wrongs being done – such as the land confiscations of the 1860′s – Maori also benefited greatly from the presence of the colonizing honkey.

    Where do you start listing those benefits? Citizenship of the British Empire, something most other colonised people didnt get; protection by operation of law from the depredations of warlike tribes; a written language; better sanitation and housing; education…the list of “things Maori had after 1840 that they didnt have before” is a very long one.

    Given that there is now no definition of “Maori” other than you identify as one, how would a judge decide what the “Maori” discount should be? Judges already go through a convoluted process from a starting “tariff” – adding on years or months for aggravating factors, and subtracting years or months for various mitigating factors. Would the Judge just have to give a standard discount to any defendant who said he identified as Maori, or – shock horror – look for evidence of just how Maori the defendant was?

    The whole idea is insane, and the leaders of bench of all branches of the judiciary should publicly say so without delay.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Chuck Bird (4,415 comments) says:

    ‘The simple fact is that if you don’t rob, burgle, assault, steal, deal in drugs, or whatever, you won’t end up in front of a judge and you won’t have to worry about it.’

    I have done none of those things but I still am expected to grovel to some judge. The other party is a former lawyer from a well know legal family so that does not help me.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Left Right and Centre (2,397 comments) says:

    Yeah, do it. And if you come from a really good family, make it longer. Fuck, you should know better !! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. big bruv (12,388 comments) says:

    We might laugh at the idea of Maori getting more lenient sentences because of their race but nobody should forget that it is the policy of the Green party that Maori should not be punished to the same level as the other ethnicities in New Zealand.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Left Right and Centre (2,397 comments) says:

    So, if a Maori murders someone he gets a reduced sentence because he is Maori… but what if his victim is also Maori , would that make a difference…or a Pakeha victim?????

    How do you think Labour / Green fill their days ? They’re drawing up a nice little chart with lots of arrows and boxes.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. rouppe (852 comments) says:

    Chuck

    I have done none of those things either, but am due in front of a judge (or maybe a pair of JP’s) in February because some traffic cop saw what he wanted to see, and is ignoring what doesn’t suit his view.

    Grovel? I don’t think I’ll be doing that. I’ll be laying out the three points of law where the cop is wrong, and sprinkling it with evidence that suggests he may be being casual with the truth.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. David Garrett (5,159 comments) says:

    Wikiwhatever: JURIES don’t jail anyone – the Judge does. Juries simply decide whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty. But you knew that, right? If you didn’t, you should stay off any thread that deals with crime and punishment and the judicial process.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Nostalgia-NZ (4,699 comments) says:

    ‘Sentencing is largely governed by the Sentencing Act. The relevant section says the court must take into account the offender’s personal, family, whanau, community, and cultural background in imposing a sentence.

    - The court must recognise Mika’s Maori (cultural) background.

    - The cultural background section of the Sentencing Act is partly designed to address the overrepresentation of Maori in the prison population (about 51 per cent).

    - Maori are not entitled to an automatic reduction in penalty, but the court must take their Maori background into account in a meaningful way.

    - Maori do not need to show a link between their cultural background and the offending. The devastating effects of the historic and systemic discrimination and deprivation of Maori and its intergenerational effects on Maori should be a given.’

    How you go from that to this is beyond me:

    ‘If the court makes allowances for being Maori, then red heads or left handers or gays might also have a valid case for special treatment’

    Even sillier is the suggestion that the Courts don’t heed statute, if it’s included in the Sentencing Act then it’s Law.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. burt (7,096 comments) says:

    We have race based quotas at universities ….

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. nickb (3,629 comments) says:

    This right winger thinks this whole story is a complete beat up.

    Either:

    a) The accused told his lawyer to run this defence, in which case the lawyer is obligated to; or

    b) The lawyer was just trying it on to get a reduced sentence, which means he is doing his job very well.

    It’s not law, it will never be law, (unless Labour and the Greens get to write our new constitution for us) its just an argument a lawyer ran in one case.

    Calm down people. This kind of hysteria got provocation removed. Talk about Pavlov’s dogs

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. wikiriwhis business (3,309 comments) says:

    ‘JURIES don’t jail anyone – the Judge does.’

    Trivialist. The judge acts on a juries decision. That’s why juries spend time in reserve making a decision.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 19 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. wikiriwhis business (3,309 comments) says:

    ‘We have race based quotas at universities ….’

    Students are vetted on their race during the enlistment process.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Chuck Bird (4,415 comments) says:

    @rouppe

    I have a lot more riding on this than a traffic ticket or two.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. kowtow (6,734 comments) says:

    rouppe

    I think the history of colonisation has been massively overlooked and under taught.

    The English (or British) had a long history of offering treaties.From the earliest days colonisation.There was the one that established the French rights in north America ,which also guaranteed native rights (that was IMHO one of th e causes of the rebellion there by the colonists)

    The conquest of the various states in India would have seen many treaties.
    eg Treaty of Lahore March 1846 Punjab becomes British Protectorate.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lahore

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. stephieboy (1,168 comments) says:

    Both Fabian Mika and his brief James Repley need to seriously consider one Tuhoe ” Bruno” Isaac ex Mongrel Mob member who decided to leave a life with the mob of ” bash,beer , prison and possibly dying in a pool of blood” and ” search for another way of life.”

    Fabian Mika wants to forget this cop out bid and follow plenty of excellent role models like Tuhoe who chooses not to become a victim of history or circumstance.

    http://www.brownpages.co.nz/Portals/0/true_red.pdf

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. liarbors a joke (1,069 comments) says:

    “Given that there is now no definition of “Maori” other than you identify as one”

    thats right…if you ” feel maori ” you “are maori ” even if you are as white as I am ..what a crock of shit , cunning stone age natives more like it.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Ryan Sproull (6,661 comments) says:

    Perhaps John Banks should get some leniency in his upcoming trial for being a rich Pakeha man.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Nostalgia-NZ (4,699 comments) says:

    Section 8 (i).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. stephieboy (1,168 comments) says:

    liarbors a joke (1,002) Says:
    November 21st, 2013 at 11:45 am

    A correction there. The Maori were not stone age but more accurately Neolithic. There was no practical way for them to extract or mine readily available deposits of Iron, Copper or tin etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. dave_c_ (206 comments) says:

    My question is – What is it inately about being a) Maori and b) ones great great great…. garandparents were treated poorly, which distinguishes a felons behaviour these days, that wasnt already obvious the same behaviours they exhibit today was already part of the behaviour before colonialisation ?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Jaffa (68 comments) says:

    They should get a lesser sentence, if their offense is against other Maoris.
    Otherwise they should get a greater sentence.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Ashley Schaeffer (336 comments) says:

    My Scottish ancestors had a pretty rough time of it from the English as well. Do I qualify?

    Actually, the truth is that my Scottish grandmother grew up in poverty, abandoned by her parents at an early age and still managed to go on and lead a successful life as a productive and caring member of society. See, there was no-one around to tell her she could blame her lot in life on someone else and expect a free ride. She recognised that she had to pull herself up by her bootstraps and make the most of the life she was born to. The victim mentality of some Maori needs to be nipped in the bud.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. beautox (408 comments) says:

    Perhaps they could use the same argument for reduced benefits for Maori. Nope, didn’t think so.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    David Garrett (4,482) Says:
    November 21st, 2013 at 11:25 am

    While there is no hiding from the fact that colonization resulted in some serious wrongs being done – such as the land confiscations of the 1860′s – Maori also benefited greatly from the presence of the colonizing honkey.

    Is this analogous to a battered wife not appreciating that her husband brought home the bacon? Should she perhaps not complain too loudly?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Grant Michael McKenna (1,152 comments) says:

    This is somewhat unrelated, but I have often wondered: given that there are programmes in prison for Māori, is there a incentive then for prisoners to declare themselves to be Māori when sent to prison? Has there been any study of whether people identified as Māori before they were sentenced?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. kowtow (6,734 comments) says:

    nickb

    This is not a beatup.

    As already pointed out ,it’s in the Sentencing Act ,just not as explicit as the Canadian Code……yet.

    A Bolt posted on a recent example where this was tried on in Oz.

    Our Human Rights legislation was copied by British Labour…..look what that’s done to the administration of “justice” in the UK!

    These people call themselves “progressives” and they take each others’ ideas ,initiatives etc and legislate them into their own jurisdictions.

    Progressives.To be opossed.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Fentex (664 comments) says:

    Many will criticise such allowances as damaging the important principle of everyone being equal before the law.

    People are not equal before the law, as simply demonstrated by two recent cases of police officers being discharged without conviction after being demonstrated, and accepted as, guilty of crimes anyone else would be banged up for.

    When I was at university a law student in my year was let off a reasonably serious charge because having the conviction would preclude them from pursuing their intended legal career – a law (forbidding convicted criminals from certain registrations and qualifications) designed to protect the public from abuse turns out to protect the abusers from consequences.

    We consistently see privileged classes of people being treated leniently by the law because of superficial similarities between accused and convicted individuals and the classes of people who hold power and authority.

    So arguing against another privilege on the logic that privilege does not exist is a fallacy.

    I think people annoyed by this suggestion should pick a better argument against it because pretending no one get’s an advantage over others in our courts is a fantasy.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. woodburner (21 comments) says:

    Waiting to see the Maori powers that be come out and denounce this. I honestly cant think of a quicker way to destroy decades of work toward equal rights for Maori. After all that, this comes out screaming: “you know what, we arent equal so treat us differently”. Own goal.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. kowtow (6,734 comments) says:

    fentex

    You are quite right about the priveliged and discharges.Today’s ODT has a shocker .It is an abuse of the principles upon which our system is meant to sit.

    But it’s the principle of equality before the law that matters, and whenever judges let these through they undermne the very principles they are meant to uphold.

    http://www.odt.co.nz/news/queenstown-lakes/282309/second-discharge-under-arms-act

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (4,166) Says:
    November 21st, 2013 at 11:35 am

    - Maori are not entitled to an automatic reduction in penalty, but the court must take their Maori background into account in a meaningful way.

    - Maori do not need to show a link between their cultural background and the offending. The devastating effects of the historic and systemic discrimination and deprivation of Maori and its intergenerational effects on Maori should be a given.’

    If it is a given, then why is the reduction not automatic?

    In any case, the problem is that such “solutions” to historic and systemic discrimination are counter-productive. Not only do they fuel the sort of racial angst clearly displayed on this forum, they only serve to excuse bad behaviour and thus undermine personal responsibility.

    I just don’t see how it addresses jury or judicial bias or other social or economic factors that may predispose people to criminality. My understanding is that modern high rates of criminal offending is a modern phenomenon which appears to be largely associated with urbanization. If this is the case then referencing historical crimes against Maori would seem irrelevant and a seperate issue. Perhaps we should be asking what is happening now that is producing these outcomes.

    It seems to me organized crime (and consequently drug prohibition) has to be a significant factor. Entrenched welfare dependency would also appear to be related. Racial prejudice likely also plays a part.

    Perhaps the most important thing to remember is that despite Maori overrepresentation, most Maori are not criminals. Disproportionate outcomes should be a concern, but numbers also need to be put in perspective.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    Fentex (376) Says:
    November 21st, 2013 at 12:02 pm

    So arguing against another privilege on the logic that privilege does not exist is a fallacy.

    I think people annoyed by this suggestion should pick a better argument against it because pretending no one get’s an advantage over others in our courts is a fantasy.

    I agree that the reality doesn’t live up to the ideal, but the ideal has to be maintained as a goal. Two wrongs don’t make a right etc.

    Try to correct the systemic bias, don’t just accept that bias is the norm.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. RRM (8,997 comments) says:

    I’m not racist.

    I just think whiteys deserve longer jail sentences than Maori ™

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. David Garrett (5,159 comments) says:

    Wiki: do really believe juries take a certain time – short or long – in which to make their decision in order to signal to the Judge whether the defendant should be jailed? Give it it up man! Holes one is in; stop digging etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Ryan Sproull (6,661 comments) says:

    My point about John Banks wasn’t entirely flippant. Every crime has causal factors behind it that were outside of the control of the criminal. Maori today are indeed affected by the consequences of colonisation and the wrongs of previous generations. And John Banks’ attitude towards hiding the source of donations (if found guilty) will also have been affected by things outside of his control.

    It cuts right to the question of the purpose of the judicial system. Lenient sentencing as a nod to societal causes of crime should be applied to everyone, if it is applied at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Nostalgia-NZ (4,699 comments) says:

    ‘Weihana 12.21′

    I don’t thinks it is a given, rather it is spelt out that it (the culture) must be considered.

    I agree with Fentex, using my words and not his ‘we are not all equal before the Law’ as in the cases Fentex points out and many others we are all aware of.

    Also I don’t agree with your argument that 2 wrongs don’t make a right if you are comparing the cases that Fentex mentions with other cases that might be considered under S8 of which we don’t know the details. The ‘jump’ back to colonisation is far from the only argument, urbanisation as you mentioned is one. Anyway, it’s all news to me. I didn’t know about it, I’m surprised that because it’s been the Law for many years that the public have not heard more about it, or read of it being applied.

    The only thing I can agree about in the article is that it is a ‘carefully nuanced train of thought.’ Taking into account that it isn’t new, surely the arguments and ‘consideration’ by the Court must be welcome.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. edhunter (435 comments) says:

    I’m all for reduced time spent in prison, a small piece of lead strategically placed behind either ear normally does the trick & there’s a 99.99% chance that the offender will never offend again.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Rich Prick (1,324 comments) says:

    Well, his victim didn’t get a race-based discount so why should he?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. fernglas (37 comments) says:

    The fallacy in the reasoning is that the Court may take into account cultural matters, etc. to determine the appropriate sentence for an individual. To assume that the same factors apply across the board to everyone of a particular ethnicity and with the same weighting is absurd. Many people have been abused physically, for example, but that is not necessarily a factor in their offending where it may be in another’s. The criteria in the Sentencing Act are designed to personalise the offender, rather than simply look at the crime and impose a tariff sentence which may not be suitable for that individual or the community. Having balanced all the considerations, the Court then imposes a sentence tailored for the individual. To say “I am Maori and therefore I am deemed to be disadvantaged in a way that entitles me to a fixed rebate on what would otherwise be the appropriate sentence” is double-dipping, as it is claiming credit for personal characteristics, and then again for perceived racial characteristics.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. MT_Tinman (2,797 comments) says:

    Based on the photograph the fellow asking for bulk discount for himself because he’s Maori is, in fact, only about half Maori.

    I suggest we give him his way, letting half of him serve the full sentence and the throwing out the other half after 90% is completed.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Manolo (12,644 comments) says:

    Give him to an enemy Iwi to put him in the kettle.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. DJP6-25 (1,236 comments) says:

    So, as usual, the left only oppose racism when it doesn’t suit their purposes.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. safesally (36 comments) says:

    My child was killed by trash like this guy. The judge took all of his so called unfortunate life into account but did not even consider the life sentence imposed on my child and my family.
    It was the creeps 24th conviction most of which being jailable. Finally he goes inside for under three years.
    If I had the guts I would kill him; I don’t care what race he is.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. wikiriwhis business (3,309 comments) says:

    ‘Wiki: do really believe juries take a certain time – short or long – in which to make their decision in order to signal to the Judge whether the defendant should be jailed? ‘

    That’s what the police and lawyers are fighting over. Persuading the jury.

    Actually, the court room has these 12 people that listen to lawyers, police and witnesses.

    TV make a lot of shows about them. The media reports on them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. wikiriwhis business (3,309 comments) says:

    ‘Perhaps John Banks should get some leniency in his upcoming trial for being a rich Pakeha man.’

    Just like the UK bankers caught in the Libor rate rigging. Timothy Geitner even warned them to tone it down

    They should all be in jail

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. ISeeRed (244 comments) says:

    Why not? They already speak in reduced sentences.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. David Garrett (5,159 comments) says:

    safesally: My sincere condolences for your loss. But since you have felt able to write about your situation – particularly your life sentence compared to the offender’s less than 3 years – I hope you will not mind my observing that it is exactly cases like yours (I do not know who you are, only what you have told us) that was the reason ACT refused to agree to a three year sentence threshold for “strike” offenders before they have a strike recorded against them. (The Nats were trying to get us to agree to a “strike” being recorded only where the offender got more than three years jail)

    Unfortunately it was not hard to find a substantial list of offenders with histories like your offender, some with many more than 24 convictions.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. safesally (36 comments) says:

    Thank you David. I kinda wish ACT would change leader so more people would vote for them :)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. flash2846 (132 comments) says:

    It is appalling that this sort of thing even comes up. I wish an outspoken Maori, any outspoken Maori would actually say “thanks” to other New Zealanders for the billions of dollars of taxpayers money they are receiving. Perhaps reduce that by 10%
    I too have lost a son by deeds of a long term criminal and I am very angry.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. wikiriwhis business (3,309 comments) says:

    ‘I too have lost a son by deeds of a long term criminal and I am very angry.’

    I would be the first to say Maori crime and violence is why police seriously consider wearing side arms.

    I did see a constable wearing a taser in Auckland other day. Even that felt sad to see.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Paul Marsden (935 comments) says:

    The sole reason Maori are over represented in prison, is that for many Maori, the warrior gene continues to flow thick through their blood and it will continue to do so, until it is eventually bred out of them.

    The only thing that a warrior respects is a force and a power greater than themselves. If we had an armed, front line police force led by a hierarchy all in the mould of say Gideon Tate (and a judiciary who backed them up), then our prisons would be almost empty and this sort of nonsense would be consigned to history

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. hj (5,720 comments) says:

    Margaret (Scotty) Mutu’s definition of racism courtesy of “distinguished” (code for cultural Marxist) Professor Spoonley:

    Racism is the ideological belief that people can be classified into ‘races’ … [which] can be
    ranked in terms of superiority and inferiority … racism is the acceptance of racial superiority … It is often used to refer to the expression of an ideology of racial superiority in the situation where the holder has some power. Thus prejudice plus power denotes racism in the modern sense … racism is essentially an attitudinal or ideological phenomenon. … A dominant group not only holds negative beliefs about other groups but, because of the power to control resources, is able to practice those beliefs in a discriminatory way … This ideological concept structures social and political relationships and derives from a history of European colonialism. The idea of ‘race’ has evolved from its use in scientific explanation (now discredited) and as a justification in the oppression of
    colonised, non European people

    http://www.nzmediastudies.org.nz/articles/sueabelmargaretmutu1202.pdf

    Everyone is racist
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21220339

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Steve (North Shore) (4,332 comments) says:

    This sort of bullshit will continue as long as the comunity and society let it.
    Who in power has the balls to say ‘enough is enough, just fuck off?’

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. MH (558 comments) says:

    There’s no doubt in my mind some of the sentences are too long,for example when questioned as to whether the defendant usually in a borrowed suit, wants to plead guily or not guilty or indeed to enter a plea,this could be shortened to ” Do you wish to plead guilty or guilty”. I shall put this over to the Sensible Sentencing Trust for further refinement and search for grammatical and syntax error.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. BlairM (2,266 comments) says:

    I’m actually all in favour of a separate Maori justice system, which could happily co-exist in the same way that the Scottish and County Durham justice systems exist within the UK.

    Any Maori victim of crime, or the family of a victim, could opt for the perpetrator to be tried by Maori justice. Maori are disproportionately victims of crime, so it would be in their interests. Clearly our current system of justice is too soft, and not serving them adequately.

    I’m pretty sure being boiled and eaten would be a suitable deterrent for any criminal.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. kowtow (6,734 comments) says:

    What’s all this “warrior gene” bullshit?

    It’s another excuse for bad behaviour.

    The British conquered by land and sea most of the world .

    They don’t go on about warrior gene shit. They went on to establish the greatest societies and democracies we now know.

    NZ,Oz,USA, Canada.

    And that democratic,lawful tradition lives on in dozens of others.

    Warrior gene …..pfffft.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. MH (558 comments) says:

    this would only lead to tribal intrigue and a revival or past inter necine grievances. The ideal behind British law is that the Scots and Irish can be fairly treated by the impartial ENGLISH. The Welsh are a different kettle of fish. It is already difficult for Northern Maori police to be stationed in the waikato region. No,if there is going to be any boiling it has to be done by impartial Pacific Islanders under a UN mandate and any by product divied up amongst the Asian community as part of our commitment to muti racial harmony.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Longknives (4,051 comments) says:

    “Warrior gene …..pfffft.”

    I dunno Kowtow- They are a pretty staunch bunch when beating helpless infants to death/throwing them in clothes dryers etc

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Chris2 (708 comments) says:

    It’s ironic how the worst maori offenders use the legal aid system to always choose a white lawyer, like Rapley, to represent them.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Paul Marsden (935 comments) says:

    Vote: 2 0 kowtow (5,769) Says:

    November 21st, 2013 at 6:24 pm
    What’s all this “warrior gene” bullshit?

    Two to three hundred years ago, Maori (depending on their tribes) where slaughtering and cannibalising their enemy, including feasting on the dead bodies of young children. In evolutionary terms, that time frame is less than a nano second ago. If you think for one moment that colonisation of Maori has somehow magically cleansed their entire blood lines of various genes in around only 20 generations, then a study of anthropology might be useful to you.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. duggledog (1,119 comments) says:

    Paul Marsden

    ‘Warrior Gene’ ?

    Mika is the sort of dog that pre European Maori would have either eaten, enslaved or just knocked on the head with a patu and left on the beach. Looking at him he’s about as Maori as John Key.

    Mika is the end result of colonisation all right – a soft as butter justice system, free cash for having babies ehoa, allowing criminal gangs to flourish, white guilt and an education system that has, by way of insinuation and intimation over the years, infused and inspired any young loser with Maori blood with a hatred for the Pakeha white man who ‘stole his land’. Remember the rock ape that smashed up the America’s Cup? Same attitude – this was years ago now – he looked more like Brad Pitt than say Tame Iti.

    Expect it to get way worse before it gets better sports fans. There are thousands of these guys (and girls) out there who are angry, powerless, poor and rapidly being left behind while the majority in this country forge ahead – including the Maori elite who don’t want anything to do with them.

    Unless underclass Maori start popping out 10 x babies per head (unlikely now the tap’s being turned off) or they breed with the massive numbers of immigrants coming from Asia, SA, UK etc to do the heavy lifting (even more unlikely) then their numbers as a % of NZ as a whole will drop to far below 15% by 2050.

    In the meantime, we better hope to god Labour don’t actually rescind Garrett’s brave and far sighted legacy (3S) and we have enough money to build the prisons – we’ll need at least one or two more for them all.

    Up until quite recently what Maori wanted, Maori got, but I don’t think this is going to last. It can’t.
    Headlines like the one above only serve to entrench bad thoughts about the tangata whenua who are… mostly awesome!

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. Paul Marsden (935 comments) says:

    duggledog (694) Says:

    November 21st, 2013 at 7:07 pm

    I agree 100% . The problem is further manifested by the nonsense espoused in NZ schools nowadays relating to NZ history and Maori. It is almost the polar opposite to what I was taught in school during my era, and which I validated myself, through my (then) keen interest in Maori history

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. MT_Tinman (2,797 comments) says:

    Paul, 60 years ago European men were exercising their “warrior gene” fighting yet another war on a massive scale.

    Those same Europeans managed to control that “warrior gene” pretty bloody quickly.

    In fact you appear to be talking pure and utter crap – are you PG in disguise?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. hj (5,720 comments) says:

    Steve (North Shore) (4,031) Says:
    November 21st, 2013 at 5:41 pm
    This sort of bullshit will continue as long as the comunity and society let it.
    Who in power has the balls to say ‘enough is enough, just fuck off?’
    …………………….
    Because self selecting groups have taken over academia, politics, journalism: cultural Marxists.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. MH (558 comments) says:

    yes, the gas ovens were still warm before Euro Stalin and Asiatic Mao re-started their pograms, nonetheless the Maori Musket Wars produced the most bloodiest campaigns ever recorded. The Serbs would have continued unabated as part of their gene bank desire. Hitler is only a few generations removed from most of us pure bred Euros and I have to include those freedom bomb loving Irish hooligans. And i agree the comments on TV about NZ history will definitely not, due to internecine rivalry talk openly about what happened 1800 – 1840 and why the Treaty was signed,Modern Maoripeons will still believe and trot out the usual rubbish about partnership and sovereignity when that plainly was not the case. The Normans made sure the English knew who was boss and 900 years later the Scots and Irish trot out the same old same old.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. MH (558 comments) says:

    @ Fentax
    had the student been a Maori law student the result would have been the same. Does anyone else seriously believe that first offenders are jailed immediately? They have had warning after warning,parental and victim meetings…..they sneer at teachers, no respect until they are too old to reform except pass on their disdain to their illegitimate offspring. People in jail aren’t there because of their colour or genes they are there because they knowingly decide to do bad things.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Paul Marsden (935 comments) says:

    I find it staggering (that to the best of my knowledge) no one has yet, undertaken a study of Maori in prison (say, over the years), linking them to their tribal ancestory.

    I’m sure the results would be fascinating.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. secondcumming (78 comments) says:

    Should Maoris get reduced sentences?

    Well if it means we get Willie and JT back on air a bit earlier, absolutely!

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. F E Smith (3,277 comments) says:

    nickb, your 11.37am comment is spot on.

    Rapley, you have outdone yourself, my friend!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Paul Marsden (935 comments) says:

    Vote: 2 2 F E Smith (2,955) Says:

    November 21st, 2013 at 9:50 pm
    nickb, your 11.37am comment is spot on.

    The frightening thing about this matter however, is for our Courts to even have the gall to allow the hearing (Yet another step towards an apathied society). And at what further cost to the taxpayer who are paying all the bills in this bizzare matter??

    Yet more absurd nonsense from the NZ judiciary

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. F E Smith (3,277 comments) says:

    The frightening thing about this matter however, is for our Courts to even have the gall to allow the hearing

    That is a completely incorrect statement.  It is a perfectly legitimate argument for a prisoner to run in mitigation, although it does not have to be accepted by the judge.

    But it is a submission that is open to make based upon the legislation passed by Parliament, and it would be a very brave judge who refused to hear it. 

    To criticise the Courts for ‘even having the gall to allow the hearing’ shows a complete misunderstanding of how the Courts operate.

    And what have the judiciary got to do with it that they deserve criticism? It was the prisoner’s counsel who made the submission, not the judge.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Paul Marsden (935 comments) says:

    November 21st, 2013 at 11:27 pm
    The frightening thing about this matter however, is for our Courts to even have the gall to allow the hearing

    That is a completely incorrect statement. It is a perfectly legitimate agreement for a prisoner to run in mitigation, although it does not have to be accepted by the judge.”

    It is not an incorrect statement at all. It is my opinion and I stand by it. And yes, I understand what you are saying, which is exactly my point. This matter is as absurd a notion as say the Court of Appeal hearing arguement from me (at the taxpayers expense), to have a traffic fine of mine reduced because I might be 1/8 Maori. And yes, I know its the prisoner’s counsel who made the submission, and he/she needs to be severely admonished for it. In such matters, I believe the Court needs to take a position that it will not hear such absurd and frivolous claims, lest of all opening a whole Pandora’s box of nonsense appeals which would do nothing for race relations in NZ

    And I have some idea how the Courts operate, having had some experience with them over a period of about x 10 years (and from a unique perspective and position), and I don’t agree with how they operate at all. I also strongly believe the Courts should engage more with society, who after all, pay them to uphold the rights of society

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.