Tamihere and Jackson off air for the rest of the year

November 11th, 2013 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

The Herald reports:

and will be off air after today.

The RadioLive hosts have announced on air that today’s will be their last show for the year.

On the show, Mr Tamihere said they would be taking the next few weeks to review what happened last week with management and agree what action needs to be taken.

“We do not condone rape in any way and did not intend to blame the victims.

“Rape is a terrible crime and the victims who come forward deserve support and respect.”

The pair said they “deeply regret” the comments they made last week in an interview with Amy, the 18-year-old friend of a Roast Busters victim.

They also said they regret the impact their actions had on their wives, children, grandchildren and communities.

If they had said that in the original apology, then they’d still be in air. As Alan Martin says, it’s the putting right that counts.

It will be interesting to see who fills in for them for the next two months.

Tags: , ,

95 Responses to “Tamihere and Jackson off air for the rest of the year”

  1. burt (8,206 comments) says:

    Lets hope the most racist person ever to be given air time never comes back, Tamihere can stay away as well.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Right of way is Way of Right (1,121 comments) says:

    Right, that’s those two taken care of, now, how about that Len Brown!

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. kowtow (8,211 comments) says:

    Tokenism.

    You can hear the radio execs saying ……you’re back on next year when this has all blown over.

    Like the apology ,insincere.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. big bruv (13,689 comments) says:

    This is fantastic news. No more three hours of racist ranting, left wing bullshit and union crap five days a week.

    Make no mistake, these two will not be back.

    Let’s get Rodney on there.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. rouppe (963 comments) says:

    They’ll probably run “highlight reels” from the previous 10 months

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. dave53 (87 comments) says:

    No more three hours of racist ranting, left wing bullshit and union crap five days a week.

    So you actually listen to their show then?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. RRM (9,786 comments) says:

    Dime – what are you going to do with your days now? :-P

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. dime (9,805 comments) says:

    LMAO

    Dime listens for about 10 mins a day. Always good to hear how the enemy think.

    Jackson can find racism anywhere. Hes the most racist guy ive come across in years.

    Hopefully its not coddington “representing the right”. Shes like he guy on the newsroom, apparently right wing, but has identical beliefs to the left

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. martinh (1,257 comments) says:

    I think that there is a point that girls shouldnt go out wearing slutty looking clothing. Its not saying they asked for it but its good advice to give to girls to minimise their chance of being targeted by these roast buster bastards.
    If you cant say that now then beware of what you cant sauy when the feminists in Labour get in and that moron sounding tv3 reporter Paula Penfold

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    Excellent News.

    why don’t they leave New Zealand while theyr’e at it?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. martinh (1,257 comments) says:

    coddington and jackson a two peas in the pod, she sounds more flustered than a demented granny most times ive heard her. At least JT can articulate a point unlike Willy who is only able to get by on the maori gravy train

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Nigel Kearney (971 comments) says:

    If they did it once only it might be thoughtless. But they did it once, lots of people talked about what they said, then they did it again. That means it must be what they really believe and there’s no way to credibly apologize for that.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. RRM (9,786 comments) says:

    The pair said they “deeply regret” being pulled up for comments they made last week in an interview with Amy, the 18-year-old friend of a Roast Busters victim.

    Fixed…

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Chuck Bird (4,836 comments) says:

    I fail to see why Coddington joined ACT. The only thing she supported was the libertarian demands particularly on homosexual issues. She supports demands from all minority pressure groups. She is also soft on crime expect for the case of responsible drinkers who want to share a bottle of wine over a meal. I wonder if she has converted her husband to that view on drinking yet?

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Simon (694 comments) says:

    “they would still be on the air”

    Doubt if these two leftwing clowns have actually changed their minds in a week (talking two life times of ignorance here) looks like their “apology” was written by lawyers.

    Leason for the left. This is how the free market works. The incompetent disappear, the competent gain market share and new producers enter the market. Not very fair and equitable for these two.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. BeaB (2,108 comments) says:

    Martinh
    Like these awful radio announcers, you really do need to understand that to a rapist all females are fair game, whatever they are wearing, however young or old, night or daytime, drunk or sober.

    “Sluttiness” is surely in the eye of the beholder. Is a bikini slutty? Shorts?
    Youngsters swimming ‘rudey nudey’?

    What about a rapist who could be inflamed by a tee shirt? Or by an 87-year-old woman? Or a woman in a burqua?

    Surely by now everyone can understand this has nothing to do with what girls wear!!!!!

    I’d just love to hear some of these men talking about men’s behaviour instead of tired old clichés that began with Eve the temptress.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    Here’s a real apology, from Andrew Fagan.

    Statement from Andrew Fagan:

    I have been called a number of things in my life, but never a ‘rape apologist’ or a misogynist. I am neither.

    I would like to explain to the best of my ability what happened regarding the phone call to RadioLIVE last week between me and Elle, and how I got it so wrong.

    It’s not easy having to work with your partner; it is particularly difficult when you are live on air on a nationwide talkback programme every week night.

    The previous night to this call (Monday) the discussion was about the ‘Roast Busters’ in west Auckland and the allegations of rape, and the obvious online bullying. On this night I had taken a stance about how the ‘error of judgement’ occurred when someone took the first drink.

    I was challenged on air on this by Karyn, who was adamant that the ‘error of judgement’ had nothing to do with the person who took the drink but the person who took advantage of them, whatever age the victim, be it 13 or 53.

    I did not think my stance through clearly enough as to the implications or the inference of ‘victim blaming’, something I really didn’t know a lot about. It was a moot point which I was stubbornly sticking to.

    I would like to reiterate here that I was not, and did not, in any way suggest that what a girl or a woman wears, or how they look, or where they go is any excuse to be violated by anybody else. That goes for either sex. I have children, I consider myself a fairly enlightened man and I have a strong moral compass in relation to sexual assault of any kind.

    The following evening, as we drove to work, we began to discuss this matter again and it ensued in a very loud argument as Karyn tried to explain to me what ‘victim blaming’ was, and I stuck to the point of girls and women being vulnerable if they drink.

    The argument increased in intensity until I was told in no uncertain terms to get out and walk, which I did, for an hour and a half in the rain.

    I arrived in the studio exactly one minute before we went on air, extremely annoyed at having been left on the side of the road and when Elle called I was still so wrapped up in what had occurred I was simply not listening and I did not hear what she said. I realise, listening back, that my challenging of her in that context was obnoxious and hurtful.

    When Elle asked me, ‘Did you not hear what I just said?’ the answer should have been ‘No, I didn’t’. Whether it was ‘consensual’ or she ‘fancied him’ was completely irrelevant given I did not have it in context, i.e. she was phoning us to say she had been raped at 14 and she had only ever had a sip of one shandy before that, and he gave her a bottle of 750 ml beer. Major points I just happened to miss.

    It is absolutely no excuse, but it is the truth of what happened. I am not blaming the argument with Karyn for this, but trying to give a truthful explanation for my aberrant behaviour.

    I wanted to make a long and full apology on air explaining what I meant, but was advised that apologising and then explaining myself could have seemed to be defending what I had done wrong.

    I completely understand the arguments now behind ‘victim blaming’, and as a co-host on RadioLIVE I will try to address those attitudes that I wittingly (because it came out of my own mouth) appear to have fostered.

    Sorry, Elle.

    Andrew Fagan

    http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Open-letter-from-Andrew-Fagan/tabid/878/articleID/38905/Default.aspx

    It takes a lot to man up and admit you might have been a part of a damaging culture and were oblivious to it. I’ve experienced something similar, although fortunately for me not in public like this.

    It sounds like Andrew is starting to get it now.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. hj (6,871 comments) says:

    This seems like a witch Hunt. I agree Willy Jackson is racist but note how the left have it in for any sign of any blokey attitudes. Also it seems that they have been stirring up the masses. It very much looks like a breach in the political consensus between National, Labour and the Greens.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Grendel (993 comments) says:

    if the mob dont like what you say, they get to silence you. yayyyy the mob…

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Chuck Bird (4,836 comments) says:

    @BeaB

    Martinh is 100% right and that in no was makes excuses for rapist.

    I made the following point on another thread. Grey Power has advised the elderly to take extra care due to the recent attacks. This is good sensible advise and certainly not blaming the victim.

    Similar advice on non violent crime say when thieves enter a house when the occupants are having a BBQ would not be blaming the victims but trying to prevent more victims.

    The same logic applies to advising when how to avoid getting raped. Unfortunately, it is hard to explain logic to a militant feminist.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Chuck Bird (4,836 comments) says:

    “The argument increased in intensity until I was told in no uncertain terms to get out and walk, which I did, for an hour and a half in the rain.”

    Poor Andrew! If he had of done the same thing if was driving he would probably find his clothes in a suitcase on the porch with a protection order taped to it.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    The same logic applies to advising when how to avoid getting raped. Unfortunately, it is hard to explain logic to a militant feminist.

    It is also hard to explain how you can impose a mandatory dress code for all teenagers. Should it apply everywhere? To be consistent should it apply to everyone? The netballers on TV yesterday have very short skirts – should they be advised to wear overalls? Compulsory beech burquas?

    And what if that doesn’t stop the raping? Lock all females away to protect them?

    It might be better aimed requiring chastity belts for randy males.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. wreck1080 (3,863 comments) says:

    i’d wager they’re not coming back at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Chuck Bird (4,836 comments) says:

    PG, has anyone advised you to engage your brain before typing? Read why I typed.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. tvb (4,330 comments) says:

    A bit of time out for these two will clear the air. The “man hunt” has gone on long enough. They could come back in the new year.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    Victims of the imature PC brigade who can’t understand context and really believe Willy and JT condone rape

    Kiwi’s have truly gone down a deep, slippery lost path. The Father Christmas in Akld that had to be changed has proven that by far

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Chuck Bird (4,836 comments) says:

    “The Father Christmas in Akld that had to be changed has proven that by far”

    Remind me please.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. skyblue (209 comments) says:

    Goodbye bitches

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    Fagan =pussy whipped loser.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    It takes a lot to man up and admit you might have been a part of a damaging culture and were oblivious to it. I’ve experienced something similar, although fortunately for me not in public like this.

    Do you white knight for charity?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. BeaB (2,108 comments) says:

    Oh dear, Chuck Bird.
    It is sensible advice for everybody it lock doors, keep out of dodgy places after dark etc. That applies to your son as well as your nana. And your daughter. It might make us safer but it doesn’t guarantee safety, sadly.

    Calling me names doesn’t change the fact that rapists rape.

    The logical conclusion of your argument is the burqua but not even that works.

    Golda Meier had it right when a curfew was proposed to protect women from assaults. Instead. she said there should be a curfew for men as they were the attackers.

    However if it makes you happy I guess we could stop showering, doing our hair, putting on make-up, dressing the way we want to, going out during the day or night, showing skin, having a drink, smiling at strangers. It’s a sad old world when men like you think women shouldn’t make themselves look pretty. Or that, by doing so, they are asking to be raped.

    There are NO EXCUSES for rape!!!!!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    It is sensible advice for everybody it lock doors, keep out of dodgy places after dark etc. That applies to your son as well as your nana. And your daughter. It might make us safer but it doesn’t guarantee safety, sadly.

    This is the perfectionist fallacy. Just because nothing can make you immune from criminal victimisation does not mean you should abandon all reasonable attempts to lower the risk of being a victim.

    Why is it that logic seems to desert feminists in this one case?

    Chuck isn’t saying that women have any moral blame for being the victims of a crime, because nobody accrues any moral blame for being the victim of a crime. Taking unnecessary risks does not violate any moral rule, but it’s not something a prudent person should do, and people who willingly take such risks and end up victims don’t attract as much sympathy as those who don’t and end up victims.

    That’s not to say that it’s acceptable to lambast rape victims over their risky behaviour – that’s clearly unacceptable behaviour towards an already traumatised person. On the other hand, if your teenager takes a terrible risk but gets away with it, it’s high time for a growling.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Dave Mann (1,207 comments) says:

    I don’t like Maori racists and apologists and I’m not a socialist by any means – but I have listened to the relevant parts of Willie & JT’s broadcasts online via the RadioLive website and I don’t see the justification for attacking them to the degree they have been. These two presenters just raised some quite pertinent questions about moral standards generally among the young and what the parents (of the girls as well as the boys) were doing all the while. They repeatedly called the Rape Busters’ behaviour ‘disgusting’ but at the same time they questioned the role of young girls’ behaviour, dress standards and so on in this context. The never even hinted that they condoned this behaviour, let alone rape.

    This whole sorry subject smells to me very much like males falling all over themselves to shout the loudest about how PC they are in defence of ‘women’ (or girls). Our whole society seems to have been pussy-whipped on this one.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. BeaB (2,108 comments) says:

    Tom Jackson
    I actually said it is sensible advice for everyone.

    I admit I fail to see the logic in:

    I see a teen in a skimpy outfit.
    She dresses like that because she is a slut.
    Because she is a slut I can rape her.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. wreck1080 (3,863 comments) says:

    I find the word ‘racist’ is used too easily these days.

    I actually quite liked listening to Willie/JT on the odd occassion. While I disagree with much of what they say — their banter and self abuse is rather amusing.

    JT occasionally speaks some sense, Willie, not so much.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    I admit I fail to see the logic in:

    I see a teen in a skimpy outfit.
    She dresses like that because she is a slut.
    Because she is a slut I can rape her.

    Clothing is a bad example, because IIRC it has been shown not to make any difference.

    Nevertheless, your point is sound. There’s no obvious inference from someone being, say, drunk, and it being OK to rape them. But rapists aren’t known for their strict adherence to moral logic.

    Inferences like the following should be made by potential victims of crime:

    Violent criminals take advantage of people who do X.
    Thus, doing X would put me at an unreasonable risk of being a victim of a violent criminal.
    I do not wish to be the victim of a violent criminal.
    —————————————————————————-
    Therefore, I should refrain from doing X.

    This isn’t a moral argument. There’s nothing morally wrong with getting drunk, or drinking from an unattended drink. Doing so doesn’t make you morally responsible for any consequent crime.

    It’s just not a good idea to get drunk alone among strangers or to drink from an unattended drink, or to flash your cash around in front of people you don’t know.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Chuck Bird (4,836 comments) says:

    @BeaB

    Tom has already covered much of what I could say.

    I have taken part is much adventure sport and activities. I have climbed most North Island mountains a few more than once.

    I am not sure if I will climb any more but if I do I will do what I can to minimize my risk.

    I could do everything right but still die but the chances of that are a lot lower if I do thing right.

    I was cycling with group a week ago when some arsehole laid on the horn and passed real close then gave me the fingers. i instinctually did the same. He drove on. If I was driving through Otara for some reason and some heavy looking dude gave me the fingers I would look the other way. That is called common sense.

    Your idea that if I can walk home from the pub after dark a female doing the same thing is at equal risk is just nonsense.

    The fact that you even mention a male curfew shows you are a feminazi and i am silly trying to have a logic debate with you.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Fentex (923 comments) says:

    They also said they regret the impact their actions had on their wives, children, grandchildren and communities.

    Apologies of ill defined regrets about the apologiser or those they obviously care for when the harm involved others is suspiciously self serving.

    They think it’s about them and theirs. No repentance worth a damn on display there.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Colville (2,256 comments) says:

    Will the Liarbore Party give JT the push?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    Colville – they claimed this morning that he hadn’t renewed his membership this year,

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Fentex (923 comments) says:

    I have listened to the relevant parts of Willie & JT’s broadcasts online via the RadioLive website and I don’t see the justification for attacking them to the degree they have been.

    I think people are more angered by the faux apology offered afterwards. Giving one is an admission of error, but couching it in self serving terms, using the oft heard “sorry for causing offence” not-apology is rubbing salt into any wound originally inflicted.

    It’s an insult to audiences intelligence and an affront to good manners.

    A person who freely derides a social convention is likely more respected for staying true to their character even if reviled personally by those offended – while people who attempt ingratiation with the offended by weaselly pretence at contrition raise far more hackles.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    Violent criminals take advantage of people who do X.

    Like bashing people who go out on the town.

    Thus, doing X would put me at an unreasonable risk of being a victim of a violent criminal.
    I do not wish to be the victim of a violent criminal.

    So we should leave the cities and bars to the violent criminals to avoid any risk?

    Violent criminals attack people in their homes too. What do you suggest to do there? Imprison ourselves in fortresses?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    So we should leave the cities and bars to the violent criminals to avoid any risk?

    It’s a trivial matter to find out which bars are the ones to be avoided. Everyone who goes drinking knows this.

    Violent criminals attack people in their homes too. What do you suggest to do there? Imprison ourselves in fortresses?

    That’s the perfectionist fallacy again.

    However, I do hope you lock your door at night?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Chuck Bird (4,836 comments) says:

    PG, can you walk and chew gum at the same time?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. jackinabox (776 comments) says:

    How come Willy and JT are goneburgers but Russell Gibson is still running Police Central Districts? Gibson’s sin was way worse than the two radio fellows but he seems to be unsackable.

    http://www.3news.co.nz/Cop-apologises-for-rape-remark/tabid/423/articleID/314951/Default.aspx#.UoBW6iro1lY

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    It’s a trivial matter to find out which bars are the ones to be avoided. Everyone who goes drinking knows this.

    No, they don’t. Bars are staffed so can be expected to be safer anyway. I hope there aren’t many rapes in bars.

    Which streets to avoid? Which Macdonalds to avoid? Someone was killed outside a MacDonalds recently. Avoid all fast food outlets? People are being advised to eat when they’ve been drinking.

    Of course everyone considers safety. But we have to be able to live and to share our cities and suburbs with a hope we will be relatively safe.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    Calling me names doesn’t change the fact that rapists rape.

    If rape is solely the responsibility of rapists, then doesn’t that mean that everyone who isn’t a rapist has zero responsibility in making our society safer for women?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    No, they don’t. Bars are staffed so can be expected to be safer anyway. I hope there aren’t many rapes in bars.

    Welcome to our planet, visitor.

    There are rough pubs and there are regular pubs. Going into a rough pub where you aren’t known and you don’t know any of the regulars is a recipe for trouble.

    Which streets to avoid? Which Macdonalds to avoid? Someone was killed outside a MacDonalds recently. Avoid all fast food outlets? People are being advised to eat when they’ve been drinking.

    I don’t know. I could have told you them 20 years ago, but I stopped going to the pub with mates after I got married. I would, however, make sure that I was with a good-sized group of people.

    Of course everyone considers safety. But we have to be able to live and to share our cities and suburbs with a hope we will be relatively safe.

    For the most part we are relatively safe. There are some places at some times that you just don’t go if you value your safety. That’s an unpleasant fact, but a fact nonetheless.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. adze (2,093 comments) says:

    I wonder if the UNITE union picketed outside Radio Live’s headquarters and call for JT & WJ to be sacked, as they did for Paul Henry?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    However if it makes you happy I guess we could stop showering, doing our hair, putting on make-up, dressing the way we want to, going out during the day or night, showing skin, having a drink, smiling at strangers.

    I’m going to need some kind of fMRI scan evidence that NZ women are trying to look or be attractive on any level :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    She dresses like that because she is a slut.

    Replies I’m not even thinking about: Yeah – she’s not a slut, she’s a fuckin cockteaser!!

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Fentex (923 comments) says:

    Violent criminals take advantage of people who do X.

    This sort of discussion is entirely beside the point, and being beside the point is what makes it victim blaming that annoys people.

    I have an alarm fitted to my home, I lock my door when I go out. I take obvious steps to protect myself and property.
    And if the subject of what to do to improve my security ever comes up these things are open to discussion.

    But when the topic is the responsibility and culpability of criminals who assault people there is no place for putting an onus of those assaulted to have stopped the criminals. The assault has happened, the responsibility is the assailants. There is no place after the fact to locate blame but with the party that assaulted another.

    My mother is currently helping out bartending at the bowling club across the road from her house. Let’s consider the hypothetical of someone robbing that club and maybe hurting my mother.

    Does anyone think, even for a moment, that I will consider any action or inaction on my mothers part to blame? Should the opportunity present itself to me to extract vengeance for harm to my mother will I hesitate for thinking that maybe she brought it on herself? No.

    And nor, I think, would any of those who pretend to be hard headed pragmatists arguing that victims bear responsibility for crimes committed against them. They don’t, and bringing up the thought that maybe if they’d done something different they’d have avoided harm is putting the onus and blame on them.

    Responsibility doesn’t work that way.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. martinh (1,257 comments) says:

    BeaB
    I think you will find that some men will target those who wear outfits which make them look like hookers so when the woman says no they just keep going and hence they a fucken god awful rapists.
    So if woman didnt dress like sluts they would minimise the chance of that happening to them.
    Would you think a woman walking around in a low cut top and fish net stockings wouldnt be called a slut or easy by other woman?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Dave Mann (1,207 comments) says:

    Geez…. have any of you people actually LISTENED to their shows from last Wed and Thurs?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. martinh (1,257 comments) says:

    I heard some of them. I also heard National Radio report the comments as being that they asked when she lost her virginity and if girls a loose in their age group.
    It didnt sound like condoning rape or blaming the girls/woman to me

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    Does anyone think, even for a moment, that I will consider any action or inaction on my mothers part to blame? Should the opportunity present itself to me to extract vengeance for harm to my mother will I hesitate for thinking that maybe she brought it on herself? No.

    The problem is that you, like 99% of people who talk about this, don’t understand that there is more than one kind of culpability. Thus, you end up saying ridiculous things.

    Nobody is arguing that people are morally culpable for being victims of crime. People may fail prudentially in ways that put them at risk of crime, but that is a separate issue from the culpability of the perpetrator.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. RandySavage (211 comments) says:

    the mob have spoken
    amazing really given Plunkett and Fagans calls in the same week, both seemingly slipping under the radar
    lets not forget JT was not speaking to a rape victim but a friend of a victim, his questioning wasn’t the best but I never heard him condoning rape.
    Hey Bomber, youre a bum I don’t know a single person who can stand your righteous soapboxing and inane blogging, you were a douchebag when helming Rip it up and youre an even bigger douchebag now

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. KapitiCoast (114 comments) says:

    Wonder how Jackson will turn this into victimisation ‘It’s because we are Maori’ spin. I think even for his racist views if he even tries he will have no future in any media full stop. I caught a Cpl of episodes of his political TV show ‘eye on politics’ or something where he had 2x politicos from the left on the left of the screen and 2x from the right on the right (funny that eh)….he never allowed anyone from the right to finish a sentence, but the ones on the right could quote the entire pages from War and Peace and be left verbally unmolested, glad to see it didn’t last long as he was making the show about him and that never works.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    Hey Bomber, youre a bum I don’t know a single person who can stand your righteous soapboxing and inane blogging,

    Bomber and co don’t give a shit about rape or rape victims. They use it as an excuse to front load it with their weird political wish lists and beliefs.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    Geez…. have any of you people actually LISTENED to their shows from last Wed and Thurs?

    I listen to them all the time. I even happened to catch that call.

    That’s the first thing – it’s not an ‘interview’. It was a talkback call. Talkback caller. Not interview. Caller. Why is anyone calling it an interview? It’s not an interview. Talkback call. There is at least a subtle difference.

    It’s the difference between – if you listen to them all the time, you probably didn’t think too much about it because you know their style and manner and their approach.

    Willie & JT have come unstuck because they took their usual casual offhand fast-talking approach while stepping on a landmine issue. Clearly they were ‘meant to know’ that there’s a ‘national collective mentality’ that they should follow for this subject-matter. Or suffer the consequences.

    It’s all over-the-top overreaction to their normal style and antics. Of all the shit that you’ll hear from music station DJs, crap on the internet, violence on TV – none of that is getting pulled. Advertisers are perfectly happy to place ads during all kinds of bullshit on TV and radio.

    Who are these creeps waiting in the woodwork for people to have a bad day so they can be outraged and start protests ?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    Clearly they were ‘meant to know’ that there’s a ‘national collective mentality’ that they should follow for this subject-matter. Or suffer the consequences.

    You mean an urban, upper-middle class liberal collective mentality?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. hj (6,871 comments) says:

    63,000 sign Roast Busters petition
    http://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/280734/63000-sign-roast-busters-petition

    I’m thinking that would be a demographic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. tvb (4,330 comments) says:

    It has taken Len off the from page. It would not surprise me if his spin operation is stirring up Roastbusters as much as possible to deflect media attention away from Len.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    You mean an urban, upper-middle class liberal collective mentality?

    I’m happy to load the gun for you all day buddy :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. hj (6,871 comments) says:

    However, a female friend of the pair said it was common knowledge the Roast Busters had sex with 13-year-olds – when the boys themselves were under 16.

    “He’s definitely had sex with people that are under-age,” she said about one of the gang, “but everyone has nowadays. That’s how society is so stuffed up nowadays, people are having sex when they’re 12, 13. It’s just life, it just happens. He’s not the only one who’s done it,” she told the Star-Times yesterday.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/9383119/Friends-of-Roast-Busters-speak-out

    A second Facebook page, attacking the Roast Busters members, was set up by Jade Schutte, 16, and Ash Hilton, 18, who felt girls needed somewhere to turn for help.
    The pair said they wanted justice for the victims, and to provide support for young girls.
    //
    On Sunday, 3 News revealed the presence of an online group called Roast Busters boasting of group sex with underage girls.

    Subsequently, it emerged that two boys, Beraiah Hales and Joseph Parker, had appeared in videos talking about it.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11154064

    The response was swift and pretty much universal: this was appalling, stomach churning, almost certainly criminal. Revulsion at the expose of a gang of teenage sexual predators was instant. And so the most immediately alarming questions was this: if it prompted anything like the same reaction two years ago, why didn’t those who knew about it then make it stop?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11153341

    The PC message is that only men are guilty whereas women are passive victims (regardless of the facts of the case).

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. hj (6,871 comments) says:

    At High school sports day (1960’s) a boy and girl had sex with a group of students thronging around. From memory the girl was expelled the boy wasn’t. If so, now we see the opposite presumption.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Chuck Bird (4,836 comments) says:

    RadioLive is in damage control. I was going to call to support poor pussy whipped Andrew. I said I wanted to talk about the topic on air. I was asked what that was and I said Roast Busters. They said the topic was rape culture. I said you mean so called rape culture. I was not allowed on air with an opposing point of view.

    If RadioLive want to go that way I hope they go off the air. I will certainly express my view on NewstalkZB about this censorship.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. cha (3,935 comments) says:

    Or perhaps it’s just that they didn’t want to give air time to a prurient old jock sniffer.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. ManuT (51 comments) says:

    Clearly that Left Right and Centre dude has never had a girlfriend.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    Freedom of speech ? This country is just a slightly watered down version of a full-on banana republic dictator controlled fascist police state !!

    Doesn’t surprise me at all Chuck. You weren’t making the right noises – see ya later. Instead of ‘freedom of speech’ there’s only the ‘advertising dollar of speech’.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. safesally (47 comments) says:

    Oh dear Mr Left Right and Centre, you really do have a small one don’t you.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    My fan club is back !!

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    How about using your other two new accounts to make comments on here like you did the Hooten thread, huh ?

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2013/11/hooton_vs_willie_and_jt.html#comment-1231165

    There you are – with all of your fake accounts. Cool.

    Why don’t you show everyone how clever you are and post using the other two names as well moron ?

    All your comments are to one user so far… hmmm

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    I want to see a lot more posts out of you. I want to see just what kind of fucked up loser you are. So get typing cunt. You set up accounts to type bollocks – so go for it !!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. safesally (47 comments) says:

    Dear Left Right and Angry
    I am sure there are lots of things you want to see; probably looking down at yourself and seeing anything would be a bonus.
    I know little men like you; I know why you are the way you are. 1931 posts tells me that you have no life other that to vent your self hatred at your betters while hiding behind the net.
    I have read some of your rubbish; BORING! mostly but confirmation you are a pathetic abuser and racist who goes through life blaming everyone but yourself for being so hopeless.
    I think someone suggested you get a job. Very good idea I think.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    Brilliant !! Is that it, or is there more ? What else would like to type onto KB ? You’re doing so well – keep it up. A+ – that’s top shelf.

    What about your other two fake accounts, chickadee and flash2846 ? Haven’t they got anything to say today ? Ooo – they’ve been making comments too somewhere – I wonder if it’s more replies to the same one user again ?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    Hurry up and post a reply you slow fuckwit !!

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    ‘safesally’ you fucking gutless pathetic sad little piece of shit. You get me all excited waiting for more of your wonderful posts and none are forthcoming. I’m very disappointed in you. Shame on you !!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Fentex (923 comments) says:

    Nobody is arguing that people are morally culpable for being victims of crime.

    I think plenty of people are whenever they state that if the assaulted had acted differently they would have avoided their assailant.

    That’s putting responsibility, therefore blame, on the victim.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Chuck Bird (4,836 comments) says:

    “That’s putting responsibility, therefore blame, on the victim.”

    As I just said Grey Power is advising elderly people to act differently like locking their doors because of the recent attacks. Do you think Grey Power is blaming the victims?

    I could get attacked walking home after a couple of pints of beer at the pubs but the likelihood is low.

    If a young woman did the same dressed like a tart and rolling drunk her risk is far greater – at least on planet earth.

    Pointing this out is not condoning rape or blaming past victims.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. Dennis Horne (2,374 comments) says:

    @Fentex. Go to sleep. Save your brain.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Nostalgia-NZ (5,101 comments) says:

    What’s ‘dressed like a tart’ mean Chuck?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Nostalgia-NZ (5,101 comments) says:

    ‘rolling drunk her risk is far greater’ Taken such risks yourself Chuck? So to speak.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Dennis Horne (2,374 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (4,147) Says: November 11th at 11:11 pm. What’s ‘dressed like a tart’ mean Chuck?

    Means you want to lick it or eat it, Nosty.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    Chuck – in terns of whether a female is going to get raped or not – I’m sure if it’s the clothes that are going to make the difference between a rape / no rape. The drunk part sure. I’ve been watching your comments with analogies and Tom Jackson did a similar thing and I agree with all of that logic about the difference between the ideal world and the actual world.

    With sex offences half the time the victim knows the abuser – and then it’s more about opportunity and all the other stuff like it’s about power not sex etc

    Pointing this out is not condoning rape or blaming past victims.

    Exactly.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    EDIT: I’m not sure if it’s the clothes that are going to make the difference between a rape / no rape.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. kiwi in america (2,428 comments) says:

    Its not often I’d agree with you LeftandRight but your comment “Willie & JT have come unstuck because they took their usual casual offhand fast-talking approach while stepping on a landmine issue” is a good one sentence summary of what happened here.

    The fact remains that whatever might be the norm in west Auckland teen circles about how young kids are when they have sex and how teen males have been bragging about sexual exploits for centuries, most people have reacted to the news that 17/18 year olds have been deliberately targeting young teen girls for group sex, and used alcohol and drugs as a tool in assisting in their goal, with revulsion. Social media has enabled predatory young men like this to enlarge their fame and magnify their bravado greatly deepening and widening the impact on the young girls on the receiving end of their treatment. This is the modern and complicating dimension to what is not a new phenomenon.

    That is the landmine JT and Willie should’ve been aware of when they took a call from an alleged victim. Now political correctness is skewering the debate and making it more difficult to allow people in the public square to be frank about their feelings and JT has always been one to ignore the PC handwringers on the left but I think his proximity to the families of the Roastboasters coloured his thinking on how far he could get away with his ‘devils advocate’ radio jock approach to this issue.

    If I were them I’d take my lumps, do something public to show contrition (visit a rape crisis centre and volunteer) and shut up and not play any race cards and learn to cast their net a little wider when gauging public sentiment on explosive issues.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Chuck Bird (4,836 comments) says:

    @LRC

    “I’m not sure if it’s the clothes that are going to make the difference between a rape / no rape.”

    I think clothes when combined with alcohol could make the difference with alcohol being the biggest factor.

    Many of us here have not lead shelter lives in youth and I bet many male and female who would not of had sex with someone but for alcohol.

    This anti-male backlash can be very harmful to adolescent males. Look at the far higher suicide rate.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. Left Right and Centre (2,950 comments) says:

    Chuck – really ? Thing is – a lot of these girls don’t dress sexy – they dress punk or trashy and look like shit. So – even if it was the clothes – they don’t dress like ‘they want it’ anyway. They dress like bogans. Alternative. Urban. Scruffy.

    We can’t see how exactly these girls were dressed – more the shame.

    The roastfuckers were sober too if we’re talking about that case or are we talking sex crime in general ? I don’t know if they cared how the girls were dressed – probably just thinking cool – got us another one here. You’d just go for whoever was easiest to have a crack with I’d *guess*. Not so much who’s ‘best dressed’.

    I’m not a big fan of trying to take social reaction to sex crimes and trying to translate it to suicide rates. Starting to get into crazy talkback caller impossible to prove inference there.

    Alcohol, as we can all agree, can lead to otherwise unlikely behaviour. I close to never touch the shit myself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Chuck Bird (4,836 comments) says:

    @LRC

    I am talking general. Although these young lowlife have not been charged I think it best to take in general terms. We do not know if there were sober. That should be for a jury decide.

    I do not follow bogan dress style. I am going by what I have seen occasionally on TV. I have seen very drunk young women with short skirts and plenty of cleavage. I think the two combined could attract horny young men.

    The male suicide rate has been far higher than females long before this. I believe the misandrist attitude of society in general plays a part in this.

    Males are not just meant to be at fault on this issue but in many. Take domestic violence for example. All proper research show that women initiate about half of all domestic violence but the media do not want the fact to get in the way of a good story.

    I could go on about the unfair treatment men get in the family court or any court for that matter. Look at the case of Devina Murray. Would a male get a non custodial sentence if the sexes were reversed? Not bloody likely.

    Not that long ago a woman in her 30s seduced an 11 year old and got pregnant as a result. Does anyone know what happened to her? Does the media care? It does not sound like it. 10 years ago she would not have broken the law and when the boy was old enough to get a job he would have been libel for child support.

    I would be surprised if any of the boy in this group was living with his real mother and father married to each other. Changes like no fault divorce on demand was the start of societal changes that have taken us to where we are now.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Chuck Bird (4,836 comments) says:

    @LRC

    I should add the following link to today’s GD. It is about sex reversal in the Andrew Fagan and Karyn Hay argument.

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2013/11/general_debate_12_november_2013.html#comment-1232667

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Nostalgia-NZ (5,101 comments) says:

    It shouldn’t be forgotten that the police first raised the question of what the teenager was wearing. Marshall says that was routine questioning, it appears she thought otherwise. Tamihere and Jackson are not the morals police, if anything they are entertainers paid to entertain an audience and lift ratings. There are two of them so that they might argue with one another to explore arguments or controversy and give those that chose to ring a chance to express an opinion. Pretty tough elevating their role as being spokesmen for anything although they might do so themselves. Somebody else expressed on another thread that JT had probably fitted into the role of a lawyer with some of his questions to the caller reflecting that. At no time was he talking about a specific person, because none have been identified, in fact as yet no one has been charged. So unknown people have been offended along with members of the public in a general distaste of claims made on Facebook.

    Time to draw a parallel to Len Brown again. He didn’t blink, Radio Live have – not over any physical actions or even specific statements but over sensitivity some in the public feel – in fact those that it could be argued are looking for anybody that might not agree with their position. I think the ‘standing down’ of 2 radio jocks will be looked back at with some incredulity later, particularly because they took part in a conversation with somebody who sought to ring them on a issue of public interest and asked questions of that person that many others are interested in the answer.

    If ‘dressing’ in a particular way is ‘inviting’ behaviour on a person Mylie Cyrus should be banned, videos should be banned, and we should all pop back to the seventeenth century.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Fentex (923 comments) says:

    As I just said Grey Power is advising elderly people to act differently like locking their doors because of the recent attacks. Do you think Grey Power is blaming the victims?

    Look at it this way – and this is hypothetical, I don’t know the details of the recent assaults on elderly women – someone knocks on the door of a retired women, she answers it, is pushed back into her home and assaulted.

    Who is at fault? The assailant of course. With such things happening it seems prudent to advise people to perhaps use chains on their doors, be especially prudent about identifying visitors before opening doors.

    So far this is not victim blaming.

    When someone says “she should have known that it was dangerous to open her front door and been more careful” it becomes victim blaming. My hypothetical victim did nothing wrong and is not to blame for being assaulted.

    Any advancement of an idea that she ought have acted fearfully, should have let the threat of others dictate her actions, should have had her life diminished and dominated by others is an effort to put guilt and blame on her. People who have had their life’s disrupted by low-lifes have enough worries and concerns to go around, they don’t need guilt dripped on them by sanctimonious prigs who waffle about how they could have done better if they only lived in sufficient fear.

    Discussing dangers and advising people for the future is helping them arm themselves and take control of their lives – blaming people for others assault on them in the past is ill mannered insult contributing to an atmosphere of guilt and suppression.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. big bruv (13,689 comments) says:

    So Jackson and JT are given the flick……who do you think that Mediaworks has got into replace them for the rest of the week?

    Wallace fucking Chapman!

    If you thought that the left wing bias was bad from JT & Willie (at least they were honest about their bias) you should hear the crap that Chapman is spouting.

    I knew Chapman was a leftie, I had no idea he is a fucking communist.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. Dean Papa (784 comments) says:

    This is terrible news. The Willie and JT show is my favourite radio program of all time, and I was very much looking forward to tuning in to them for the very first time this week.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.