The power of speaking up

July 6th, 2014 at 7:00 am by David Farrar

The Herald reports:

National MP says more than a dozen New Zealand women have approached her to say they were also indecently assaulted by disgraced entertainer — and one is considering an official complaint to police after decades of silence.

Ms Barry revealed yesterday that she was groped by Harris in a Palmerston North recording studio when she was working as a journalist.

This is the great thing about being brave enough to reveal what someone like Harris did to you. Suddenly everyone else who has had it happen to them, doesn’t feel quite so alone. It’s great that they now have someone they can share their stories with – of course would be greater if this had never happened. If a dozen have contacted Maggie Barry, how many scores more may be out there?

Former TVNZ makeup artist Lee Howden told RadioLIVE she was also sexually assaulted as she did his make-up for an on-air interview. She said she fled the room after he put his hand into her underwear.

While she never reported the incident, she was inspired to come forward after hearing Ms Barry’s account and was prepared to make an official police complaint.

Good.

Tags: ,

111 Responses to “The power of speaking up”

  1. mjw (303 comments) says:

    I hope this will encourage other women to come forward about abusers who have not yet been held to account. This could be a good opportunity for somebody to set up a hotline to take advantage of the heightened concern in this area.

    And yes, good on you Maggie.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. nasska (10,841 comments) says:

    I’ve complete sympathy for the latest victims of Rolf Harris to have come forward.

    It must have been terrible living with amnesia until now.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Longknives (4,657 comments) says:

    How is waiting twenty odd years then jumping on the bandwagon when you get a sniff of compensation “Brave”??
    I find anyone who ‘suddenly remembers’ an incident that happened donkeys years ago rather suspicious…

    [DPF: You're being insulting and offensive. The reality is sadly women get groped by lecherous men a lot. They don't run to the Police every time it happens. I've not seen any suggestion of compensation. This is just people realising that this didn't just happen to them. Try being a fucking human being]

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Redbaiter (7,865 comments) says:

    “This is the great thing about being brave enough to reveal what someone like Harris did to you.”

    Not now…

    BACK THEN…!!!!

    If these women had been brave enough to speak out when it happened then maybe all the other women similarly assaulted would have been spared.

    Back then would have been brave.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. hj (6,618 comments) says:

    I bet Rolf got away with it (or thought he did) often enough.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Pete George (23,168 comments) says:

    Speaking out about sexual assaults is important to make it loud and clear that sleazy behaviour can and will be exposed.

    I have concerns about attacks on people for speaking up. Apart from them being ignorant of the long term anguish frequently suffered in silence, suppressed due to past societal attitudes it is effectively trying to sweep predatory behaviour under the male carpet.

    Sure some memories can be exaggerated, but the scale of the problem of sexual predation and abuse is a far bigger problem.

    Attacking the victims – especially generalised factless ‘assumptions’ – is a part of the problem. The “shut up and suffer” society has aided and abetted sexual predators to get away with far too much for far too long.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Griff (6,970 comments) says:

    righto guys ever had a negative sexual experience?
    I got assaulted as a 12 year old by a derelict at a bus station. Dirty old sod tried to feel me up
    I did not tell my parents or anyone.
    scared the hell out of me.
    But I didn’t want my parents to limit my independence. I used to catch buses alone from penrose to town and from there to orakei or the ferry to Devonport to go fishing.
    I can understand why many do not make a fuss at the time just move on and become a little more situational aware.
    Now that the truth about Rolf has been exposed I can see how victims could decide it is important to speak up about the long ago past. The emotions are less threatening and there is a sense of community support in joining the outcry . Before this exposure happened anyone talking out about Rolf would have exposed them self to ridicule and abuse for no gain.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Pete George (23,168 comments) says:

    “Back then would have been brave.”

    Redbaiter, have you been sexually assaulted in the past? Are you female? Do you understand what it was like for many victims in a society that excused the attackers and shamed the victims?

    And parts of our society still does excuse the attackers and shame the victims by the sound of some of the comments here.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Longknives (4,657 comments) says:

    They are ‘alleged’ victims Pete….
    We all know Rolf was a dirty old man- But anyone with half a brain knows that dozens of bullshit artists will be coming out of the woodwork with their tales of ‘trauma’ hoping to be part of the shopping spree once Rolf’s fortune is divvied up..
    “Waah! He pinched my bum in 1977! Can I have my million pounds now?”

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Nookin (3,162 comments) says:

    I must have missed the bit where Maggie Barry and Lee Howden said that they were after compensation. Can you provide a link?

    As far as Howden is concerned, her story may well be corroborated. She did not finish the make-up job and refused further contact with Harris.

    Are you saying that the complainants in the Harris trial “suddenly remembered” and no credence is to be given to them because they were after the money? They opened up because they knew they knew were going to be taken seriously.

    Sadly, I fear that this cynicism is one of the reasons that victims don’t front — they are dismissed as opportunists.

    If you are humiliated and know that the perpetrator carries a ton of clout, why subject yourself to even more humiliation? People are coming forward now are doing so because it is safe to do so. There will be the odd opportunist but they will be the exception to the rule.

    Stuff carries a report, today, that exemplifies the futility of complaint against a “connected” offender.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/10237131/Police-mishandle-assault-on-11-year-old

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Pete George (23,168 comments) says:

    “They are ‘alleged’ victims ”

    “But anyone with half a brain knows that dozens of bullshit artists will be coming out of the woodwork with their tales of ‘trauma’ hoping to be part of the shopping spree once Rolf’s fortune is divvied up..”

    Huge double standard there.

    You cast doubt on their claims of being assaulted but accuse with certainty dozens are lying rip of artists.

    That starkly illustrates the cultural problem of putting all the blame on victims. That’s what has protected people like Harris and many others for many years, and why many victims have been reluctant to speak up.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Nookin (3,162 comments) says:

    Classy, Red. It’s all the victims’ fault. Stick to it pal. Fortunately, your ilk are fast joining the ranks of Trev’s pet Dinornithidae

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. tvb (4,236 comments) says:

    The images of Harris with Saville are sinister. I bet those two dirty old men sniggered away how they got away with it and plotted amongst themselves where the next grope will come from.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Pete George (23,168 comments) says:

    Re the case Nooking refers to, that’s a worse example of someone in a privileged position – a Tauranga ‘professional’ who has had his reputation protected by the police and court – than the Maori King’s son.

    A man inflicted multiple head injuries on an eleven year old, was able to plea bargain his charge down (ignoring the boy and mother), was discharged without conviction and of course got permanent name suppression. His charity work will be able to continue then. I wonder what sentence he gets for breaching a protection order.

    But the brain damage is only alleged.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. BlairM (2,303 comments) says:

    If there were more genuine victims of Harris then it is good that they are finally speaking up. They should be supported and their claims investigated. But to call them “brave” is untrue, and I don’t think it’s any slur on them to say they are not brave. It is completely understandable that they did not speak up until now, and completely human. But “brave” is a label reserved for those who actually risk something in speaking out, as those who originally spoke out about Harris did. Those speaking up now after his conviction deserve our sympathy, support, and attention, but they are not brave, because there is now no risk to what they are doing.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. hj (6,618 comments) says:

    One thing about a Rolf Harris is that they come and go “oh, well he’s gone”! Maybe in the media they thought it was a privilege to meet people like him (stars) and the bad behavior goes with the job?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Dean Papa (775 comments) says:

    Does touching the thigh and fondling the buttocks really count as indecent assault these days? I suppose it does, but that kind of carry on was common place in the 60s and 70s. It was also referred to as “making a pass”. This may sound perverse, but in a way Rolfie is also a victim. If the ladies he was making these passes at had kicked up a big stink at the time, then he may have seen the error of his ways. Or at least realised that he could not continue such behaviour. Now look at the predicament poor Rolfie finds himself in. He might be a sleazy perv, but I’m not convinced he is a predatory pedophile, but that seems to be what he is being called. That Rolfie now has this label is a result of the Savile effect in Britain, where Rolf has become the Savile by proxy, on to which all the pent up frustrations and hysteria of a nation is being released.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. ShawnLH (4,339 comments) says:

    Especially back when much if this happened, it was just not a supportive environment to speak out, most especially against a powerful and popular man with friends in high places.

    In fact, many of the comments above PROVE why. Take the horror of already being physically violated in this way, then add in the sick and childish comments above about how they are just out for the money, or that poor old Ralph was just a dirty old man and we should give dirty old men a break, or that they are lying, and Naaska, RedNutter, and ShortKnives have all given us a perfect example of WHY women and girls who are abused DON”T speak out.

    Thanks guys, and your all a credit to the human race. Not.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Unity (374 comments) says:

    Part of me can understand the likes of Maggie Barry not speaking out at the time as she probably thought it only happened to her in this instance. However in hindsight, perhaps these people can now be encouraged to speak out these days, and thus give courage to others to speak out because obviously if someone like Harris did it Maggie, then surely it follows that she won’t have been the only one. We didn’t really speak about these things or were aware of them many years ago and Maggie probably felt her ‘brushing him off’ at the time would have stopped him in his tracks.

    However, this Rolf Harris thing has been going on for some time now so why didn’t these others come forward much earlier seeing it would have become very obvious that he was a serial offender? It now smacks of publicity for her coming out so close to the election especially now that he has been convicted.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. ShawnLH (4,339 comments) says:

    “Does touching the thigh and fondling the buttocks really count as indecent assault these days?”

    Yes, and so it should.

    “ut that kind of carry on was common place in the 60s and 70s. It was also referred to as “making a pass”. This may sound perverse, but in a way Rolfie is also a victim. ”

    Bullshit. Most of his victims were not women, they were children. Barely into their teens.

    Since when is sexually abusing 12-14 year old girls acceptable? At any time?

    “poor old Rolf” my ass! The guys is a pedophile and a very nasty predator. He knew what he was doing was wrong, which is why he tried to hide it all.

    Now they have found cp on his computer!

    Are their any other crimes against children that Naaska, Red, Long and “Papa” approve of?

    Seriously, you guys need professional help.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. jackinabox (744 comments) says:

    New Zealand has one of the best police forces in the world. Yeah right!

    “Stuff carries a report, today, that exemplifies the futility of complaint against a “connected” offender.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/10237131/Police-mishandle-assault-on-11-year-old

    A classic example of NZ Police corruption.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. stephieboy (2,464 comments) says:

    Am now having some second thoughts about Maggie Barry’s claim so,so long ago.Why not lay a complaint then and then with at the very least station management let alone the police.?
    I detect an element of political grandstanding here.Maybe Maggie’s should stand aside , go on the list and let Colin in on her coat tails.?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Redbaiter (7,865 comments) says:

    “Are their any other crimes against children that Naaska, Red, Long and “Papa” approve of?”

    What an odious coward you are.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Tauhei Notts (1,635 comments) says:

    A delightful highly respected 66 year old Greek woman told me that in the late sixties if you did not get your bum fondled on a crowded rush hour Athenian bus, you had a good long look at yourself in a mirror;
    “Am I becoming too ugly?”
    But when you have a U.S.A. backed military junta in charge that sort of behaviour might be acceptable.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Longknives (4,657 comments) says:

    So a woman who fabricated a rape complaint because her boyfriend finds out she misbehaved at the work Christmas party…
    And she carries on with this outrageous lie for over a year while Police spend thousands on investigating (at the expense of real victims)
    And the guy involved has his life collapse around him, he loses his career, his friends,his health, his self esteem ( plus a legal bill in the tens of thousands…)
    To the extent he attempts suicide.
    The girl eventually tells the truth once her lies start unravelling…
    She is a ‘victim’ is she Pete? Deserves our sympathy does she?
    As far as I am concerned she should be rotting in a prison cell..

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. ShawnLH (4,339 comments) says:

    Red, I’m just trying to expose the facts that others seem to be sweeping under the carpet, and frankly I’m appalled at the willingness to give the guy a pass. If it was my daughter he had assaulted I would be hard put not to want to deal with him personally.

    However my last comment did go too far, and I apologize to the people I named for that.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Dean Papa (775 comments) says:

    Obviously Shawn, you take everything you hear or read in the media as gospel truth. I’m not convinced. At least I’m not convinced, yet. I am also not convinced about many of the allegations against Savile. Are you implying I do not have a right to not be convinced? As for the cp, the fact that those charges were dropped “in the public interest” is suspicious. If it was that cut and dry, then those charges should have been pursued. But I suspect just making them public was a part of a tactic of character assassination and public humiliation directed against Harris.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Nookin (3,162 comments) says:

    “This is a result of the Savile effect in Britain, where Rolf has become the Savile by proxy, on to which all the pent up frustrations and hysteria of a nation is being released.”

    Dean — Harris’s offending involved children. He had porno downloads of children. Evidence was given of assaults on other children. He is a paedophile of the worst kind — one who used his fame to provide immunity and victimise the children even further. Harris may have got away with it had it not been for Savile. Savile’s predations do not make Harris an innocent victim.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Pete George (23,168 comments) says:

    Longknives – the people who act illegally are not victims of course. Abuse can happen in many ways.

    People should feel free to speak up against false complaints without being condemned by an apologist chorus, shouldn’t they.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Redbaiter (7,865 comments) says:

    You knackerless girly men are getting right off the subject in your pitiful eagerness to pander to ugly socialist feminists and express your caring sharing side.

    I’m talking about truth.

    The issue is the claim that it is brave to speak out now.

    I say not now.

    Now is too late.

    True bravery would have been to speak out back when it happened, and stop this dirtbag from molesting all of the other victims.

    That is the issue here. Those jostling others in their panic to get their entrance card to the feminist club need to focus.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. lazza (362 comments) says:

    Will we now, with some justification be on molester alert for every male self obessed narcissistic performer who shows the signs that Saville and Harris did? Yes … and with some justification … I hope.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Griff (6,970 comments) says:

    Red some of us are merely men with a respect for the opposite gender as equal members of the human race.
    One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself.
    The golden rule.
    Includes all humans not just the members of your sex.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Redbaiter (7,865 comments) says:

    Grief I’ll not be criticised or be subjected to false allegations by a vile POS like you.

    You don’t even respect yourself let alone women or the human race.

    Spare me the nauseating posturing.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Nookin (3,162 comments) says:

    Sure, Red. Fourteen year old fronts the cop shop in the 60s and 70s and says that Mr Harris fiddled around with her. Cop says “Sure, Miss. Wot you been sniffing? Now eff off and stop wasting my time.”

    That’ll work won’t it?

    Scoffing this off as the delusions of feminist sympathisers simply illustrates that you have not the slightest idea of the problem.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Griff (6,970 comments) says:

    :lol:
    Redtard you will suffer what ever DPF allows on this blog you have absolutely no choice besides throwing another spac attack and fucking of to twit face or your dismal corner of the internet bloggersphere.
    As to your insults
    I don’t reference my life against the thought of an obsolete pointless idiot like you. I have been on prime time tv with my thoughts against nz’s culture of piss drinking Misogyny have you?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Nookin (3,162 comments) says:

    Longknives @ 9.08

    She should have been prosecuted. She should have been made to reimburse the guy all his costs. There are plenty of examples of false accusations — some high profile –which exacerbate the problems dealing with abuse. Andrew Little’s idea of reversing the burden of proof is as abhorrent a concept as I can imagine for this very reason.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. jackinabox (744 comments) says:

    “I have been on prime time tv with my thoughts against nz’s culture of piss drinking Misogyny”

    Prove it!

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. NZpatriot (5 comments) says:

    “I’m sorry for being a man.”

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Griff (6,970 comments) says:

    Why?
    As I said you mungs are not the source of my self respect.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    @ NZpatriot (5 comments) says:
    July 6th, 2014 at 9:59 am

    First we need evidence that you are a ‘man’ and not just male :P

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    nasska (10,392 comments) says:
    July 6th, 2014 at 8:04 am
    I’ve complete sympathy for the latest victims of Rolf Harris to have come forward.

    It must have been terrible living with amnesia until now.

    One would hope it was amnesia because it would be terrible to think that these women, especially high profile women, sat on evidence that could have assisted the victims with the recent hearing, and for some reason, known only to themselves, decided it wasn’t important enough, or useful enough for them, to speak out about it, before now.

    Sitting back and waiting for the verdict and then be able to declare being ‘one of the group’ is not admirable in the slightest. Speaking out when its safe, and the world is hating the perpetrator, is nothing but weak. These women didn’t speak out before because they were probably worried that they wouldn’t be regarded as heroes. Then speak out now when its ‘safe’ and there is no gamble that they won’t be believed; that doesn’t make the brave – that demonstrates their weakness, and they do absolutely NOTHING for those that are brave enough to speak out when it counted, and took the risk of not getting justice and being regarded as liars.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    @ Redbaiter (7,399 comments) says:
    July 6th, 2014 at 9:25 am

    I can understand a young girl not speaking out when it happened. I suspect some of them were even a little bit flattered at the time, and certainly wouldn’t have realised the amount of victims involved. It was probably not until later in life that they actually felt ashamed, or revolted by the acts. I also suspect that unless the first person had spoken out and made a big deal of it, that none of the others would have come forward, and would have simply gone on with their lives.

    However, what I don’t understand is a mature and intelligent women like Ms Barry, not speaking out at the time. And I especially do not understand Ms Barry, a so called prominent figure, who is considered to be socially responsible and mindful enough to be an MP, to have sat back, and not spoken out, as soon as the matter became public.

    A sitting MP, who had an experience with Mr Harris, that could demonstrate the level of his inappropriate behaviour, even in situations where he should have been extremely guarded, would have been invaluable to the prosecution – but instead, she sat back and said nothing. She is a disgrace, not a hero. She is a weak minded, person who has thought only of what she can get out the situation, and bugger all for the real victims who have been harmed by Harris’ actions.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. ShawnLH (4,339 comments) says:

    “Obviously Shawn, you take everything you hear or read in the media as gospel truth.”

    Hardly, but he HAS been found guilty in a court.

    “Are you implying I do not have a right to not be convinced?”

    I’m saying you there is more than enough evidence, and a guilty verdict to boot.

    So your suspicions make me suspicious.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. tvb (4,236 comments) says:

    The dirty old c**t even tried to feel up our Maggie. How dare he. She had the presence to stop him in his tracks but sadly not many girls could do that and the lecherous old bastard knows that.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Nookin (3,162 comments) says:

    “She is a disgrace, not a hero. She is a weak minded, person who has thought only of what she can get out the situation, and bugger all for the real victims who have been harmed by Harris’ actions.”

    Of course, it is entirely possible that she took the view, maybe even after taking advice, that it would be prejudicial to burst into print before the verdict. The courts tend to frown on publication of prejudicial matter.

    She has also poked her head above the parapet knowing that every bigot and his/her dog would be there to bite it off. And she was right.

    If it helps someone deal with their situation then good on her. There are different ways of dealing with matters. Some work, some don’t. If it doesn’t work for you, that’s fine. There is no need to dump personal abuse on someone because they have a different view.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    @ ShawnLH (2,743 comments) says:
    July 6th, 2014 at 10:57 am

    To be fair Shawn, we have had a case here in NZ where the person was convicted, but the vast majority now believe Peter Ellis is innocent.

    The courts don’t always get it right, and especially in cases such as these, where the evidence is not based on physical fact, and a large majority of it cannot even be verified. I am very suspicious of some of the claims, especially as the victim/s continued to initiate contact with Harris, even alone, despite claiming they were unwilling.

    I think the truth in this case lies somewhere in the middle.

    Women often think back on their lives, especially if they’ve had emotional problems, etc, and try to find a point where ‘it went wrong’. It’s become very easy and popular to point the finger at such things as being the reason for failure in life. Sometimes they are, but the question has to be raised, why do some sexual abuse victims claim their lives were destroyed by the acts, and others never suffer any adverse effects?

    When it becomes ‘fashionable’ to have been a victim (something we saw happen with Bert Potter and people who had never felt any shame, suddenly developing PTSD and other illnesses) one has to stop and wonder just how great the recall of events was. Especially the ability to recall the event as being ‘horrible or devastating’ when in fact that is a reflection of their current frame of mind, and not indicative of how they actually regarded it at the time.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Pete George (23,168 comments) says:

    I can understand a young girl not speaking out when it happened. I suspect some of them were even a little bit flattered at the time, and certainly wouldn’t have realised the amount of victims involved. It was probably not until later in life that they actually felt ashamed, or revolted by the acts.

    I question that. I think shame and revulsion would be far more likely to have started sooner rather than later. They are feelings far more likely to be immediate rather than delayed reactions.

    Feelings of shame may grow over time but there must be something right from the time of the event for that to happen.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. ShawnLH (4,339 comments) says:

    “You knackerless girly men are getting right off the subject in your pitiful eagerness to pander to ugly socialist feminists and express your caring sharing side.”

    Bullshit RedNutter. Your all tough behind a computer, but I doubt your anything more than a wimp in real life.

    Caring about the safety of the young, and taking a stand against child predaters, has nothing to do with feminism, or any other ideology you daft twit. It’s just common decency, and it’s what REAL men do Red, they protect the young and the weak.

    “I’m talking about truth.”

    No, your talking about your opinions, nothing more.

    “The issue is the claim that it is brave to speak out now.

    I say not now.

    Now is too late.”

    It’s never too late for victims to speak out. Doing so takes real courage. And as has been expalined to you, not that I expect you to actualy use your other braincell, there are strong reasons why young girls at the time did not feel safe to speak out, and your proving exactly why.

    “That is the issue here.”

    No, that’s your opinion as to what the issue is. And your wrong.

    “Those jostling others in their panic to get their entrance card to the feminist club need to focus.”

    Wank, wank, wank. Seriously Rednutter, simply throwing out accusations like this is a mindless, dumb way to argue, a lazy and cowardly version of sticking your tail between your legs and running away. You seem to have trouble constructing an argument based on any real principle, let alone any real Conservative principle, and so you hide your lack of intellectual grunt behind calling anyone who disagrees with you “progs” “liberals” or “feminists.” The truth is that your just not very Conservative in any real way, which is why you have such trouble actually engaging in debate for more than five minutes before hiding your intellectual and spiritual weakness behind name-calling.

    By the way, for people like you the Internet really should come with a warning, “beyond here there be Dragons.”

    Careful who you choose to bite.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    If it helps someone deal with their situation then good on her.

    Oh PLEASE !! Help Ms Barry deal with the situation? Now you are saying she is a ‘hurt victim’! You really are getting very desperate here Nookin. Ms Barry is more likely to be the tormentor than the tormented. What a load of crap – “she has spoken out now as a means of ‘dealing’ with it” Pull the other one!

    I’ve have dealt with a number of sexual abuse victims – I can recognise someone who has lasting issues a mile off – Ms Barry has no lasting emotional issues about her experience with Mr Harris

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Pete George (23,168 comments) says:

    You’re making a lot of assumptions about other people’s experiences Judith, and excuses for perpetrators. That’s not your usual approach.

    From Stop It Now!

    * About 85% of children who are sexually abused never tell, or delay telling, about the abuse.
    * Often disclosure is gradual and may begin with vague hints or unclear information.

    What the child may be feeling

    Fear
    - Afraid that the person who abused them will reject or harm them or those they love.
    - Scared that no one will believe them.
    - Anxious about what will happen next.

    Confused and conflicted
    - Unsure about whom they can trust.
    - Feels protective and/or loving toward the person who abused them.
    - Regrets having told (may even take back the disclosure).
    - Guilt and shame

    Believes they are responsible for the abuse.
    - Feels guilt about upsetting the family by telling.
    - Feels ashamed if they experienced positive physical sensations.

    http://www.stopitnow.org/when_a_child_tells

    See also:
    http://www.kellyclarkattorney.com/breaking-the-silence-of-sexual-abuse/
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/15/1065031/-Tree-Climbers-I-was-5-when-the-grooming-began

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Nookin (3,162 comments) says:

    I was talking about the fact that Barry speaking out may help others speak out. That is, after al, the subject of the thread. You seem you be somewhat clouded by your personal view of Maggie Barrie. Then again, Judith, that seems to be your MO, doesn’t it?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Manolo (13,514 comments) says:

    We should all listen to the wise words of P.G., future Labour candidate for Dunedin.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    @ Pete George (22,441 comments) says:
    July 6th, 2014 at 11:10 am

    I have worked for years with victims of sexual abuse Pete, which is why I am disgusted with Ms Barry’s performance. She is NOT a victim of sexual abuse – she is conveniently ‘playing the victim’, and that is all.

    I have no doubt that Ms Barry had her butt pinched, or whatever she claims, but she has not had any lasting emotional issues from that experience, which she handled appropriately at the time. She is not hurt, or damaged, and she demonstrates absolutely NONE of the recognised behaviours associated with sexual abuse.

    The real victims are a different matter, but my issue is with Ms Barry – the subject of this thread, and she is NO more a hurt victim of Rolf Harris, than I am. She’s a woman who has probably had her bum pinched by several men – and was strong and assured enough to put them in their place, and never think another thing about it – until it suited her.

    In trying to make herself out now, to be a victim, she does the real victims of sexual abuse a great dis-service.

    Th

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Dean Papa (775 comments) says:

    Shawn, mate, don’t be a twerp. He might have been found guilty in a court of law, but to me, the evidence was not of the standard of beyond reasonable doubt. Indeed, for perhaps the most damaging charge, the one where the victim was alleged to be about 7 years old, there is no corroborating evidence at all. It seems that Harris was convicted merely on the basis of bad character. To me, that is a worry. But to you, apparently not. You are of course entitled to your opinion. Just as I am entitled not to give my judgements up to a jury of 12, randomly selected, possible morons.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    @ Nookin (2,979 comments) says:
    July 6th, 2014 at 11:14 am

    I actually like Maggie a great deal. She is a really vibrant and fun person, and great to be around. She has the ability to make the people she is with feel very special, and a wonderful conversationalist. I just have a big issue with her behaviour over this one, because of the dis-service she does to the real victims of sexual abuse – perhaps you should search around a bit and look at what some of them have said about Maggie’s behaviour. Many are not impressed – especially as she could have helped before now, and didn’t.

    Speaking out now, to try and get others to? The trial is over, any subsequent trial will achieve very little. Harris will die in prison – and probably die before any other trials are even heard – what will that achieve for subsequent victims – except disappointment?

    The victims of sexual abuse do not seek recognition, they seek acceptance. There is a vast difference – think about it.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. gump (1,538 comments) says:

    There are so many sad and unfortunate attitudes on display in this discussion.

    I really hope that the fathers among you are not passing on these attitudes to your sons.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Pete George (23,168 comments) says:

    I didn’t think Maggie Barry was claiming victimhood. She was saying Harris had groped her too, adding weight to the litany of lechery.

    When prominent people speak up it encourages others to speak up. That’s what this thread was originally about.

    What’s wrong with giving victims support and the confidence to speak up?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. ShawnLH (4,339 comments) says:

    Dean, the fact was he WAS convicted in court. Now you may not think the evidence was up to scratch, but at the end of the day the jury system is what we have, and as far as I can tell the evidence is overwhelming. He groped underage girls, many of them barely beyond puberty. Moreover his own words betray him.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Redbaiter (7,865 comments) says:

    “Shawn, mate, don’t be a twerp.”

    He can’t help himself. Its pointless trying to reason with someone whose comments here show a glaring immunity to that quality.

    For example, if you don’t agree with him that complainants speaking out after the event are “brave”, you’re someone who supports child molesting.

    Or another example, complaining about name calling while calling someone “Rednutter”.

    A particularly stark example of illogic when its used in the context of his claim to be a “true” Conservative, when the tactic of categorising your political opponents as insane stems from Lenin’s communist kangaroo courts after the Russian Revolution.

    There are all kinds who comment on the internet. In choosing who to engage with, you really need to sort the wheat from the chaff, or you can be lead down any number of worthless roads by the likes of attention seeking low IQ idiots like Shawn et al. I don’t have the time to waste myself.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    @ Pete George (22,441 comments) says:
    July 6th, 2014 at 11:10 am

    Just to clarify some of what you’ve linked to. I have posted on here before how victims of sexual abuse are often targeted because they, as children, willingly sought out the perpetrator to have sex with. Often it was them who initiated the behaviour, and as young children, became sexualised very early, and learned to become proficient ‘lovers’ at very young ages. In fact they just wanted to be loved, and their immature minds confused the two. They were taken advantage of by people that should have known better.

    But Harris case does not involve intercourse or sexual acts performed on his person. It is a different kind of sexual behaviour that appears to have been about contact, rather than dominance. There appears to have been only one victim for whom there was continued long term abuse, and the vast majority being once or twice episodes of inappropriate touching.

    The fact that any of this has taken so long to come out, and now, given his fame, there seems to be victims emerging everywhere, is suspicious. It is fascinating in a bizzare way, that his behaviour differed. Most sexual abusers have a very strong MO that they adhered to. I have the greatest sympathy for that long term victim, however, I believe we will now see an array of people, who probably just brushed passed Harris at some stage, who will join in the circus, and now be ‘victims’. We live in a world where people gain a lot from being victims in some circumstances – sadly that kind of victim does nothing to assist in those that are truly harmed in the most devastating way, from real sexual abuse.

    I am annoyed. I am annoyed for the serious victims who have to live their lives, and get constant shit from people because of the insincere people who like to crawl out of the woodwork, to be part of something like this.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Nookin (3,162 comments) says:

    “The victims of sexual abuse do not seek recognition, they seek acceptance. There is a vast difference – think about it.

    That, Judith, is exactly my point, except I think that your use of the word “acceptance” is incorrect. A lot of abuse victims think it is their fault. It’s a bit like telling someone with depression to “man up” and get over it.

    The struggle is not about what others believe. The struggle is about what they believe. Maggie may have dealt with it in her own mind. Those ringing her may be a combination of publicity seekers, money-grabbers or innocent victims. We will never know. If she helps just one person then it will have been worthwhile.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Pete George (23,168 comments) says:

    “because of the insincere people who like to crawl out of the woodwork”

    You are assuming the are insincere. How do you know they are all insincere? How do you know some of them at least haven’t been given the confidence by this publicity to come out and speak up?

    Why dismiss them all as insincere?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. gump (1,538 comments) says:

    @Judith

    I’m perplexed by your logic.

    You seem to be arguing that incidents of sexual abuse are not in fact sexual abuse unless the victim suffers lasting harm.

    That’s a weird and frankly fucked up attitude. An absence of lasting harm doesn’t negate a crime.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    Pete George (22,442 comments) says:
    July 6th, 2014 at 11:30 am
    I didn’t think Maggie Barry was claiming victimhood. She was saying Harris had groped her too, adding weight to the litany of lechery.

    When prominent people speak up it encourages others to speak up. That’s what this thread was originally about.

    What’s wrong with giving victims support and the confidence to speak up?

    EXACTLY – there is nothing wrong with it. AND had Ms Barry done it when it would have achieved the greatest good, I’d be applauding her – but to wait until the safe guilty verdict was given, and speak up only when she knew there would be more to gain personally from it, is horrible.

    Letting other victims see how important it is to speak up???? Really, now after two years of the media being dominated by this case, after a prolonged investigation when the police were trying to put together a viable case against Harris. When it was important that they gathered as much evidence as possible. When that investigation even reached NZ – NOW Maggie Barry decides its IMPORTANT, for victims to speak up.

    FFS – she’s only two years too bloody late.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Dean Papa (775 comments) says:

    Nookin -that’s what they want you to believe. But if Harris really is a “paedophile of the worst kind” why would he not be prosecuted for alleged child pornography found on his computer? I say alleged because that is what it is until he is found guilty. I cannot see why it would not be in the public interest to charge him. Unless of course the charge is a stitch-up. Instead we have this ritual of public humiliation, where the accusations of creating these images, and websites that Harris allegedly visited have been broadcast in the media. But these allegations will not be tested in court. I don’t think that is very fair. Sounds like a witch hunt to me.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Dean Papa (775 comments) says:

    Shawn, the evidence that Harris is guilty of the actual crimes he was convicted of is by no means overwhelming. Now, you are entitled to believe that his proven bad character is enough to be confident of his guilt. I however do not. But if you want to convince me otherwise, then I’d suggest you introduce a little more substance to your argument.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Pete George (23,168 comments) says:

    “…why would he not be prosecuted for alleged child pornography found on his computer? I say alleged because that is what it is until he is found guilty”

    But he didn’t deny it was there.

    Harris admitted looking at adult erotic material online but denied searching underage sites, claiming any child abuse images must have found their way onto his hard drive by mistake.

    There doesn’t seem any point in not prosecuting him on lesser charges. The rest of his life is probably already committed to being under prison sentence.

    Prosecutor Sasha Wass QC told Southwark Crown Court: “In the light of the 12 unanimous convictions on the counts that Mr Harris faced, the Crown prosecution Service has decided that it is no longer in the public interest to proceed with a trial on these four charges.”

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rolf-harris-caught-33-child-3807271

    That doesn’t sound like any sort of “stitch-up”.

    Why the hell are you making excuses for Harris when you don’t know the facts?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Dean Papa (775 comments) says:

    I’m not buying it PG. If Harris really had a computer choc-a-block with disgusting child abuse images then he would have been prosecuted. The case would have been a slam dunk. What is more likely is that, amongst the possibly 1000s of images they found on Rolf’s computer, the cops selected a few where they decided the girl looked underage. As I recall, in the initial charge sheet only four images were mentioned. So it is not many, for an alleged “paedophile of the worst kind” to have on his computer. The vast majority was probably porn of the ‘acceptable’ kind. It makes it likely then that Harris may not have intentionally sought out those images. He may not have even seen them. It could be a result of his trawling for ‘normal’ porn. I’m not an expert, but apparently this is possible.

    http://www.insidetime.co.uk/articleview.asp?a=1779&c=child_pornography_computer_convictions

    http://melbournecriminallawyersblog.com/2014/06/05/pornography-lawyers/

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Nookin (3,162 comments) says:

    Dean

    I am not suggesting that he was a paedophile of the worst kind. If that had been the case he would have got the full 24 years. He is, though, bad enough to warrant contempt.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. Mr_Blobby (133 comments) says:

    The question is why did it take so long for her to come forward?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Pete George (23,168 comments) says:

    He has been judged bad enough to be imprisoned for five years nine months. And that’s under review.

    Rolf Harris has been jailed for five years and nine months after abusing his fame and trust to indecently assault a series of young women and girls, a sentence the attorney general’s office was immediately asked to reconsider as potentially too lenient.

    That doesn’t mean it was too lenient, but it indicates concerns some people have.

    I can’t find anything suggesting Harris might appeal the sentence or the convictions.

    I don’t see any point in quibbling over the images on his computer. Neither does the Prosecutor. A hacker could have put them there to incriminate Harris. That’s highly unlikely but if you want to speculate in support of Harris why not look at all possibilities?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Mike (433 comments) says:

    Judith,

    So if a woman who is being beaten by her abusive husband (or a man who is being beaten by his abusive wife) is too fearful to lay a complaint with the police, he or she is a contemptuous person?

    I am all for small government, but given that you admit that you have worked in this field before, perhaps more resources are needed to ensure the workers are better trained.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    @ Mike (407 comments) says:
    July 6th, 2014 at 1:03 pm

    For goodness sake, keep it real.

    Maggie Barry stated very firmly on TV that she was only offended, not hurt, and said nothing about indicating she was ‘afraid’ to speak up against Harris at the time. In fact she took great delight in saying how she put him firmly in his place.

    Using women who are victims of domestic abuse to try and justify Ms Barry’s tardiness, is desperate and pathetic. The two situations are not even remotely similar. Ms Barry was not confronted with Harris behaviour on a regular basis, nor was she living with him, hurt by him, or had her personal ability to lead an ordinary life effected by him on an ongoing basis.

    And please don’t question my professional competence unless you actually know who and what your are referring to.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. Dean Papa (775 comments) says:

    Well PG, given that the charges have been deemed to be ‘not in the public interest’, such speculation is now inevitable, wouldn’t you think? You may be comfortable with such a scenario, but I am not. Possession of cp is a serous matter. Do you think it fair to put such an accusation out there, and then not test it? No matter if the accused is of a bad character, this does not fit in with any concept of justice I can think of.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. Mike (433 comments) says:

    “Maggie Barry stated very firmly on TV that she was only offended, not hurt, and said nothing about indicating she was ‘afraid’ to speak up against Harris at the time. In fact she took great delight in saying how she put him firmly in his place.”

    Good on her. I am still not quite connecting the dots as to how this makes her a charlatan, as you seem to be implying (in the other thread you denied that she was a victim at all).

    “Using women who are victims of domestic abuse to try and justify Ms Barry’s tardiness, is desperate and pathetic. The two situations are not even remotely similar. And please don’t question my professional competence unless you actually know who and what your are referring to”

    Says you who is using a victim of sexual harassment to score political points! I presented an analogy to show you how irrational it is to be using the behavior of a victim in a situation where it is obvious that the perp is a crim, as a means to discredit their experiences, which is precisely what you are doing here. I also didn’t limit the scope to women, men too are victims of domestic abuse.

    “And please don’t question my professional competence unless you actually know who and what your are referring to.”

    I obviously can’t speak for your professional ability, i can however voice my opinion that it is strange that you are seemingly unaware of the fact that doubting a victim on the basis of their reluctance to speak out is a huge part of the cyclical problem of domestic violence. This usually occurs at the family level, but here it is occurring at the political level.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. thedavincimode (6,582 comments) says:

    Penny II

    It isn’t your “professional” competence that is at issue here.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. Mike (433 comments) says:

    “Ms Barry was not confronted with Harris behaviour on a regular basis, nor was she living with him, hurt by him, or had her personal ability to lead an ordinary life effected by him on an ongoing basis.”

    The old “it was just a one off!” line that gets trotted out so often (by the side of those who are supporting the abusers).

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Dean Papa (775 comments) says:

    I thought my reference to “paedophile of the worst kind” was direct quoting you, Nookin? In fact, checking back on this thread, it would indeed appear to be you who said it. Or am I missing something?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Pete George (23,168 comments) says:

    The latest data summary from the New Zealand Family Violence Clearing House.

    Family violence

    In 2012, there were 87,622 family violence investigations by NZ Police. 101,293 children were linked to these investigations.
    In 2011, 4064 applications were made for protection orders:
    2776 (91%) were made by women and 230 (8%) by men
    2655 (88%) of respondents were men and 321 (11%) women.

    - In 2011, there were 7896recorded male assaults female offences and 5232 recorded offences for breaching a protection order.2
    - In 2011/12, Women’s Refuges affiliated to the National Collective of Independent Women’s Refuges received 85,794 crisis calls. 8930 women and 7005 children accessed advocacy services in the community. 2273 women and 1424 children stayed in safe houses.[3]
    - 1 in 3 (35.4%) ever-partnered New Zealand women report having experienced physical and/or sexual IPV in their lifetime. When psychological/emotional abuse is included, 55% report having experienced IPV in their lifetime. In the 12 months prior to the survey, 5.2% had experiencedphysical and/or sexual IPV. When psychological/emotional abuse was included, 18.2% had experienced one or more forms of IPV.
    - In 2011, NZ Police recorded 11 homicides by an intimate partner. 9 of the victims were women and 2 were men.
    - 16.8% of New Zealand women report having experienced sexual violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime; 2% in the last 12 months.
    - In 2011, there were 1,575 reported sexual offences against an adult over 16 years.
    - In 2011/12, Child, Youth and Family received 152,800 reports of concern. 61,074 were deemed to require further action, leading to 21,525 findings of abuse or neglect. 3884 children were in care placements.
    - In 2011, NZ Police recorded 12 homicides of children and young people under 20 by a family member. In 2011, 113 children and youth were hospitalised for a serious non-fatal assault perpetrated by a family member.
    - Between 1 in 3 and 1 in 5 New Zealand women and 1 in 109 men report having experienced child sexual abuse. 1 in 5 female and 1 in 20 male secondary school students report having experienced unwanted sexual contact in the last 12 months.
    - In 2011, there were 1856 reported sexual offences against a child under 16 years.
    - 10% of secondary school students report witnessing adults at home hitting or physically hurting each other once or more in the last year.

    Intimate partner violence (IPV)
    Adult sexual assault

    - 29% of New Zealand women and 9% of men report having experienced sexual assault in their lifetime. 73% of these assaults against women and 54% of these assaults against men were perpetrated by a partner, ex-partner or other family member.

    Children and young people

    - In 2011/12, Child, Youth and Family received 152,800 reports of concern. 61,074 were deemed to require further action, leading to 21,525 findings of abuse or neglect. 3884 children were in care placements.
    - In 2011, NZ Police recorded 12 homicides of children and young people under 20 by a family member. In 2011, 113 children and youth were hospitalised for a serious non-fatal assault perpetrated by a family member.
    - Between 1 in 3 and 1 in 5 New Zealand women and 1 in 109 men report having experienced child sexual abuse. 1 in 5 female and 1 in 20 male secondary school students report having experienced unwanted sexual contact in the last 12 months.
    - In 2011, there were 1856 reported sexual offences against a child under 16 years.
    - 10% of secondary school students report witnessing adults at home hitting or physically hurting each other once or more in the last year.

    http://www.nzfvc.org.nz/data-summaries

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. anticorruptionnz (193 comments) says:

    I spoke up I asked why we gave law coercive enforcement powers to a fictional organsiation
    I asked why a manager at Waitakere city council was using council resources staff and infrastructure for self enrichment.

    I was sued. It proves how dangerous our defamation laws are when you are denied a defence of truth and honest opinion , they skip formal proof and go straight to quantum.

    Have the evidence time and again that I am guilty only of speaking the truth and that the matter has been unfairly determined.

    I am fighting the charitable dollar which is being used for money laundering and a charity has been created to to pervert the course of justice.

    our corrupt legal system does not rely on evidence and no one is ever punished for perjury this makes it a very good arena for the corrupt to beat up those who speak out against them.

    Speak up at your own peril it has cost me 8 years of my life, a marriage, the family untold $$ and very seen my house

    without truth there is no justice and when the rich can use the court to silence those speaking the truth then it makes speaking up an act of suicide.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    @ Mike (409 comments) says:
    July 6th, 2014 at 1:22 pm

    You are talking absolute friggin garbage if you are trying to insinuate that Maggie Barry had any adverse long term effects from her experience of Mr Harris groping her. And you are especially doing the victims of violent domestic abuse a great deal of disservice to even remotely suggest that Ms Barry’s experience is anywhere near equivalent to theirs.

    You accuse me of using this for political gain and yet here you are taking two completely different circumstances and trying to make them the same, in order to appease your own political bias.

    Ms Barry’s experience was over twenty years ago. She has had plenty of opportunity to tell of her experience, and more so in the last two years she has had the opportunity to actually do something positive regarding that experience.

    She did nothing!

    You are pushing it up hill – you have no defence and your excuse doesn’t fit with her behaviour. IF she was harmed, IF she had on-going issues with what happened, IF she had the slightest bit of concern for the other victims who suffered far worse than her, IF she was of the opinion that Harris was a danger to others – then she would have done something about it. She did nothing. She said nothing. Even when the investigation was in the papers here, she still kept quiet.

    What sort of example was that to victims of sexual abuse?

    You are all claiming how bloody wonderful it was for her to speak out – do you seriously expect anyone to believe you’d be giving the same adoration to a female member of the Labour party if they had spoken out? You’re pathetic.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Dean Papa (775 comments) says:

    This is something I noted while reading the reports of the sentencing hearing. The prosecution apparently thought it worthy to mention that, whilst ransacking Rolf’s home, the cops found a note in his handwriting with instructions on how to delete ones browser history. I can only imagine, to a hysterical Brit public, that this was further evidence of the “vial peedo” covering his tracks after viewing disgusting cp images. Of course, he could have equally just been hiding his tracks after viewing ‘normal’ porn, as most blokes who look at that sort of thing would do, I’d imagine. It just further illustrates the farcical nature of this sordid business. It disturbs me to witness the glee so many seem to have taken in the total evisceration of Harris. It is something I cannot understand. Very puzzling.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    @ anticorruptionnz (155 comments) says:
    July 6th, 2014 at 1:28 pm

    I am not saying that people shouldn’t speak up, and I acknowledge how difficult speaking up can be, but I don’t see Ms Barry as someone who holds back when she has something to say.

    She had the ability as a community minded individual to actually do some real good, by telling her story at a time when it mattered most. I am not criticising her for speaking up, I wish she had done so when it was important. I’m criticising her for waiting and for not exercising the good judgement that she is meant to have.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Mike (433 comments) says:

    “You are talking absolute friggin garbage if you are trying to insinuate that Maggie Barry had any adverse long term effects from her experience of Mr Harris groping her. And you are especially doing the victims of violent domestic abuse a great deal of disservice to even remotely suggest that Ms Barry’s experience is anywhere near equivalent to theirs.”

    I am not evaluating the effect or lack of effect the experience had on Maggie’s lifestyle. The reason for this is simple, I am not her, and it would be extremely distasteful for me, with my limited information, to reach any judgement about the issue. This doesn’t seem to be an issue for you though. It is hilarious how you are now presenting yourself as a champion of victims all the while casting doubt and shame on someone who was on the receiving end of an abusive gesture!

    “You accuse me of using this for political gain and yet here you are taking two completely different circumstances and trying to make them the same, in order to appease your own political bias.

    Ms Barry’s experience was over twenty years ago. She has had plenty of opportunity to tell of her experience, and more so in the last two years she has had the opportunity to actually do something positive regarding that experience.

    She did nothing!”

    I am sure she would re-evaluate her course of action if she knew a liberal on the internet would be extremely upset about how she handled the situation! Who is the victim here, you or Maggie?

    “You are pushing it up hill – you have no defence and your excuse doesn’t fit with her behaviour. IF she was harmed, IF she had on-going issues with what happened, IF she had the slightest bit of concern for the other victims who suffered far worse than her, IF she was of the opinion that Harris was a danger to others – then she would have done something about it. She did nothing. She said nothing. Even when the investigation was in the papers here, she still kept quiet.”

    Again, you are making a judgement on her experiences from your vantage point of not knowing anything about her. She is best placed to evaluate these issues, not you. You seem extremely hurt by Maggie’s reluctance to speak out, it really shouldn’t be bothering you at all (let alone to the extent that it seems to be).

    “You are all claiming how bloody wonderful it was for her to speak out – do you seriously expect anyone to believe you’d be giving the same adoration to a female member of the Labour party if they had spoken out? You’re pathetic”

    I think something like this is one of those rare issues that transcend the political divide. It is only a very small handful who choose to politicize an event like this. Most reasonable people understand how distasteful and outright vile it is to be making such comments.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Reid (16,074 comments) says:

    The latest data summary from the New Zealand Family Violence Clearing House.

    Pete, over the period that data covered, how many people in the country didn’t feature in one or other of those statistics? In other words, how many men didn’t beat the hell out of someone, how many men didn’t etc etc etc etc etc etc etc???????

    Or is that part of the data not important or relevant in anyway whatsoever, at all?

    P.S. Why don’t you apply as an expert family violence commentator on some show that’s fair and balanced, like Campbell Live? I’m sure your analyses to date would make you a shoe-in.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    Just think for one minute what Maggie Barry could have saved those poor victims from.

    All of those victims were only young women when Harris abused them. They each were noted as being insecure and emotional vulnerable people, and giving their testimony, and having to relive their experiences was really hard on them. Because of their young ages at the time of the abuse, there were naturally doubts over their ability to recall correctly.

    Then we have Maggie. Maggie Barry, and elected member of parliament, who was a mature and intelligent woman at the time of her experience with Harris. A person old enough to recall exactly what happened and astute enough to give not only a time and date (something the others struggled with) but also able to give competent evidence, that supported the victims accusations of the type of person Harris was.

    Had Harris been confronted with the fact that someone of Ms Barry’s status, experience and competence was going to give evidence against him – reliable evidence where the time and place etc could be given exactly – then he may very well have pleaded guilty – and saved those poor young women the terrible ordeal of having to be on the stand, facing their accuser.

    Maggie Barry could have made a huge deal of difference, if only she had spoken up at a time when it really mattered. To those of you that applaud her standing up now – its too late. Maggie Barry could have really made a difference – a difference that would have prevented or at least supported those victims, and made them feel much stronger.

    She has nothing to be proud of, and plenty to be ashamed of, for keeping her silence for so long. Stop feigning your concern for the victims, – if you really cared you’d have wanted what was best for them too – instead you’d rather praise Maggie for what? Doing nothing constructive!

    Carrying on with your praise – you’re all a pack of hypocrites.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Mike (433 comments) says:

    It is now apparent that you think that Maggie has liability for Harris behavior! Simply appalling.

    You really are taking the strategy of “lets do whatever it takes to make national look bad” to the absolute extreme.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Pete George (23,168 comments) says:

    “over the period that data covered, how many people in the country didn’t feature in one or other of those statistics?”

    That’s not reported as counted, not surprisingly. Not sure what your point is. I think it’s accepted that the majority of people don’t beat or abuse their partners or kids. But the recorded statistics indicate a fairly serious problem all the same:

    - Between 1 in 3 and 1 in 5 New Zealand women and 1 in 109 men report having experienced child sexual abuse. 1 in 5 female and 1 in 20 male secondary school students report having experienced unwanted sexual contact in the last 12 months.

    That sounds like a significant problem to me.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. Nookin (3,162 comments) says:

    Dean
    You are quite correct – I did use that terminology and I clearly confused the issue. In one context, I was referring to the exertion of power over the victims because of his fame — instilling a sense of helplessness. In the second context I was referring to the degree of offending. My fault.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. gump (1,538 comments) says:

    @Judith

    “And please don’t question my professional competence unless you actually know who and what your are referring to.”

    ————————–

    To be brutally honest, I’m not sure that anybody here needs to raise questions about your professional competence.

    Because some of the opinions you’ve posted here in the last few weeks speak for themselves. And the fact that you’re willing to voice them publicly makes me question any claims you might make to possess professional competence.

    I am sorry to be so blunt. But I’d tell you the same thing if I knew you personally.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. gump (1,538 comments) says:

    @Judith

    “Maggie Barry could have made a huge deal of difference, if only she had spoken up at a time when it really mattered. To those of you that applaud her standing up now – its too late. Maggie Barry could have really made a difference – a difference that would have prevented or at least supported those victims, and made them feel much stronger.

    She has nothing to be proud of, and plenty to be ashamed of, for keeping her silence for so long. Stop feigning your concern for the victims, – if you really cared you’d have wanted what was best for them too – instead you’d rather praise Maggie for what? Doing nothing constructive!

    Carrying on with your praise – you’re all a pack of hypocrites.”

    —————————

    It’s funny that you single out Maggie Barry for keeping silent, yet you don’t apply the same standard to the victims whose statements led to Rolf’s prosecution.

    All of the victims that Rolf abused waited until they were adults before they made official complaints, and some of them waited for over thirty years after the abuse occurred.

    Does your condemnation extend to those women for “keeping [their] silence for so long”? Do they have “nothing to be proud of”? Do they have “plenty to be ashamed for”?

    I’d politely suggest that the only hypocrite in this discussion is you.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Mike (433 comments) says:

    I just now read about that Judith seems to think that Harris is an innocent man! Someone fighting her corner yesterday also stated his belief that Saville was innocent. It takes a very “special” kind of person to defend sexual predators (especially so those that prey on the young)!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    Barries timing was atrocious and hypocritical to the maximum.

    She should have spoken out as soon as th eHarris case was announced…not wait for a guilty plea.

    This is what makes her look so unconvincing and unsubstantial. Both with capital U’s

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    “It takes a very “special” kind of person to defend sexual predators (especially so those that prey on the young)!”

    In the US, everyone used to be a bum. Now everyone is a pedophile.

    That attitude is slipping into our lexicon and a PC tool to suppress free speech .

    Exactly what PC is about. Training our minds in an utterly insidious brain washing.

    Stephie boy beware!

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. Mike (433 comments) says:

    Yea calling sexual predators what they are is actually a liberal tool to undermine democracy and hurl us towards totalitarianism! Hoard your gold, stack up the baked beans, because the apocalypse is near!

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    I get the feeling from this case (which will cornerstone more in the future) that PC will start sounding more Islamic and while Christianity is being undermined th eMuslims will be allowed to use these precedents to promote Sharia Law (as in the UK now) and soon men and women won’t be allowed on the same side walks.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Nookin (3,162 comments) says:

    You seem affronted Judith, that your professional competence has been called into question. I may have missed it but I cannot recall you having laid out your professional credentials. I will, however, challenge your professionalism. You challenge and others for questioning you when they do not know with whom they are dealing, but aren’t you doing the same?
    You are the one who raised the issue of Barrie’s standing as an MP –no-one else. You have assumed that everyone else would have had a different view had it been a labour MP –without any foundation. (Some, no doubt would have taken that view but no more so than those condemning Barrie).

    Your entire premise is based on the untenable notion that a lascivious grope by an international star was, at the time it happened, proof that he was messing around with children and a 20 something reporter should have realised that immediately and charged of to the police out of a sense of public duty. Perhaps we need to blame scandals in the catholic church on the one-off victims of abuse who failed to front up and stop serial abuse in its tracks.

    To hold her accountable, in terms as derogatory and unqualified as you have used, really does undermine your credibility.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    “To hold her accountable, in terms as derogatory and unqualified as you have used, really does undermine your credibility.”

    You’re actually blaming Judith for Barries statement and trivialising the propensity of Barries outlandishness.

    Very old weapon that’s being recognised for it’s insidiousness and not before time !

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Mike (433 comments) says:

    “I get the feeling from this case (which will cornerstone more in the future) that PC will start sounding more Islamic and while Christianity is being undermined th eMuslims will be allowed to use these precedents to promote Sharia Law (as in the UK now) and soon men and women won’t be allowed on the same side walks.”

    I get the (very sincere) feeling that you should probably be in some type of therapy.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. jackinabox (744 comments) says:

    “Barries timing was atrocious and hypocritical to the maximum.

    She should have spoken out as soon as the Harris case was announced…not wait for a guilty plea.

    This is what makes her look so unconvincing and unsubstantial. Both with capital U’s”

    Yay to that!

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

    ” Hoard your gold, stack up the baked beans, because the apocalypse is near!’

    And according to many financial experts obviously beyond your comprehension.

    Priniting paper money is one tool to crashing the markets which a 12 y o could work out.

    Not to mention the international outcry for one world currency.

    And if you can’t understand the banks are working towards a cashless society to control our finances you know nothing what so ever at any time of the day or night, week, month or year.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. wikiriwhis business (3,883 comments) says:

    “I get the (very sincere) feeling that you should probably be in some type of therapy.”

    If you can’t see the dominant race between Communism and Islam, you’ve missed everything from post war.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. Nookin (3,162 comments) says:

    Wiki. I think you should read the thread. Judith is suggesting that Barrie could have stopped all the abuse had she spoken out at the time. She says that if Barrie had spoken up when Harris was charged he would have had the white flag up in surrender and pleaded guilty — thereby relieving other complainants of the torment of a trial.

    Her logic does not stack up.

    One might wonder what might have happened had she spoken up. To pose a theory is one thing. To ask a question, give a definitive answer, condemn Barrie and berate anyone who disagrees is something else.

    Then, on top of it all, she attributes any contrary view to political motivation.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. Manolo (13,514 comments) says:

    This subject is manna from heaven for KB’s self-appointed compassionate anti-male crusader from Dunedin.
    You are all rapists. You know it, don’t you.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. ShawnLH (4,339 comments) says:

    “He can’t help himself. Its pointless trying to reason with someone whose comments here show a glaring immunity to that quality.

    For example, if you don’t agree with him that complainants speaking out after the event are “brave”, you’re someone who supports child molesting.”

    Well, do you Red? You seem to think that the opposite of a feminist girly-man is one who supports or approves or soft soaps child molesters.

    So do ya wimpy?

    “Or another example, complaining about name calling while calling someone “Rednutter”.”

    It’s not the name calling wimpy, it’s substituting an actual argument with name calling.

    It’s what stupid people do.

    “A particularly stark example of illogic when its used in the context of his claim to be a “true” Conservative, when the tactic of categorising your political opponents as insane stems from Lenin’s communist kangaroo courts after the Russian Revolution.”

    Exactly the tactics you use wimpy. Anyone who does not fit your version of Conservatism gets labled a prog or a socialist or a traitor, or all three.

    If you disgree with the tactic, why do you use it so much? You use it way more than any Lefty on this blog. Perhaps ya need to come out of the closet wimpy and admit your half a goose step away from being a Stalinist.

    “There are all kinds who comment on the internet.”

    Yup, including wimpy cowards like you.

    “In choosing who to engage with, you really need to sort the wheat from the chaff”

    How would you know which is which? That would require thinking. You clearly don’t do a lot of that.

    Accusing anyone who supports the victims of a child abuser and a predate as “feminist girly-men” is a monumentally stupid argument displaying zero intellectual ability, and a great deal of mental retardation.

    If you are gonna talk dumbass shite, don’t whine when your called on it, wimpy. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. ShawnLH (4,339 comments) says:

    ““And please don’t question my professional competence unless you actually know who and what your are referring to.””

    Why not? I started questioning your sanity, let alone your professionalism, when you claimed adopted children are better off dead.

    Don’t comment on an open blog if you think your above being questioned.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. Griff (6,970 comments) says:

    Spawn
    Don’t take redtard so personally
    He has as about as much creditability as a black man at a KKK convention.
    I value him for the light comic relief he adds to an over wise serious political blog.
    It is imposable that someone could be genuinely so self deluded as to be unaware of the humor value in the extremism he posts daily

    Poe’s law,
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law
    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe%27s_Law

    named after its author Nathan Poe, is an Internet adage reflecting the idea that without a clear indication of the author’s intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between an expression of sincere extremism and a parody of extremism

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. ShawnLH (4,339 comments) says:

    There are multiple victims from around the world, all who have testified, and in which their descriptions of Rolf and his tactics are all in agreement. He had child porn on his computer, and when questioned claimed it got their by accident. Yeah, THAT’S credible! On top of that, his own words betray him.

    The guy is as guilty as sin. This is clear. So it beggars the question, why are people trying to excuse him? What kind of mentality thinks this is an excusable offense? What kind of morally retarded nutjob thinks that men opposing the sexual abuse of young girls makes them feminist girly men?

    There are some seriously sick people on KB.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. Griff (6,970 comments) says:

    Amen to that Shawn
    my

    Griff (6,548 comments) says:
    July 6th, 2014 at 9:31 am
    is
    Do unto others as you would have them do unto you

    And it gets 9 down ticks

    fuck

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Judith (8,243 comments) says:

    @ ShawnLH (2,749 comments) says:
    July 6th, 2014 at 3:31 pm

    Wow, you sound like a really angry frustrated little man there Shawn.

    I thought you’d ‘found God’? Aren’t Christians meant to be nice, caring, loving, non-judgmental types?

    I guess that’s not working out to well for you huh?

    @ Nookin

    Face it sunshine – your position comes from your own political bias too. I didn’t see you supporting Cunliffe, when he spoke up about victims of domestic abuse. You’re such a pathetic hypocrite, and so bloody obvious.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. Nookin (3,162 comments) says:

    Judith
    You did not see me decrying him, either. And guess what? That is the test — applying one principle to one person and another principle to someone else — like you do – constantly. That is the meaning of hypocrisy.

    I have made no comment on Cunliffe’s comments — not even the apology.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.