Kiwiblog

Have just heard that the Parole Board have given Rev Graham Capill parole, and released him.

From all the reports I have seen, he has never shown much remorse at all, and his sexual abuse of children makes him NZ’s worst hypocrite.

He has served six of nine year sentence. Sadly under the law that applied at the time, parole is near automatic at two thirds. I think the Parole Board have turned him down seven times before.,

Remember this is the man who claimed that the sex with one of his victims was consensual:

“The law, as it has been explained to me, seems so different to what the Biblical law and indeed common perceptions are of rape,” he wrote.

“The fact that [the victim] consented is irrelevant.”

If we are lucky he will leave NZ.

I am curious as to why the media think it is their job to try and help Winston Peters back into Parliament, just because it means that they get more interesting stories.

What I mean, is the media overkill that reports almost every utterance from Winston. Every speech to a room of oldies or students results in stories. An off the cuff comment about how he is not ruling out Helensville gets reported breathlessly on TV as a major story. Hello – what is news worthy about a guy who had a 30 year old beat him by 10,000 votes in his own former seat, speculate he may stand in a seat where the majority is 20,000 and he would be lucky to get his deposit back.

I do not advocate that the media should never report Winston. Of course not. If there is genuine judgement that something significant is said, they should consider it on the merits. But they give Winston free publicity massively in excess of what they give any other politician in his situation. I suspect they give him more publicity for one of his speeches to Grey Power, than they do to the Leaders of parties in Parliament such as the Maori Party.

On the average of the last polls by the three main public pollsters, NZ First is at 1.9% average. So he leads a party that is polling at under 2%, and got 4% at the last election.

I’ve tried to think of other party leaders in such situations, to compare the massively publicity Peters gets, against what they got. Perhaps a comparison could be the Alliance post 2002. But to be fair they only got 1.3% in the 2002 election.

The best comparison is the Christian Coalition post 1996. In 1996 they got 4.3% – a bit more than Winston’s 4.1% in 2008. So one would expect Winston to get as much coverage as they gave Graham Capill when he made a speech or press release, in 1997.

The Press reports:

Child-sex offender Graham Capill has been denied parole because he has not completed any rehabilitation programmes and poses “an undue risk to the safety of the community”.

Does he still maintain some of the sex was consensual? If so, definitely not fit for release. Especially considering the particular circumstances of the case which can not be detailed publicly.

Dave at Big News has some more details:

But what the media does not report is that there has been a bit of a disagreement about which sex offender programme Capill should be on. He wants to go on one- the STOP programme – a community-based programme, but his psychologists want him to go on the Kia Marama one, in prison. He is waiting to be treated on the latter programme. Yet Capill may not even get accepted onto that programme until 2011, because the 60-bed unit is always full, and he is down the waiting list behind those who have been behind bars for longer.

In fact the Press did cover this:

The Corrections Department said yesterday that Kia Marama was prioritised for prisoners near the end of their sentences.

“The programmes are designed to assist offenders live an offence-free life in the community,” it said. “For this reason, they are best attended close to the point at which the offender will be released.

“We aim to schedule eligible offenders about one year prior to their parole date. For example, a prisoner on a nine-year sentence who needs to attend the Kia Marama programme will be at the end of his fifth year in prison.

“We do not move longer-term offenders ahead in the schedule if this results in a shorter-term offender not being able to access treatment …

Dave comments:

Since writing this post I have been advised that the reason Capill preferred the STOP programme to the Kia Marama one was because the former one aligned more to Christian principles. I pointed out that Capill is a sex offender, so his “Christian principles” probably don’t count for much.

I agree. I think he wanted the STOP programme as you do it after you have been released from prison on parole.

The key thing for me is the victims, as reported by the Press:

The board had letters from Capill’s victims and had met one of them. All expressed fears for the safety of a person whose name was withheld.

Makes it an easy call.

The Dom Post has a column on Winston Peters from Bob Jones. Go read it yourself but I do have to quote the last two paragraphs:

This has been no Icarus fall, instead there’s a whiff of Graham Capill about Winston’s descent. There were the baubles of office betrayal, the theft and refusal to return taxpayers money and the swirling rumours around the scampi matter.

Jones is on the mark here. He does not mean that Peters is a kiddy fiddler. Just that politicians who go on and on the most about an issue (society’s morals or secret business donations) are often practising what they condemn.

Is it possible that somewhere in darkest Africa, an ancient toothless crone muttering gibberish in the corner of her hut might believe Winston’s story over the $100,000 Glenn payment? If so then she will be alone in the world.

Sadly Sir Robert is not quite accurate here. Two people in the world say they believe Winston. One if the ancient toothless crone in a hut in darkest Africa. The other is the Prime Minister of New Zealand who keeps feeding him his baubles.

The Herald on Sunday reports on paedophile Graham Capill:

Before being sentenced, Capill emailed friends arguing that sex with one victim was “consensual” and he hoped to be released a third of the way into his sentence.

But supporter and Richmond New Life Church elder Chris Baigent told the Herald on Sunday that was no longer Capill’s view.

It never is as parole hearings loom.

There had been some talk his offending could be categorised as “adultery” but that was more people twisting the situation rather than any view Capill held himself, Baigent said.

I think words fail me.

Capill kept in regular touch with his wife and she and some of his children were regular visitors to the prison.

“She is standing alongside him all the way. She has kept the family going and he will be welcome back into the marriage relationship when he gets out,” he said.

“The younger children miss him terribly. They are really neat kids – you couldn’t wish for a better family of kids.”

Words fail me even more.

Baigent said that two of Capill’s older children had got married while he was in prison, which had been “really tough” for the former Christian leader who wasn’t able to attend the weddings.

And am now in stunned silence.

In 2002 Labour changed the laws so even violent offenders and rapists could become eligible for parole after one third of their sentence.

The Criminal Justice Act 1985 did not allow a prisoner to be released from prison before two thirds of their sentence, if they had been convicted of any of the following crimes:

1. Sexual Violation (includes rape)
2. Manslaughter
3. Attempted Murder
4. Wounding on injuring with intent to cause grievous bodily harm and wounding/injuring with intent to injure
5. Using a firearm against law enforcement officer
6. Commission of crime with firearm
7. Robbery and aggravated robbery

But the Parole Act 2002 changed that, and lets all the rapists and other thugs become eligible after one third of their sentence. Labour only finally backed down on this in the last parliamentary term.

So in July of this year, Graham Capill will become eligible for parole, despite having served only three years of his nine year sentence.