"Restorative justice"

[Virago]

This makes for some interesting reading:

http://aranakenny.blogspot.co.nz/

It's worthwhile clicking through some of the links to get all the details, but in a nutshell:

A Victoria University employee, doing caretaking and security work, steals a student's cellphone while working. Seven months later, the victim tracks the phone down using smart-phone technology, and hands the evidence to the police. The culprit is arrested and charged, and he admits the theft.

The crucial thing is how the university have handled it. They've decided that a simple "restorative justice" process is in order, with a letter of apology to be written, and a replacement sim-card provided. The victim rejects this approach, but it was thrust upon him anyway. The letter of apology was basically a self-absorbed "poor me, I got caught".

While I think the victim is being a little precious in withdrawing from the university, he raises some valid issues about the university's approach to the issue. The culprit keeps his job (in a position of trust) on the basis of a pseudo-apology.

I wonder what part of the process was "restorative"?

[tigertim20]

I read this the other day -pretty messed up. If I ever flogged something while on the job Id expect to be down the road pretty fuckin fast!

as for leaving the university being precious, maybe, but if the victim feels that the incident wasn't deal with appropriately then what other option do they really have to show their disgust at the handling of it? Turning up to class as usual is a signal that you are going to accept it, choosing to leave, and doing so while publicly expressing WHY you are leaving brings a little more attention to the isse.
I wouldnt feel comfortable spending my $100,000 student loan at an institution that watches me get robbed and then does fuckall about it, especially when there are other universities that would love that chunk of cash.

[bogan]

Yeh that's pretty rough. Seems like a better caretaker wouldn't be hard to find, or maybe he's kept his job cos he was giving someone a :tugger:

The phd dude's got principles too, good on him.

[Mom]

I wonder what part of the process was "restorative"?

The part where it looks like the Uni was actually doing something, attempts to restore faith in their policies.

I actually think this sort of thinking (around many, many things) is way more prevalent in our tertiary institutions than we have a clue about.

Sent from my ignorant seat, in the computer room at the end of the hall.

[Usarka]

Stole a phone? They should have slit his eyelids off and pissed on the scars.

[bogan]

The part where it looks like the Uni was actually doing something, attempts to restore faith in their policies.

I actually think this sort of thinking (around many, many things) is way more prevalent in our tertiary institutions than we have a clue about.

Sent from my ignorant seat, in the computer room at the end of the hall.

Yeh Uni's a a bit weird like that. As a career universitist, some of the shit you see which is just completely out touch with reality is pretty funny, as long as it only involves others of course :bleh:

Sent from my thesis, using crayons and fingerpaints.

[yungatart]

The part where it looks like the Uni was actually doing something, attempts to restore faith in their policies.

I actually think this sort of thinking (around many, many things) is way more prevalent in our tertiary institutions than we have a clue about.

Sent from my ignorant seat, in the computer room at the end of the hall.

Not just tertiary institutions, the school I work in has introduced it this year as well.
It does my head in.
Bring back the cane...or give me a taser! PC BS

[300weatherby]

I read this the other day -pretty messed up. If I ever flogged something while on the job Id expect to be down the road pretty fuckin fast!

as for leaving the university being precious, maybe, but if the victim feels that the incident wasn't deal with appropriately then what other option do they really have to show their disgust at the handling of it? Turning up to class as usual is a signal that you are going to accept it, choosing to leave, and doing so while publicly expressing WHY you are leaving brings a little more attention to the isse.
I wouldnt feel comfortable spending my $100,000 student loan at an institution that watches me get robbed and then does fuckall about it, especially when there are other universities that would love that chunk of cash.

I no longer have faith or belief in the system, the time has come that we deal with the crims and deadbeats ourselves, the police can't be arsed dealing with crime below rape and murder, the courts don't actually punish the crims, mainly because the judges are/have never been, on the receiving end of criminal behaviour and have no concept of it, sentencing is allways based on predetermined guidlines based on modern "pc" thinking. Last thief that stuck his fingers in my toolbox and got caught by me, won't do it again. A result for society in general.

Stamp on the small crimes and bad behaviours:bash:, you give your self a chance of an ordered society with a lesser rate of bigger crime....

[mashman]

Maybe he is genuinely sorry for what he has done. He could have sold it. So I'm going to assume that he probably couldn't afford one and took his chances. Not a nice thing to do like... but it was only a phone.

[Virago]

Not just tertiary institutions, the school I work in has introduced it this year as well.
It does my head in.
Bring back the cane...or give me a taser! PC BS

Yeah, I'm aware that this has been going on in schools for a while. Theft or violence will be dealt with by a semi-believable apology, which is then rewarded with lots of praise for "putting things right".

I'm also aware that the approach is often used in the tertiary sector when dealing with student hi-jinks, to keep the students out of court - but usually only for low-impact (victimless) crimes.

I'm appalled that the university is taking a "say sorry and shake hands" approach to this, and refusing to even acknowledge the victim. Theft as a servant is serious, especially for those in such a position of trust.

[Virago]

Maybe he is genuinely sorry for what he has done. He could have sold it. So I'm going to assume that he probably couldn't afford one and took his chances. Not a nice thing to do like... but it was only a phone.

Blah fucking blah.

He had seven months to be genuinely sorry, he was only "sorry" when he got caught.

[Smifffy]

Maybe he is genuinely sorry for what he has done. He could have sold it. So I'm going to assume that he probably couldn't afford one and took his chances. Not a nice thing to do like... but it was only a phone.
:mad:
Or it was only an ipod, or only a laptop, or only a car or only a vagina...

I read this thread thinking that from the title it was going to be the one example of restorative justice that actually worked. Restorative justice is no justice at all. People need to know that they are aren't entitled to take whatever the fuck they want. Whether that be a phone or a vagina.

Restorative imo would be at least, replacement of the phone to the equivalent spec of the current model and payment of the charges relative to the plan the guy had for the next how ever many months. Fat Chance.

I'm not one to get into the whole debate about rehabilitation Vs retribution. The consequences should just be such that the offender respects others' rights in future.

[mashman]

Blah fucking blah.

He had seven months to be genuinely sorry, he was only "sorry" when he got caught.

:crybaby:

And he thought he had gotten away with it. He hadn't. Somewhere along the lines someone has believed him and given him a second chance. T'would seem that some fuckers just don't believe in second chances. And over a phone of all things.

[bogan]

:crybaby:

And he thought he had gotten away with it. He hadn't. Somewhere along the lines someone has believed him and given him a second chance. T'would seem that some fuckers just don't believe in second chances. And over a phone of all things.

T'would seem that most of us think the victim should be the one to decide if he gets a second chance or not. It shouldn't be the guy the perp might be giving the sly handy-j to after hours.

[300weatherby]

:mad:
Or it was only an ipod, or only a laptop, or only a car or only a vagina...

I read this thread thinking that from the title it was going to be the one example of restorative justice that actually worked. Restorative justice is no justice at all. People need to know that they are aren't entitled to take whatever the fuck they want. Whether that be a phone or a vagina.

Restorative imo would be at least, replacement of the phone to the equivalent spec of the current model and payment of the charges relative to the plan the guy had for the next how ever many months. Fat Chance.

I'm not one to get into the whole debate about rehabilitation Vs retribution. The consequences should just be such that the offender respects others' rights in future.

You hit it right on the nail with one word........ CONSEQUENCES!!!!!

[mashman]

The consequences should just be such that the offender respects others' rights in future.

I'm hoping that that will be the case too. But when sorry for a first pretty minor offense isn't enough, what's next?

[Smifffy]

:crybaby:

And he thought he had gotten away with it. He hadn't. Somewhere along the lines someone has believed him and given him a second chance. T'would seem that some fuckers just don't believe in second chances. And over a phone of all things.

Strange. We were having this convo at work the other day, re: second chances. A couple of guys who have done some heinous shit (TM) got an awesome opportunity. A couple of others that have done awesome things got to miss out.

Great for people that get second chances, but what about the people that make the most of their first chance, get the bit between their teeth and really make a go of it? Why should they miss out just because some other loser needs a second, third, fourth chance?

Look deep, deep into this. Do you really believe that this is the first time the person has done this type of thing?

[PrincessBandit]

Not just tertiary institutions, the school I work in has introduced it this year as well.
It does my head in.
Bring back the cane...or give me a taser! PC BS


Yeah, I'm aware that this has been going on in schools for a while. Theft or violence will be dealt with by a semi-believable apology, which is then rewarded with lots of praise for "putting things right".

I'm also aware that the approach is often used in the tertiary sector when dealing with student hi-jinks, to keep the students out of court - but usually only for low-impact (victimless) crimes.

I'm appalled that the university is taking a "say sorry and shake hands" approach to this, and refusing to even acknowledge the victim. Theft as a servant is serious, especially for those in such a position of trust.

Yep, very common. The pseudo apology to the victim is rampant in schools as well as "family conferences" where perps apologise for their behaviour to their victims and promise to never never never be naughty again.

TPTB feel it is more constructive to have dialogue (the fact that very little of it is genuine or meaningful is irrelevant) because this 'proves' that the system leaves everyone happy all round. People who are not happy about the whole thing get swept under the carpet.

[mashman]

T'would seem that most of us think the victim should be the one to decide if he gets a second chance or not. It shouldn't be the guy the perp might be giving the sly handy-j to after hours.

Well most of you are also carrying pitch forks and torches. Doesn't mean you're showing any common sense.

[Ocean1]

Well most of you are also carrying pitch forks and torches. Doesn't mean you're showing any common sense.

Makes sense to me. And it sounds like the call for more effective consequences is pretty common.

Looks like you're wrong. Again.

[Smifffy]

Well most of you are also carrying pitch forks and torches. Doesn't mean you're showing any common sense.

Because a cell phone is one of the essentials of life, and if you don't have one even by stealing it then you are going to die. More important even, than selling it on to buy a loaf of bread. :tugger::tugger::tugger:

[bogan]

Well most of you are also carrying pitch forks and torches. Doesn't mean you're showing any common sense.

Yes, but if I'm carrying a pitchfork and a torch, then there'll be no sly handy-j from me (or not one that anybody would want at least), so really, its an honorable thing to carry. Doesn't exclude us from showing some common sense either.

[mashman]

Strange. We were having this convo at work the other day, re: second chances. A couple of guys who have done some heinous shit (TM) got an awesome opportunity. A couple of others that have done awesome things got to miss out.

Great for people that get second chances, but what about the people that make the most of their first chance, get the bit between their teeth and really make a go of it? Why should they miss out just because some other loser needs a second, third, fourth chance?

Look deep, deep into this. Do you really believe that this is the first time the person has done this type of thing?

It sucks... and I guess it stems from someone believing that it ain't the self-reliant ones who need to be hand fed as they're highly unlikely to be any trouble to society. But that doesn't make it any less sucky and it makes an unfortunate perverse sense.

You mean that he may have stolen the phone because he wanted an upgrade from the last phone he stole? If that's the case, then fuck him... although it's nice to see the benefit of the doubt for a change. Good people do the odd bad thing ya know.

[PrincessBandit]

... More important even, than selling it on to buy a loaf of bread. :tugger::tugger::tugger:

Do you hear the people sing, singing the song of angry men...oh hang on, Jean Valjean stole the bread, not the cellphone

[Virago]

The letter of apology is true to form:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-cLF57CxSgt8/UTMhna71iXI/AAAAAAAABqg/NdIHcVOhviE/s1600/DSC_0324.jpg

It's all about him - how being caught affects him. No mention or acknowledgement of his effect on the victim.

[James Deuce]

the time has come that we deal with the crims and deadbeats ourselves, the police can't be arsed dealing with crime below rape and murder, .

The first point makes YOU a crim, the second simply isn't true.

May we deal out our citizens vengeance on YOU first for simply thinking of a violent crime, or is that not what you meant?

[Smifffy]

It sucks... and I guess it stems from someone believing that it ain't the self-reliant ones who need to be hand fed as they're highly unlikely to be any trouble to society. But that doesn't make it any less sucky and it makes an unfortunate perverse sense.

You mean that he may have stolen the phone because he wanted an upgrade from the last phone he stole? If that's the case, then fuck him... although it's nice to see the benefit of the doubt for a change. Good people do the odd bad thing ya know.

I'm not talking about being hand fed. I'm talking about a genuine, once in a lifetime, golden opportunity. Given to a couple of people "that deserved a second chance", or maybe they just 'knew' the right people.

[300weatherby]

Well most of you are also carrying pitch forks and torches. Doesn't mean you're showing any common sense.

No pitchforks or torches here, would rather use the gas axe, one thieving finger at a time.........

[mashman]

Makes sense to me. And it sounds like the call for more effective consequences is pretty common.

Looks like you're wrong. Again.

Just a different perspective and one less mouth for your hard earned taxes to feed :bleh:. Maybe the guy will heed what the potential consequences could have been.


Because a cell phone is one of the essentials of life, and if you don't have one even by stealing it then you are going to die. More important even, than selling it on to buy a loaf of bread. :tugger::tugger::tugger:

:rofl: it was found and kept. The guy made some stupid decisions. Perhaps he should have stolen another two or 3 and sold them, then he could have afforded his own. I have a felling we're not talking about a criminal mastermind here. I could be wrong though.


Yes, but if I'm carrying a pitchfork and a torch, then there'll be no sly handy-j from me (or not one that anybody would want at least), so really, its an honorable thing to carry. Doesn't exclude us from showing some common sense either.

How the fuck do you give a guy with a pitch fork and torch a sly handy-j? You're right, it doesn't... but this is KB, so it does.

[Virago]

Maybe he is genuinely sorry for what he has done. He could have sold it. So I'm going to assume that he probably couldn't afford one and took his chances. Not a nice thing to do like... but it was only a phone.

Give me fucking strength...

Yes, he needed the phone to take lots of lovely photos when he was on holiday in Fiji.

Poor fella...

[mashman]

I'm not talking about being hand fed. I'm talking about a genuine, once in a lifetime, golden opportunity. Given to a couple of people "that deserved a second chance", or maybe they just 'knew' the right people.

As I said, it sucks. With any luck they'll stay true to type and fuck it up and end up where they belong... then the other guys can have their shot.


No pitchforks or torches here, would rather use the gas axe, one thieving finger at a time.........

I'm surprised you didn't go for the blunt hunting knife.

[Ocean1]

You mean that he may have stolen the phone because he wanted an upgrade from the last phone he stole? If that's the case, then fuck him... although it's nice to see the benefit of the doubt for a change. Good people do the odd bad thing ya know.

Mashie, nobody gets to an age where they're an employee desperately in need of a second chance, they've long since had chance #2. If that didn't change their behaviour then another one won't, time to pay the real cost of that behaviour.

Seems our learning institutions have become infected by "don't sweat the small stuff".

[mashman]

The letter of apology is true to form:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-cLF57CxSgt8/UTMhna71iXI/AAAAAAAABqg/NdIHcVOhviE/s1600/DSC_0324.jpg

It's all about him - how being caught affects him. No mention or acknowledgement of his effect on the victim.

He said he was sorry, twice. Gives a reason. And says he'll not do it again. End of?

[scumdog]

Blah fucking blah.

He had seven months to be genuinely sorry, he was only "sorry" when he got caught.

And I wonder if he had ever done stuff/taken stuff and NOT been caught...<_<

[Smifffy]

:rofl: it was found and kept. The guy made some stupid decisions. Perhaps he should have stolen another two or 3 and sold them, then he could have afforded his own. I have a felling we're not talking about a criminal mastermind here. I could be wrong though.


Ok. So let's assume the guy is a fucktard. Why continue to employ him? Apparently there is a metric shit ton of fine upstanding citizens and permanent residents in the country looking for honest work. Perhaps the next guy or gal will hand in said 'found' cell phone. This guy can go back in the pool with all of the other fine upstanding citizens and permanent residents and wait for his second chance after all of the rest have exhausted their first chance in a similar stupid, dishonest way that he did.

[PrincessBandit]

While the object of the theft might only seem inconsequential to some i.e. replaceable and non-life threatening, the impact on the person who it belongs to could be devastating on other levels. We seem to have this mentality that if someone hasn't been physically damaged by an offence (or even when they have been injured but not "seriously enough" ) then what's the problem?

A lot of perps genuinely don't seem to understand why their victims are angry, emotionally impacted, or suffer other outcomes because by their reckoning "....come on man, it was only a ......(insert insignificant object of theft)". Again, it comes down to the perspective of some of our society that whatever is out there in the wide world, even if it belongs to someone else, is theirs for the taking. Their sense of self-entitlement is bred in them from a young age often being modeled by parents or other adults they see. Leads to lack of compassion or ability to put themselves in a victims shoes.

Sure there may well be genuine cases of stealing literally to feed a hungry child, but I'd wager those would be so few and far between that they'd be barely a blip on the radar.

[mashman]

Mashie, nobody gets to an age where they're an employee desperately in need of a second chance, they've long since had chance #2. If that didn't change their behaviour then another one won't, time to pay the real cost of that behaviour.

Seems our learning institutions have become infected by "don't sweat the small stuff".

There's always a first time. With any luck there won't be a second in this guys case. If his behaviour doesn't change, then fair enough, hang him by the balls, throw him in Civic Square and treat him like a pinata.

It was dealt with. I guess they'll find out in time whether the decision was justified or not.

[Smifffy]

As I said, it sucks. With any luck they'll stay true to type and fuck it up and end up where they belong... then the other guys can have their shot.


I expect that next time around there will be others that are fully deserving of a 'second chance'. If there ever is a next time, employment situations being what they are.

That also brings up the point that of course our whole enterprise is so awesomely secure that we can stake our future on the people that desperately need second chances (more like 5th or 6th chances if truth be known)

[Ocean1]

There's always a first time. With any luck there won't be a second in this guys case. If his behaviour doesn't change, then fair enough, hang him by the balls, throw him in Civic Square and treat him like a pinata.

It was dealt with. I guess they'll find out in time whether the decision was justified or not.

You're not listening again. There's no way someone gets to adulthood capable of stealing a phone without a history of similar events throughout childhood and adolescence. There's no way they do that without being caught several times. He's had his second, third and subsequent chances years ago.

And you don't have to destroy the guy, simply make it unattractive enough for him that he won't indulge in similar behaviour again.

[mashman]

While the object of the theft might only seem inconsequential to some i.e. replaceable and non-life threatening, the impact on the person who it belongs to could be devastating on other levels. We seem to have this mentality that if someone hasn't been physically damaged by an offence (or even when they have been injured but not "seriously enough" ) then what's the problem?

The guy "lost" his phone. Mitigating circumstances get all sorts of people off of all sorts of crimes, even when they've been battered black and blue. By comparison this looks kind of innocuous. Yes that proves your point, however where do you stop? All theft carries a sentence of 5 years? Why not just go down the Islamic route and chop off their hand for all to see and save the jail fees? It's a slippery slope. Either way, it doesn't mean that this guy isn't genuinely sorry and hasn't considered the damage that he has done.

[Virago]

...:rofl: it was found and kept. The guy made some stupid decisions...

I was wondering how long it would take for the "he found it" line to be trotted out.

After he "found it" he was asked by the victim if a phone had been handed in, and he denied it. At that point, it was no longer the great kiwi "score", and became theft - by someone trusted (and employed) to protect the victim.

[300weatherby]

The first point makes YOU a crim, the second simply isn't true.

May we deal out our citizens vengeance on YOU first for simply thinking of a violent crime, or is that not what you meant?

The day may come when YOUR house gets turned over by thieving deadbeats while you are at work earning the taxes that pay their dole as they rob you, maybe your dog dies cause they give it a cooked whole chicken to eat as a distaction,

Maybe your wife/daughter/sister gets beaten, raped.

Maybe something less, like your fence gets tagged to fuck while you sleep in your bed

Any of those things happens to you.....you and your high and mighty pc better than me position might get a rethink. Unlike you, I am strong enough to stand up in the face of wrongdoers and don't lower myself to be the politicaly correct handwringing wet weak sop that you occupy as a positition to exuse your willingness to accept injustice without a fight.

I believe in right not wrong, I believe in justice, not turning the cheek, I will stand, irrespective of the odds, in defence of what I believe in, weak people like you are part of the cause of the epidemic crime swamping society like a cancer unchecked.

[Kickaha]

The day may come when YOUR house gets turned over by thieving deadbeats while you are at work earning the taxes that pay their dole as they rob you, maybe your dog dies cause they give it a cooked whole chicken to eat as a distaction,

Maybe your wife/daughter/sister gets beaten, raped.

Maybe something less, like your fence gets tagged to fuck while you sleep in your bed

Any of those things happens to you.....you and your high and mighty pc better than me position might get a rethink. Unlike you, I am strong enough to stand up in the face of wrongdoers and don't lower myself to be the politicaly correct handwringing wet weak sop that you occupy as a positition to exuse your willingness to accept injustice without a fight.

I believe in right not wrong, I believe in justice, not turning the cheek, I will stand, irrespective of the odds, in defence of what I believe in, weak people like you are part of the cause of the epidemic crime swamping society like a cancer unchecked.

You're funny as all fuck, you should get a stand up comedy routine :lol:

[mashman]

Ok. So let's assume the guy is a fucktard. Why continue to employ him? Apparently there is a metric shit ton of fine upstanding citizens and permanent residents in the country looking for honest work. Perhaps the next guy or gal will hand in said 'found' cell phone. This guy can go back in the pool with all of the other fine upstanding citizens and permanent residents and wait for his second chance after all of the rest have exhausted their first chance in a similar stupid, dishonest way that he did.

Fair enough. Perhaps the employer has a good working relationship with the guy and have considered that it's better the "devil" you know?


I expect that next time around there will be others that are fully deserving of a 'second chance'. If there ever is a next time, employment situations being what they are.

That also brings up the point that of course our whole enterprise is so awesomely secure that we can stake our future on the people that desperately need second chances (more like 5th or 6th chances if truth be known)

Aye. Hopefully the guy is thanking his lucky stars.

Plenty of people don't get caught. So it could be 15th or 16th chances. We'll never know.


You're not listening again. There's no way someone gets to adulthood capable of stealing a phone without a history of similar events throughout childhood and adolescence. There's no way they do that without being caught several times. He's had his second, third and subsequent chances years ago.

And you don't have to destroy the guy, simply make it unattractive enough for him that he won't indulge in similar behaviour again.

Oh I'm listening fine... but you're missing the bit where he didn't steal it. He found it and kept it. Dishonest at best, but that doesn't mean that that is his entire persona.

[Virago]

... but you're missing the bit where he didn't steal it. He found it and kept it...

:facepalm:

See post 41...

[mashman]

I was wondering how long it would take for the "he found it" line to be trotted out.

After he "found it" he was asked by the victim if a phone had been handed in, and he denied it. At that point, it was no longer the great kiwi "score", and became theft - by someone trusted (and employed) to protect the victim.

Glad I'm here to state the obvious.

Yes, he lied. It wasn't theft, it was dishonesty at best. And it was dealt with. Same as any other fucked up situation where a person is caught. Hope he doesn't do it again.

[Smifffy]

The day may come when YOUR house gets turned over by thieving deadbeats while you are at work earning the taxes that pay their dole as they rob you, maybe your dog dies cause they give it a cooked whole chicken to eat as a distaction,

Maybe your wife/daughter/sister gets beaten, raped.

Maybe something less, like your fence gets tagged to fuck while you sleep in your bed

Any of those things happens to you.....you and your high and mighty pc better than me position might get a rethink. Unlike you, I am strong enough to stand up in the face of wrongdoers and don't lower myself to be the politicaly correct handwringing wet weak sop that you occupy as a positition to exuse your willingness to accept injustice without a fight.

I believe in right not wrong, I believe in justice, not turning the cheek, I will stand, irrespective of the odds, in defence of what I believe in, weak people like you are part of the cause of the epidemic crime swamping society like a cancer unchecked.

My fence has been tagged more times than I care to count. It upsets me whole lot less than this restorative justice bullshit.

[mashman]

:facepalm:

See post 41...

See post #46 :bleh:.

[Virago]

Glad I'm here to state the obvious.

Yes, he lied. It wasn't theft, it was dishonesty at best. And it was dealt with. Same as any other fucked up situation where a person is caught. Hope he doesn't do it again.

I hope you don't park your bike on the street, mate - someone might "find" it.

[Smifffy]

I guess the point is that the person who had the phone has said that they don't believe the excuses the perp gave and they don't accept his apology either. So how is that in any way restorative? Surely the onus is now on the perp to somehow show and prove that he is genuinely sorry and will change his ways, even in the face of temptation.

So it wasn't 'dealt with'

[mashman]

I hope you don't park your bike on the street, mate - someone might "find" it.

You think I haven't had stuff stolen before? There's fuck all you can do about it short of reporting it and hoping that the person gets caught. It's stuff. Sure I get pissed when it happens, but it happens, freaking the fuck out doesn't change a damned thing.

[mashman]

I guess the point is that the person who had the phone has said that they don't believe the excuses the perp gave and they don't accept his apology either. So how is that in any way restorative? Surely the onus is now on the perp to somehow show and prove that he is genuinely sorry and will change his ways, even in the face of temptation.

So it wasn't 'dealt with'

Ohhhhhhh to troll, but no, I shall resist, as I am the bigger man. The guy got shitty. He probably got his phone back. Did the victim take part in the restorative justice process, or spit the dummy and call for his head from minute one?

[Smifffy]

You think I haven't had stuff stolen before? There's fuck all you can do about it short of reporting it and hoping that the person gets caught. It's stuff. Sure I get pissed when it happens, but it happens, freaking the fuck out doesn't change a damned thing.

Why would you hope they get caught if all they do is say "sorry"?

They could leave a note at the time: "Sorry I nicked your Ipad, please don't think bad of me. I promise I won't nick any more."

Then they wouldn't need to be caught. Job done. Justice restored.

[Virago]

You think I haven't had stuff stolen before?

No, not stolen. "Found".

[mashman]

Why would you hope they get caught if all they do is say "sorry"?

They could leave a note at the time: "Sorry I nicked your Ipad, please don't think bad of me. I promise I won't nick any more."

Then they wouldn't need to be caught. Job done.

If they're a repeat offender, then by all means escalate the punishment.

[mashman]

No, not stolen. "Found".

True, it should have been "stolen".

[Ocean1]

My fence has been tagged more times than I care to count. It upsets me whole lot less than this restorative justice bullshit.

This isn't restoritive justice, it's an employer trying to avoid bad publicity, paperwork and possibly litigation. You'd know if it was restoritive justice because the victim's total losses would have been restored at the cost of the perpetrator. If criminals are caught often enough that's penalty enough to prevent them reoffending.

[jim.cox]

If criminals are caught often enough that's penalty enough to prevent them reoffending.

Chop their heads off - they wont reoffend then

[mashman]

This isn't restoritive justice, it's an employer trying to avoid bad publicity, paperwork and possibly litigation. You'd know if it was restoritive justice because the victim's total losses would have been restored at the cost of the perpetrator. If criminals are caught often enough that's penalty enough to prevent them reoffending.

Was the phone returned or did the "perp" offer to return the phone? I haven't seen that in any of the scribblings.

[Smifffy]

If they're a repeat offender, then by all means escalate the punishment.

How would you ever know if they are a repeat offender? They could leave apology notes everywhere. Get a bulk discount at the local office supply place, or nick a business copier...

What if the first offence is a car, the second a laptop but the third 'only a cell phone'?

Fuck it - give him his second chance - we all know that post grad students will never amount to anything anyway, have more money than they know what to do with and don't have any need for technology. They're lazy fuckers too, never doing any work or going out of their way to take advantage of life's opportunities. Probably never go on to contribute anything to society like our friend the caretaker. After all universities don't exist to advance the cause of students, they are there to provide social justice for the dishonest.

[tigertim20]

:crybaby:

And he thought he had gotten away with it. He hadn't. Somewhere along the lines someone has believed him and given him a second chance. T'would seem that some fuckers just don't believe in second chances. And over a phone of all things.
ummm, This:

And I wonder if he had ever done stuff/taken stuff and NOT been caught...<_<


Glad I'm here to state the obvious.

Yes, he lied. It wasn't theft, it was dishonesty at best. And it was dealt with. Same as any other fucked up situation where a person is caught. Hope he doesn't do it again.

Fuck me, how the hell can you argue in favour of his actions with such certain and complete conviction? were you there to see it? are you a fucking psychic, capable of reading his mind and feeling his repentant feelings?

[mashman]

How would you ever know if they are a repeat offender? They could leave apology notes everywhere. Get a bulk discount at the local office supply place, or nick a business copier...

What if the first offence is a car, the second a laptop but the third 'only a cell phone'?

Fuck it - give him his second chance - we all know that post grad students will never amount to anything anyway, have more money than they know what to do with and don't have any need for technology. They're lazy fuckers too, never doing any work or going out of their way to take advantage of life's opportunities. Probably never go on to contribute anything to society like our friend the caretaker. After all universities don't exist to advance the cause of students, they are there to provide social justice for the dishonest.

I'll take the first obvious answer on the right please... a repeat offender is indeed a person who has been caught more than once. Didn't some guy in the Us do that. He broke into someone's private residence and stole some goodies and 17 years later returned some of it with a letter of apology? But you should find a second hand copier and go into business with the underground caretakers association of misappropriation.

Ooooooo now that's a really tricky one... did the "perp" keep and use the car, the laptop and the cell phone?

Don't knock the system man. Accountants are really important.

[mashman]

ummm, This:

Fuck me, how the hell can you argue in favour of his actions with such certain and complete conviction? were you there to see it? are you a fucking psychic, capable of reading his mind and feeling his repentant feelings?

Is that what I've been doing? Glad you were there to put me right. Thanks for that :yawn:

Why are you all bullying me?

[Smifffy]

I'll take the first obvious answer on the right please... a repeat offender is indeed a person who has been caught more than once. Didn't some guy in the Us do that. He broke into someone's private residence and stole some goodies and 17 years later returned some of it with a letter of apology? But you should find a second hand copier and go into business with the underground caretakers association of misappropriation.

Ooooooo now that's a really tricky one... did the "perp" keep and use the car, the laptop and the cell phone?

Don't knock the system man. Accountants are really important.

What do you mean "caught"? It was all a misunderstanding. It was only found, not stolen. There was an apology and all was forgiven and is now well with the world. what do you mean "repeat offender"? What are you trying to accuse them of?

[mashman]

What do you mean "caught"? It was all a misunderstanding. It was only found, not stolen. There was an apology and all was forgiven and is now well with the world. what do you mean "repeat offender"? What are you trying to accuse them of?

He got caught and deception is a crime. I'm so weak. I wish I was so much stronger, just like you.

[Smifffy]

He got caught and deception is a crime. I'm so weak. I wish I was so much stronger, just like you.


I forgive you. I'm sure you will be stronger next time.

Fuck this is easy.

[mashman]

I forgive you. I'm sure you will be stronger next time.

Fuck this is easy.

Really? You promise?

What is?

[Smifffy]

Really? You promise?

What is?

yeah. accepting a bullshit excuse and waiting to be shown how insincere it was at a later date.

I wonder how much success I'll have at proving a repeat offence?

[mashman]

yeah. accepting a bullshit excuse and waiting to be shown how insincere it was at a later date.

I wonder how much success I'll have at proving a repeat offence?

Is that what I did? Fuckin good job you guys are around here to keep me in the learn.

I'm going to assume that if a person has committed an offense once, that the next time they commit one will be seen as a repeat.

[Virago]

...Why are you all bullying me?

Why are you taking offence?



Oops, sorry - you didn't take offence, you just found it, eh...? :msn-wink:

[Akzle]

I wonder what part of the process was "restorative"?

it's definitely restored my belief that your society is fucked and getting fuckeder.

have fun with that...

[mashman]

Why are you taking offence?

Oops, sorry - you didn't take offence, you just found it, eh...? :msn-wink:

I did. I found it in your hurtful and belittling words :bleh:

[Berries]

Burn him.

Not mashman. The thief, or treasure hunter depending on your point of view. Actually it would be a bit like Time Team but instead of digging a hole in a field and finding lost valuables they would knock out a rear window, climb in and rifle a few drawers and then find a wallet. And a cell phone. They would have to rename the show Police Ten 7 or some such shit.

[328FTW]

I've never accepted the PC push for calm resolution using fuzzy feel good words. The way the justice system has dealt with wrong doings against me is rather disgusting, or in fact how modern society handles many touchy issues like this. I did Jury Duty once and it was a JOKE. Bunch of useless pricks all dressed up like that makes any difference to what they did. When all my racecar spares and car was vandalized by 2 guys escaped from a detention centre I was devastated. They were 2 underage kids, so the police basically dropped them back and when they went to court got told to say sorry then got diversion. Should of pulled out the .22 the minute things were discovered and taken them out at the kneecaps, the 12 gauge would be ready for if they still felt like proceeding. There is no justice like your own; I've discovered that many a time after things fail to be resolved at all by feel good letters or accepting forgiveness as my savoir.

Thankfully half the time I don't give a shit and do my own thing to resolve such problems. Haven't shot anyone over it........yet:bleh:

[Maha]

Bring back the cane...or give me a taser! PC BS

I was as proud of my cane stripes as I am with now my chicken strips.:cool:
Show em off! shoulders back/head held high.

[schrodingers cat]

I did. I found it in your hurtful and belittling words :bleh:

Bro, fuck off and find something constructive to do. Like pulling the wings off flys or whatever.

Boring troll is boring

[Usarka]

I reckon any fucker commiting a crime has shown they are capable. Who knows how many other crimes they've committed already, or how many more they are going to commit.

Hang the fuckers at the first sign of any offence.

[Oakie]

Damn. I wish I'd checked this thread out earlier.
It's dangerous taking the complainant's blog as the be all and end all of the facts of the case.
anyhoo...
from Wiki: Restorative justice is an approach to justice that focuses on the needs of the victims and the offenders, as well as the involved community, instead of satisfying abstract legal principles or punishing the offender. Victims take an active role in the process, while offenders are encouraged to take responsibility for their actions, "to repair the harm they've done—by apologizing, returning stolen money, or community service". Restorative justice involves both victim and offender and focuses on their personal needs. In addition, it provides help for the offender in order to avoid future offences.

Question: Can it be called 'Restorative Justice' if the victim refuses to participate?

Observations:
> Perhaps if the blogger had agreed to be involved in the process instead of refusing he may have received more satisfaction. He did not give himself the opportunity to say "well this has cost me $500 so that's what I'd like in addition to his apology and his left testicle in a jar"
> The guy found the phone in a toilet block, presumably dropped on the floor or left elsewhere. No way was it right for him to keep it but I don't know if its 'theft' in the way that the victim inferred it. It may possibly be it was this subtle diofference that saved the guy's job. (And no, don't compare it to someone 'finding a bike in a carpark' and taking it.)
> Possibly the uni being a bunch of tree-hugging, jandal-wearing, youghurt slurping left-wing hippies at heart do 'restorative justice' as a first step in anything and just couldn't get past that on this occasion. I also think that the bloggers attitude (and general demeanour) may have pissed them off sufficiently for them to say "well phuck ewe". In any case, it would be really interesting to see their policy on how restorative justice is administered.

If it had happened in my workplace my first instinct was that 'yeah, lets sack his arse' but then I remember the advice my boss gave me "Always make sure you have all the facts before proceding". In my workplace I'd probably still sack his arse as my guys work in small teams. Perhaps at the Uni with minimal chance of the victim and offender running into each other that made a small difference?

The cleaner is a ladies front-bum for keeping the phone and the victim is a twat for ultimately making the damage to himself a lot worse than the loss of a phone (which presumably he'd already replaced under insurance).

OK guys ... have at me ... but remember, I'm really only playing Devil's Advocate ... just posing questions to consider.

[Virago]

...The guy found the phone in a toilet block, presumably dropped on the floor or left elsewhere. No way was it right for him to keep it but I don't know if its 'theft' in the way that the victim inferred it. It may possibly be it was this subtle diofference that saved the guy's job. (And no, don't compare it to someone 'finding a bike in a carpark' and taking it.)...

This, sadly, is a regretably common attitude, where picking up a dropped item becomes a "score". Why is it different to "finding" a motorcycle in a carpark? It is not your property, what gives you the right to take it and keep it, and claim that it's not theft?

The key issue here (as mentioned above) is that the victim approached the caretaker, and asked if a phone had been found - the caretaker said no, despite having it. At that point, it was theft - pure and simple. Theft by someone actually employed to protect the victim, and carried out during the course of his duties.

[PrincessBandit]

The key issue here (as mentioned above) is that the victim approached the caretaker, and asked if a phone had been found - the caretaker said no, despite having it. At that point, it was theft - pure and simple. Theft by someone actually employed to protect the victim, and carried out during the course of his duties.

An open and shut case my dear Watson

[SMOKEU]

As much as I hate to say it, we can learn from the Arabs with their Sharia law for this sort of thing.

[cskadizzy]

Sup guys. I just checked the blog stats this weekend and found this thread. That's an interesting discussion. Some of you raise some good points. I'd hope they could be answered by reading the emails from the staff at Vic in the blog - they were pretty keen to not do anything beyond the initial offer of restorative justice - but it's a lot of information, and if you read it piecemeal then bits might get left out.

I should address them, right? Even if I do little else. This is really stressful. I disengage from it a lot. I'd rather be talking to the media about my research. :)

First, that it may have been a little precious to withdraw from the PhD. I agree completely that it could seem this way. And in fact I was quite concerned that the impression would be that I was throwing my toys out of the pram, cutting my nose off to spite my face, etc. Considering I know what the academic community in NZ is like, that was first in my mind: that making a fuss and moving somewhere else would screw my career entirely. So this wasn't taken rashly, or lightly. Much discussion went into it. In fact, the decision was taken after discussion with my partner and my PhD supervisor. It was the third time in a month it had been under consideration, but the response from senior faculty sealed it.

I really felt like I had no choice: I've taken and left a lot of things in my life, but I've never been told to lump it or leave it in this way. So the ultimate end of this is that a caretaker has the full support of the university, and I can go get fucked. I'm a principled person. I can't help it. I'm from Liverpool originally, and I'm from working stock. I'm weirdly proud of it. At some times, pride in your principles is all you've got to separate you from the scum out there. So I'm not going to stand by and carry on working at an institution that's treated me like shit.

If they can't get this right, then how are they going to get the bigger things right?

Doing a PhD is a really lonely experience. No one in my school does what I do. Not even my supervisor speaks the in the same terms as me. You're basically on your own with your work for three years. You get next to nothing to live on, but you have to put in well over 50 hours of work a week. You don't have classes. You teach, but you're not a lecturer. You're stuck between undergrads, honours and master's and the staff. So you don't belong anywhere, and the PhD cohort in my school was small. You need the support of the institution. If you don't have that then you may as well not be there.



Damn. I wish I'd checked this thread out earlier.
It's dangerous taking the complainant's blog as the be all and end all of the facts of the case.

I think you're right. But I feel I should say that aside from the fact that this is a very emotive issue for me, no one at the university has stepped forward to challenge any information on there or any information that's been in the media. They've had plenty of opportunity when the Herald have called them. But they refused to even comment at first. All I've done is repeat what I did, as I stated in my statement to police. I simply added photographs, which the police have. I included the full emails from the Associate Director of Campus Services and the Dean of the Faculty of Graduate Research. It's the only place I've had my full say, really, apart from the victim impact statement for the court.

The university are also treating this as an employment issue. They're trivialising the fact that a crime was committed by a member of their staff, on their premises, by doing this. It becomes an employment issue, they don't have to comment, and they can ignore the safety issues and the potential that other things have been taken.

By the way, here are some photos from the phone (http://aranakenny.blogspot.co.nz/2013/01/more-photos-from-stolen-phone.html). You'll see that he's been taking pictures of a brand new cellphone in a box, and pictures of two pairs of basketball shoes, in their boxes. They look like TradeMe pics.


Question: Can it be called 'Restorative Justice' if the victim refuses to participate?

Observations:
> Perhaps if the blogger had agreed to be involved in the process instead of refusing he may have received more satisfaction. He did not give himself the opportunity to say "well this has cost me $500 so that's what I'd like in addition to his apology and his left testicle in a jar"

I pointed out to the university that an apology and a SIM card didn't even begin to cover the losses - I was insured, but the excess was $250. That's half my weekly scholarship money. He deleted all my photos and videos, and all the attachments I had from emails. I also pointed out that restorative justice wasn't their job. If he wanted restorative justice, that's actually a matter for the courts. He has made no such offer through his lawyer or the courts. I could consider it then - it might actually be forced to be proportionate to the damage. Nevertheless, after I refused the offer they made, they didn't listen to the points I'd made: they just told me they were "disappointed" that I didn't want to do it, they were happy with their processes and "All the best for your future." In other words, piss off, it's nothing to do with you. Take it or leave it.

I've spoken to the police, I've spoken to victim support and I've spoken with my partner, a lawyer, and some of her lawyer friends about this: they've all said that restorative justice is victim led. It's never to be taken as a sign of being uncooperative on the part of the victim if he doesn't want to participate.

But I was prepared to cooperate. I didn't demand anything from them. I wouldn't have minded if they'd carried on employing him in a different job - gardening or something, I don't know. But you can't have someone who's taken something and lied about it with keys to the buildings and reasons to be unsupervised around campus. The offer they made was weak, and didn't even compensate me for 10% of my losses, and didn't offer any guarantees of security.

I told them my actual losses (http://aranakenny.blogspot.co.nz/2013/02/response-from-rainsforth-dix-associate.html). I told them I didn't think the offer was appropriate. I'm not sure if an actual restorative justice session was the best place to negotiate what I thought was proper utu. That would be prior to that point - the point where they didn't listen to how the offer had made me feel or my actual economic losses, but just told me they were disappointed in me and that he should be praised for wanting to take part. They'd already set compensation: a $20 SIM card.


> The guy found the phone in a toilet block, presumably dropped on the floor or left elsewhere. No way was it right for him to keep it but I don't know if its 'theft' in the way that the victim inferred it. It may possibly be it was this subtle diofference that saved the guy's job. (And no, don't compare it to someone 'finding a bike in a carpark' and taking it.)

It was left on top of a toilet roll holder while I took a piss, not on the window ledge as the Herald said. At that time of the morning, there were two people in the building: me and the AV tech. Arana Kenny unlocked that building as regular as clockwork. I would have been in the building really early - on that day, at just after 6am because I dropped my partner at the gym. We saw each other regularly. Mine would have been the only light on in the offices upstairs.

I didn't ask that he be charged with theft. I took the information to the police, and they said that it was theft and they'd find him and charge him. The police are prosecuting, not me. I've had the full support of the police throughout: no one who's had the full appraisal has questioned why I left the PhD. There are factors that aggravate the crime. Yes, it was found. Yes, I was an idiot for leaving it in the bathroom. Yes, I'd done it twice before but retrieved it each time.

But Mr Kenny turned the phone off when he found it; removed and threw away the SIM card; lied to my face about having found it; deleted all my personal photos, videos, music and other files; went out and bought a cable to charge it and connect it to the PC; took it with him around campus; took it on holiday to Fiji; put his own music on there.

And the police have told me that he also tried to tell them he'd found it outside. When they challenged him with my statement, he admitted he found it in the bathroom. He also said that he didn't remember talking to me that morning - but I remember him, and Campus Care sent out the person who unlocked the building to speak to me. Which was Arana Kenny.


> Possibly the uni being a bunch of tree-hugging, jandal-wearing, youghurt slurping left-wing hippies at heart do 'restorative justice' as a first step in anything and just couldn't get past that on this occasion. I also think that the bloggers attitude (and general demeanour) may have pissed them off sufficiently for them to say "well phuck ewe". In any case, it would be really interesting to see their policy on how restorative justice is administered.

That would be fine. I'm a belligerent bastard, I'll be the first to admit it. I'm a belligerent pain in the arse on the blog, and I sound like it - but, and I want to stress this, I didn't say anything to put them off or give them attitude in either the first or the second emails. Disagreeing with something doesn't mean that you have a bad attitude or you're uncooperative. If disagreeing with someone means that in the eyes of the university that you have a bad attitude, then how does anything get sorted out?

They conducted an investigation into the theft they said adhered to principles of natural justice - but they didn't talk to me about what happened at any point, and the police wouldn't have given them any information. Natural justice means that people get a fair hearing and the proceedings are conducted without bias: but if you only talk to the offender, then that's not natural justice.


If it had happened in my workplace my first instinct was that 'yeah, lets sack his arse' but then I remember the advice my boss gave me "Always make sure you have all the facts before proceding". In my workplace I'd probably still sack his arse as my guys work in small teams. Perhaps at the Uni with minimal chance of the victim and offender running into each other that made a small difference?

We're around the same buildings. We see each other all the time. Originally my faculty said, okay, he'll be banned from your offices. But I work all over the university - I use the library, the student union building, I used to teach in the main buildings too. It's not practical. Aside from that, there's no guarantee that given their responses, they'll actually ban him from the buildings.

I have a short temper, too. I'm livid at being treated like this. I won't say what I've felt like doing, but it'd probably get me deported if I lost my carefully cultivated self control.


The cleaner is a ladies front-bum for keeping the phone and the victim is a twat for ultimately making the damage to himself a lot worse than the loss of a phone (which presumably he'd already replaced under insurance).

He's not a cleaner. He's a caretaker who's tasked with building security. He has keys to everywhere. I like the cleaners there. I trust them. I talk to them. They regularly come into our offices and our stuff is safe.

I can understand how you might think that I did this to myself: but again, I'm not going to lump it or leave it. I've had little choice in this, and little say with the university. Why, if I feel marginalised, excluded and effectively punished for catching a member of staff on the rob, should I want to stay at the university? I have no support here. They're banking on me just either staying and putting up with their shit, or leaving and not causing trouble. But they have a duty of care to me and other people. They're failing in that.

What kind of message does this send to other staff? Who else has been caught stealing, and got to keep their job? How many other students have been through the same thing and quietly disappeared or put up with it?

Finally, the cheeky bastard has now applied for a discharge without conviction: he's got away with his job, and now he's trying to get away without a conviction. There will, frankly, be NO consequences for him if he succeeds. I had to change my victim impact statement to reflect how disappointed I am in the fact that he's offered nothing to me of value, hasn't recognised what he's done and now is trying to walk away with his job and his record intact. I'll have borne all the consequences of his actions.

This guy has lied at least twice: to me, and police. His apology, which was forced on me after I said no, is weak, and it's all about him. He actually put a SIM card in the envelope - completely useless to me. And he's got away with his job, and now he's trying to get away with it in court.

I think it's rationally understandable that I'm annoyed. I'm a hothead, but I'm also a reasonable person. But what's happened here, and what he asked for in court isn't reasonable.

[flyingcrocodile46]

This makes for some interesting reading:

http://aranakenny.blogspot.co.nz/

It's worthwhile clicking through some of the links to get all the details, but in a nutshell:

A Victoria University employee, doing caretaking and security work, steals a student's cellphone while working. Seven months later, the victim tracks the phone down using smart-phone technology, and hands the evidence to the police. The culprit is arrested and charged, and he admits the theft.

The crucial thing is how the university have handled it. They've decided that a simple "restorative justice" process is in order, with a letter of apology to be written, and a replacement sim-card provided. The victim rejects this approach, but it was thrust upon him anyway. The letter of apology was basically a self-absorbed "poor me, I got caught".

While I think the victim is being a little precious in withdrawing from the university, he raises some valid issues about the university's approach to the issue. The culprit keeps his job (in a position of trust) on the basis of a pseudo-apology.

I wonder what part of the process was "restorative"?

Fucking soft cock PC bullshit. End of

[flyingcrocodile46]

Sup guys. I just checked the blog stats this weekend and found this thread. That's an interesting discussion. Some of you raise some good points. I'd hope they could be answered by reading the emails from the staff at Vic in the blog - they were pretty keen to not do anything beyond the initial offer of restorative justice - but it's a lot of information, and if you read it piecemeal then bits might get left out.

I should address them, right? Even if I do little else. This is really stressful. I disengage from it a lot. I'd rather be talking to the media about my research. :)

First, that it may have been a little precious to withdraw from the PhD. I agree completely that it could seem this way. And in fact I was quite concerned that the impression would be that I was throwing my toys out of the pram, cutting my nose off to spite my face, etc. Considering I know what the academic community in NZ is like, that was first in my mind: that making a fuss and moving somewhere else would screw my career entirely. So this wasn't taken rashly, or lightly. Much discussion went into it. In fact, the decision was taken after discussion with my partner and my PhD supervisor. It was the third time in a month it had been under consideration, but the response from senior faculty sealed it.

I really felt like I had no choice: I've taken and left a lot of things in my life, but I've never been told to lump it or leave it in this way. So the ultimate end of this is that a caretaker has the full support of the university, and I can go get fucked. I'm a principled person. I can't help it. I'm from Liverpool originally, and I'm from working stock. I'm weirdly proud of it. At some times, pride in your principles is all you've got to separate you from the scum out there. So I'm not going to stand by and carry on working at an institution that's treated me like shit.

If they can't get this right, then how are they going to get the bigger things right?

Doing a PhD is a really lonely experience. No one in my school does what I do. Not even my supervisor speaks the in the same terms as me. You're basically on your own with your work for three years. You get next to nothing to live on, but you have to put in well over 50 hours of work a week. You don't have classes. You teach, but you're not a lecturer. You're stuck between undergrads, honours and master's and the staff. So you don't belong anywhere, and the PhD cohort in my school was small. You need the support of the institution. If you don't have that then you may as well not be there.




I think you're right. But I feel I should say that aside from the fact that this is a very emotive issue for me, no one at the university has stepped forward to challenge any information on there or any information that's been in the media. They've had plenty of opportunity when the Herald have called them. But they refused to even comment at first. All I've done is repeat what I did, as I stated in my statement to police. I simply added photographs, which the police have. I included the full emails from the Associate Director of Campus Services and the Dean of the Faculty of Graduate Research. It's the only place I've had my full say, really, apart from the victim impact statement for the court.

The university are also treating this as an employment issue. They're trivialising the fact that a crime was committed by a member of their staff, on their premises, by doing this. It becomes an employment issue, they don't have to comment, and they can ignore the safety issues and the potential that other things have been taken.

By the way, here are some photos from the phone (http://aranakenny.blogspot.co.nz/2013/01/more-photos-from-stolen-phone.html). You'll see that he's been taking pictures of a brand new cellphone in a box, and pictures of two pairs of basketball shoes, in their boxes. They look like TradeMe pics.



I pointed out to the university that an apology and a SIM card didn't even begin to cover the losses - I was insured, but the excess was $250. That's half my weekly scholarship money. He deleted all my photos and videos, and all the attachments I had from emails. I also pointed out that restorative justice wasn't their job. If he wanted restorative justice, that's actually a matter for the courts. He has made no such offer through his lawyer or the courts. I could consider it then - it might actually be forced to be proportionate to the damage. Nevertheless, after I refused the offer they made, they didn't listen to the points I'd made: they just told me they were "disappointed" that I didn't want to do it, they were happy with their processes and "All the best for your future." In other words, piss off, it's nothing to do with you. Take it or leave it.

I've spoken to the police, I've spoken to victim support and I've spoken with my partner, a lawyer, and some of her lawyer friends about this: they've all said that restorative justice is victim led. It's never to be taken as a sign of being uncooperative on the part of the victim if he doesn't want to participate.

But I was prepared to cooperate. I didn't demand anything from them. I wouldn't have minded if they'd carried on employing him in a different job - gardening or something, I don't know. But you can't have someone who's taken something and lied about it with keys to the buildings and reasons to be unsupervised around campus. The offer they made was weak, and didn't even compensate me for 10% of my losses, and didn't offer any guarantees of security.

I told them my actual losses (http://aranakenny.blogspot.co.nz/2013/02/response-from-rainsforth-dix-associate.html). I told them I didn't think the offer was appropriate. I'm not sure if an actual restorative justice session was the best place to negotiate what I thought was proper utu. That would be prior to that point - the point where they didn't listen to how the offer had made me feel or my actual economic losses, but just told me they were disappointed in me and that he should be praised for wanting to take part. They'd already set compensation: a $20 SIM card.



It was left on top of a toilet roll holder while I took a piss, not on the window ledge as the Herald said. At that time of the morning, there were two people in the building: me and the AV tech. Arana Kenny unlocked that building as regular as clockwork. I would have been in the building really early - on that day, at just after 6am because I dropped my partner at the gym. We saw each other regularly. Mine would have been the only light on in the offices upstairs.

I didn't ask that he be charged with theft. I took the information to the police, and they said that it was theft and they'd find him and charge him. The police are prosecuting, not me. I've had the full support of the police throughout: no one who's had the full appraisal has questioned why I left the PhD. There are factors that aggravate the crime. Yes, it was found. Yes, I was an idiot for leaving it in the bathroom. Yes, I'd done it twice before but retrieved it each time.

But Mr Kenny turned the phone off when he found it; removed and threw away the SIM card; lied to my face about having found it; deleted all my personal photos, videos, music and other files; went out and bought a cable to charge it and connect it to the PC; took it with him around campus; took it on holiday to Fiji; put his own music on there.

And the police have told me that he also tried to tell them he'd found it outside. When they challenged him with my statement, he admitted he found it in the bathroom. He also said that he didn't remember talking to me that morning - but I remember him, and Campus Care sent out the person who unlocked the building to speak to me. Which was Arana Kenny.



That would be fine. I'm a belligerent bastard, I'll be the first to admit it. I'm a belligerent pain in the arse on the blog, and I sound like it - but, and I want to stress this, I didn't say anything to put them off or give them attitude in either the first or the second emails. Disagreeing with something doesn't mean that you have a bad attitude or you're uncooperative. If disagreeing with someone means that in the eyes of the university that you have a bad attitude, then how does anything get sorted out?

They conducted an investigation into the theft they said adhered to principles of natural justice - but they didn't talk to me about what happened at any point, and the police wouldn't have given them any information. Natural justice means that people get a fair hearing and the proceedings are conducted without bias: but if you only talk to the offender, then that's not natural justice.



We're around the same buildings. We see each other all the time. Originally my faculty said, okay, he'll be banned from your offices. But I work all over the university - I use the library, the student union building, I used to teach in the main buildings too. It's not practical. Aside from that, there's no guarantee that given their responses, they'll actually ban him from the buildings.

I have a short temper, too. I'm livid at being treated like this. I won't say what I've felt like doing, but it'd probably get me deported if I lost my carefully cultivated self control.



He's not a cleaner. He's a caretaker who's tasked with building security. He has keys to everywhere. I like the cleaners there. I trust them. I talk to them. They regularly come into our offices and our stuff is safe.

I can understand how you might think that I did this to myself: but again, I'm not going to lump it or leave it. I've had little choice in this, and little say with the university. Why, if I feel marginalised, excluded and effectively punished for catching a member of staff on the rob, should I want to stay at the university? I have no support here. They're banking on me just either staying and putting up with their shit, or leaving and not causing trouble. But they have a duty of care to me and other people. They're failing in that.

What kind of message does this send to other staff? Who else has been caught stealing, and got to keep their job? How many other students have been through the same thing and quietly disappeared or put up with it?

Finally, the cheeky bastard has now applied for a discharge without conviction: he's got away with his job, and now he's trying to get away without a conviction. There will, frankly, be NO consequences for him if he succeeds. I had to change my victim impact statement to reflect how disappointed I am in the fact that he's offered nothing to me of value, hasn't recognised what he's done and now is trying to walk away with his job and his record intact. I'll have borne all the consequences of his actions.

This guy has lied at least twice: to me, and police. His apology, which was forced on me after I said no, is weak, and it's all about him. He actually put a SIM card in the envelope - completely useless to me. And he's got away with his job, and now he's trying to get away with it in court.

I think it's rationally understandable that I'm annoyed. I'm a hothead, but I'm also a reasonable person. But what's happened here, and what he asked for in court isn't reasonable.

Being a principled bridge burner myself, I understand and respect where you are coming from. Scar the fuckers for all of our and their benefit.

[mashman]

:mad:

I dunno... you can take the boy out of Liverpool etc... and there's an irony in there somewhere. Applying for discharge without conviction shouldn't be an option, I agree. As for the rest, good luck to you and remember YNWA.

[imdying]

What a fucking moaner. He should have simply cut Dix and that niggers hands off, dumped him a few km off the desert road, and then flown back to England that night. Anything short of that is just wasting his time.

[gammaguy]

I no longer have faith or belief in the system, the time has come that we deal with the crims and deadbeats ourselves, the police can't be arsed dealing with crime below rape and murder, the courts don't actually punish the crims, mainly because the judges are/have never been, on the receiving end of criminal behaviour and have no concept of it, sentencing is allways based on predetermined guidlines based on modern "pc" thinking. Last thief that stuck his fingers in my toolbox and got caught by me, won't do it again. A result for society in general.

Stamp on the small crimes and bad behaviours:bash:, you give your self a chance of an ordered society with a lesser rate of bigger crime....

Human nature works something like this........

Hmmm'stole that phone got away with it...........hmmm stole that car got away with it........hmmm embezzled that money got away with it..........hmmm what's next?

If they stopped it when it started and not waited for escalation things would be better

Of course that's not the kiwi way we have to give everyone a chance bla bla

[gammaguy]

I was as proud of my cane stripes as I am with now my chicken strips.:cool:
Show em off! shoulders back/head held high.

So you've been to Singapore?

[300weatherby]

So you've been to Singapore?

I'll bet he hasn't, getting the cane in a Hong Kong or Singapore cell block is something you would try very hard to forget!, I would rather do the time........

Wish we had it here and had a Judiciary with the balls to call it, you could stop the young wannabe tough crims in their tracks.

[Oakie]

Sup guys. I just checked the blog stats this weekend and found this thread. That's an interesting discussion. Some of you raise some good points. I'd hope they could be answered by reading the emails from the staff at Vic in the blog - they were pretty keen to not do anything beyond the initial offer of restorative justice - but it's a lot of information, and if you read it piecemeal then bits might get left out.

etc etc etc

Jeez man, that was a well considered and articulate response to my comments. You'll never fit in here at KiwiBiker. Next time try a bit of personal abuse, preferably with some 4 letter words, a reference to my mother's sexual habits and at least one reference to Hitler if you want to fit in.


That would be fine. I'm a belligerent bastard, I'll be the first to admit it. I'm a belligerent pain in the arse on the blog, It really came through that way too. In my job in HR you do sometimes get people who despite being in the right don't do themselves any favours by being belligerently self righteous. On the other hand, I know when a principal is involved the heart can overule the head.

All the best for the future anyway and I hope it all works out for you.

[Akzle]

Hmmm'stole that phone got away with it...........hmmm stole that car got away with it........hmmm embezzled that money got away with it..........hmmm what's next?

...politics.
scam everyone.

[98tls]

...politics.
scam everyone.


In this country:wacko:surely not.

[Edbear]

This, sadly, is a regretably common attitude, where picking up a dropped item becomes a "score". Why is it different to "finding" a motorcycle in a carpark? It is not your property, what gives you the right to take it and keep it, and claim that it's not theft?

The key issue here (as mentioned above) is that the victim approached the caretaker, and asked if a phone had been found - the caretaker said no, despite having it. At that point, it was theft - pure and simple. Theft by someone actually employed to protect the victim, and carried out during the course of his duties.

Yup!


Jeez man, that was a well considered and articulate response to my comments. You'll never fit in here at KiwiBiker. Next time try a bit of personal abuse, preferably with some 4 letter words, a reference to my mother's sexual habits and at least one reference to Hitler if you want to fit in.

It really came through that way too. In my job in HR you do sometimes get people who despite being in the right don't do themselves any favours by being belligerently self righteous. On the other hand, I know when a principal is involved the heart can overule the head.

All the best for the future anyway and I hope it all works out for you.

+1! :lol:

But, yeah, appreciate the clarifying post. Hope you get justice. Said he hopefully...

[cskadizzy]

It really came through that way too. In my job in HR you do sometimes get people who despite being in the right don't do themselves any favours by being belligerently self righteous. On the other hand, I know when a principal is involved the heart can overule the head.

All the best for the future anyway and I hope it all works out for you.

Bear in mind the blog was written on 3rd March. This was after all of this had gone down and my withdrawal had gone in. I actually ran the emails to Rainsforth Dix through my partner first to make sure I wasn't coming across as anything other than someone with an opinion and a vested interest. Reading them now, I don't think they sound belligerent; I'm more of the opinion that Dix's reaction was always going to be take it or leave it.

Looking at her history though, it doesn't take much for her to get a stick up her arse about things. She doesn't have a good history with students or people who complain to her. I think she was just a little insulted that I didn't jump at the chance of getting $20 from Arana.

We'll see what happens. I either have a career here, or I've fucked it. NZ gets one less caretaker, or one less PhD and one less lawyer (don't think anyone would be too sad about that though).

:2thumbsup Thanks for reading, everyone, anyway.

[Banditbandit]

I read this thread thinking that from the title it was going to be the one example of restorative justice that actually worked. Restorative justice is no justice at all. People need to know that they are aren't entitled to take whatever the fuck they want. Whether that be a phone or a vagina.

Restorative imo would be at least, replacement of the phone to the equivalent spec of the current model and payment of the charges relative to the plan the guy had for the next how ever many months. Fat Chance.

I'm not one to get into the whole debate about rehabilitation Vs retribution. The consequences should just be such that the offender respects others' rights in future.

Yes - I agree .. and what the uni did is not what I would call "restorative justice" at all. In any restorative process that ahs any chance of workign the victim has to agree .. and in this case they did not .. so the uni should have dropped the restorative justice approach instead of proceeding and producing this piece of bullshit .. that effectively lets the perp off with no consequences.

How was anything "restored" here???

[Banditbandit]

it's definitely restored my belief that your society is fucked and getting fuckeder.

have fun with that...

What's this "your society" crap??? Isn't it time you dropepd the bullshit outsider stance and either admit that you're part of our society or stop using our electricity to post your bullshit on our interdweb.

[Grubber]

I was in the process of employing a couple of new drivers a few weeks ago.
We had a guy come in with tons of promise and gave him a trial on the basis that his medical and drugs test all came back clean.
He didn't do his drug test on the day of appointment and said he was worried cause he had a joint a couple of weeks back.
So i asked him his level of use and he replied with "hardly ever just the odd weekend,".
So we decided to give him a second chance and allowed him a week to clear his system so as to get a clean test.
Once done we sent him back in for another test on a Monday and low and behold he decided he wanted different type of work all of a sudden.
So he moved onto another company driving trucks (thought he wanted to do different type of work, ODD!)
Got a phone call from the company asking of his back ground, of coarse after the discussion they decided to take him in for drug test, no getting out of this one as they were near enough to holding his hand.
You guessed it, he failed miserably and i believe he is struggling to gain employment anywhere. The transport industry network is spread far and wide.
so as far as giving 2nd chances, F***k that again!:brick:

[Banditbandit]

I was in the process of employing a couple of new drivers a few weeks ago.
We had a guy come in with tons of promise and gave him a trial on the basis that his medical and drugs test all came back clean.
He didn't do his drug test on the day of appointment and said he was worried cause he had a joint a couple of weeks back.
So i asked him his level of use and he replied with "hardly ever just the odd weekend,".
So we decided to give him a second chance and allowed him a week to clear his system so as to get a clean test.
Once done we sent him back in for another test on a Monday and low and behold he decided he wanted different type of work all of a sudden.
So he moved onto another company driving trucks (thought he wanted to do different type of work, ODD!)
Got a phone call from the company asking of his back ground, of coarse after the discussion they decided to take him in for drug test, no getting out of this one as they were near enough to holding his hand.
You guessed it, he failed miserably and i believe he is struggling to gain employment anywhere. The transport industry network is spread far and wide.
so as far as giving 2nd chances, F***k that again!:brick:

Not surprisingly ... but cannabis can be detected up to three months after the last use .. (that's a can be ... and not a will be ... depends on the person etc etc )

So the drug testing for work is actually quite hard on someone who smokes .. even occassionally and only at weekends ... if you want to pass the tests and continue to pass the tests the answer is don't smoke at all ...

[Akzle]

What's this "your society" crap??? Isn't it time you dropepd the bullshit outsider stance and either admit that you're part of our society or stop using our electricity to post your bullshit on our interdweb.

your electricity eh? is that the sunlight you're claiming, or the car batteries under my bunk?


either way, go fuck yourself. :motu:

[Akzle]

I was in the process of employing a couple of new drivers a few weeks ago.
We had a guy come in with tons of promise and gave him a trial on the basis that his medical and drugs test all came back clean.
He didn't do his drug test on the day of appointment and said he was worried cause he had a joint a couple of weeks back.
So i asked him his level of use and he replied with "hardly ever just the odd weekend,".
So we decided to give him a second chance and allowed him a week to clear his system so as to get a clean test.
Once done we sent him back in for another test on a Monday and low and behold he decided he wanted different type of work all of a sudden.
So he moved onto another company driving trucks (thought he wanted to do different type of work, ODD!)
Got a phone call from the company asking of his back ground, of coarse after the discussion they decided to take him in for drug test, no getting out of this one as they were near enough to holding his hand.
You guessed it, he failed miserably and i believe he is struggling to gain employment anywhere. The transport industry network is spread far and wide.
so as far as giving 2nd chances, F***k that again!:brick:


lets just de-rail this thread a bit. he had tons of promise, obviously interviewed well, could probably drive a truck like a motherfucker, references probably came back ok, he turns up for work on time, all the time...

so what do you care if he has a joint after dinner, rather than a beer?

or would you rather a crackhead, who could pass a drug test after a weekend off?

[Oakie]

lets just de-rail this thread a bit. he had tons of promise, obviously interviewed well, could probably drive a truck like a motherfucker, references probably came back ok, he turns up for work on time, all the time...

so what do you care if he has a joint after dinner, rather than a beer?

or would you rather a crackhead, who could pass a drug test after a weekend off?

No one biting huh?

[Akzle]

No one biting huh?

no i think it's a fairly fair question. all this drug test crap doesn't count for shit, really. as the people who you think should have the job, probably should.

the drop kicks, well, it's an easy and legal way to tell them to fuck off. (because "you're a dropkick" might hurt their precious little egos)

all up for reform.

[bogan]

no i think it's a fairly fair question. all this drug test crap doesn't count for shit, really. as the people who you think should have the job, probably should.

the drop kicks, well, it's an easy and legal way to tell them to fuck off. (because "you're a dropkick" might hurt their precious little egos)

all up for reform.

Pipe down in the cheap seats, I thought reform was up to us members of society? Some stoned hillbilly is one of the last cunts I'd want at the wheel of a 20T + truck on our roads.

[Grubber]

Not surprisingly ... but cannabis can be detected up to three months after the last use .. (that's a can be ... and not a will be ... depends on the person etc etc )

So the drug testing for work is actually quite hard on someone who smokes .. even occassionally and only at weekends ... if you want to pass the tests and continue to pass the tests the answer is don't smoke at all ...

That is close to correct, going what we have been told.
A part time user can be free of detection in 3 to 4 weeks and a full on user can stay infested for up the 6 months.
And you are right, easiest way is to just not use it!

[Akzle]

Pipe down in the cheap seats, I thought reform was up to us members of society? Some stoned hillbilly is one of the last cunts I'd want at the wheel of a 20T + truck on our roads.

i meant a re-form of the "society"

(notice the absence of words to the effect: "law reform" etc.)

who says the hillbilly is going to be stoned while driving. and/or how did you infer that from the scenario i presented?

[Grubber]

lets just de-rail this thread a bit. he had tons of promise, obviously interviewed well, could probably drive a truck like a motherfucker, references probably came back ok, he turns up for work on time, all the time...

so what do you care if he has a joint after dinner, rather than a beer?

or would you rather a crackhead, who could pass a drug test after a weekend off?

Not sure i should actually have to explain this but....
If he has an accident and they test for drugs etc (as they do everytime) we would immediately loose our insurance for a start...still not sure why i would have to explain this....2nd thing is if he has a habit of any kind it will definitely affect his ability behind the wheel and therefore become an added risk to road users.
You seriously couldn't figure that out for yourself. That just fuckin scares me that does!

[Grubber]

no i think it's a fairly fair question. all this drug test crap doesn't count for shit, really. as the people who you think should have the job, probably should.

the drop kicks, well, it's an easy and legal way to tell them to fuck off. (because "you're a dropkick" might hurt their precious little egos)

all up for reform.

If you plan on working for me and you want to smoke pot, then you are immediately a "dropkick" anyway. I don't care how good you think you are, you're actually not that professional anyway if you think you're going to smoke dope and drive one of my trucks.

[Grubber]

Pipe down in the cheap seats, I thought reform was up to us members of society? Some stoned hillbilly is one of the last cunts I'd want at the wheel of a 20T + truck on our roads.

Couldn't have said it better myself!

[Akzle]

If he has an accident and they test for drugs etc (as they do everytime) we would immediately loose our insurance

2nd thing is if he has a habit of any kind it will definitely affect his ability behind the wheel and therefore become an added risk to road users.
1) i get that, from a business perspective, but that's where the reform comes in.
but it's also a fairly big IF. you may be scared by how many people do miles while under the influence. (and manage not to a) crash and b) fuck anything up.)
2) no. no we disagree.
(i say you're wrong)

If you plan on working for me and you want to smoke pot, then you are immediately a "dropkick" anyway. I don't care how good you think you are, you're actually not that professional anyway if you think you're going to smoke dope and drive one of my trucks.
it's unfortunate that you hold that view. and probably baseless.
but hell, you're probably going to die before me, so i have more time to enjoy what's left of the planet. have fun with that.

[bogan]

i meant a re-form of the "society"

(notice the absence of words to the effect: "law reform" etc.)

who says the hillbilly is going to be stoned while driving. and/or how did you infer that from the scenario i presented?

I didn't specify what sort of reform either :confused:

The drugs that are still tested to be in his system after 4 weeks suggest maybe the hillbilly isn't going to be the best after a big night on the pot. Those trucks require a bit of concentration, they'd have more gears than our hypothetical hillbilly has teeth, probably more wheels than teeth too...

[BMWST?]

Maybe he is genuinely sorry for what he has done. He could have sold it. So I'm going to assume that he probably couldn't afford one and took his chances. Not a nice thing to do like... but it was only a phone.

ONLY a phone?..at what level does it become not ok.is it ok to pinch a free smartphone?How about a $1000 iphone?

[mashman]

ONLY a phone?..at what level does it become not ok.is it ok to pinch a free smartphone?How about a $1000 iphone?

I believe it's rapidly becoming the number 1 crime in the US... anyhoo, he didn't pinch it. He found it. Yes he lied when asked if he had found the phone and that was a stupid thing to do. They key bit there. The owner as if the liar had FOUND his phone. It was second hand, it likely wasn't worth $1000 :innocent:

[Road kill]

Restorative justice is a waste of effort "Natural justice" would having me being able to legally shoot the person that burgled me in the knee,,an the state paying for the bullet.
People would stop ripping others off pretty quick because after a while most burglers would have bad limp so wouldn't be so good at climbing my back fence an the crime rate would drop..win all round.

[mashman]

Restorative justice is a waste of effort "Natural justice" would having me being able to legally shoot the person that burgled me in the knee,,an the state paying for the bullet.
People would stop ripping others off pretty quick because after a while most burglers would have bad limp so wouldn't be so good at climbing my back fence an the crime rate would drop..win all round.

Or they'll resort to killing those who they burgle and keep their knees intact... sure they'll risk doing the time, but it's easier to fight off bubba and the honda riders with 2 good knees.

[Virago]

...anyhoo, he didn't pinch it. He found it. Yes he lied when asked if he had found the phone and that was a stupid thing to do. They key bit there...

Yeah, yeah, so you keep saying - he's only guilty of telling a little fib...

But - tell me - what's the difference between "finding" a cell phone in a toilet and, say, "finding" your bike in a car-park? At what point does it become theft? Please explain.

(Aside of course, from your already-confirmed notion that it's only stealing if it's your property).

[mashman]

Yeah, yeah, so you keep saying - he's only guilty of telling a little fib...

But - tell me - what's the difference between "finding" a cell phone in a toilet and, say, "finding" your bike in a car-park? At what point does it become theft? Please explain.

(Aside of course, from your already-confirmed notion that it's only stealing if it's your property).

I already answered that for ya when you asked the first time.

[Virago]

Yeah, yeah, so you keep saying - he's only guilty of telling a little fib...

But - tell me - what's the difference between "finding" a cell phone in a toilet and, say, "finding" your bike in a car-park? At what point does it become theft? Please explain.

(Aside of course, from your already-confirmed notion that it's only stealing if it's your property).


I already answered that for ya when you asked the first time.

No you didn't - this was your response:


You think I haven't had stuff stolen before? There's fuck all you can do about it short of reporting it and hoping that the person gets caught. It's stuff. Sure I get pissed when it happens, but it happens, freaking the fuck out doesn't change a damned thing.

I repeat - at what point is it stealing? It must cross the line somewhere - you claim to have had stuff "stolen".

[mashman]

No you didn't - this was your response:

I repeat - at what point is it stealing? It must cross the line somewhere - you claim to have had stuff "stolen".

Oh I see. My answer wasn't to your liking. That's a shame.

[Virago]

Oh I see. My answer wasn't to your liking. That's a shame.

No, that's cool. It's only theft if it's Mashman's property - we'll bear that in mind... :cool:

[tigertim20]

i meant a re-form of the "society"

(notice the absence of words to the effect: "law reform" etc.)

who says the hillbilly is going to be stoned while driving. and/or how did you infer that from the scenario i presented?

despite being unable to take anything you say seriously, I'll bite anyway.

Employers want to know what things might increase the risk to them and their business, by employing person A.
SO Person A gets asked multiple questions when applying for a job.
Things like any criminal convictions? - If you have a fraud conviction, you probably arent a good option for a bank teller or accountant, but not a big deal if you are applying for a job as a builders labourer

Or, questions like, Have you had any back injuries - fairly relevant if you are applying to be a truckie, furniture mover, or other physical job - not so much if you're applying for a reception job.

Throughout different jobs Ive applied for Ive been asked about my drinking habbits, whether i use drugs, back or other injuries among a myriad of other things.

If Employer A is looking to fill a position, they are entitled to gather whatever information they need to ascertain what risks, if any, a potential employee poses to the success, image or growth of their livelihood.

Personally, Im surprised that more employers dont ask if applicants are smokers, given that many smokers fuck off for an extra 5 minutes every hour to have a smoke while everyone else keeps working . . .

[mashman]

No, that's cool. It's only theft if it's Mashman's property - we'll bear that in mind... :cool:

Did I say it was theft? I agreed with you when you corrected me from stolen to found, hence "stolen". If someone finds my stuff and makes off with it, there's not a lot I can do about it. A phone wouldn't piss me off that much. A bike would. But there's still not a lot I can do about it.

[Smifffy]

I believe it's rapidly becoming the number 1 crime in the US... anyhoo, he didn't pinch it. He found it. Yes he lied when asked if he had found the phone and that was a stupid thing to do. They key bit there. The owner as if the liar had FOUND his phone. It was second hand, it likely wasn't worth $1000 :innocent:

You are right, it likely wasn't a $500 phone. The question is at what value does the line get crossed?

[mashman]

You are right, it likely wasn't a $500 phone. The question is at what value does the line get crossed?

In this case. When he lied. Value is unimportant.

[300weatherby]

Or they'll resort to killing those who they burgle and keep their knees intact... sure they'll risk doing the time, but it's easier to fight off bubba and the honda riders with 2 good knees.

It should be legal to wire internal doors to the mains and leave your windows open.
It should be legal to rig a claymore in the back of the garage and leave the door unlocked.
It should be legal to beat a home invader to death.

The legal system is not invested in protection of Joe kiwi.
The police are not invested in catching crims at Joe kiwi level.

The crims prosper at the pain and expense of Joe kiwi, would you rather do nothing but weep when it is your turn?

[300weatherby]

You're funny as all fuck, you should get a stand up comedy routine :lol:

You think I am funny........ You would change your mind if I caught you in my house........

[mashman]

It should be legal to wire internal doors to the mains and leave your windows open.
It should be legal to rig a claymore in the back of the garage and leave the door unlocked.
It should be legal to beat a home invader to death.

The legal system is not invested in protection of Joe kiwi.
The police are not invested in catching crims at Joe kiwi level.

The crims prosper at the pain and expense of Joe kiwi, would you rather do nothing but weep when it is your turn?

Apart from the beating someone to death I agree. Although I'll likely be more angry than weepy when it's my turn. You seem to be under the illusion that I'm some form of bleeding heart. Honestly, I'd happily see the return of the death penalty to deal with the recidivists. Although that's for crimes against a human being i.e. rape, murder, kiddy fiddling.

Crims ain't just at the bottom en of the scale. They do all sorts of damage near the top too. In fact more so as more people are "hurt" along the way where their dishonesty is concerned... yet the bleeding hearts let those fuckers off the hook, in fact they leave loopholes and allow for mitigating circumstances to excuse it.

[Akzle]

despite being unable to take anything you say seriously,
you're onto it...


If Employer A is looking to fill a position, they are entitled to gather whatever information they need to ascertain what risks, if any, a potential employee poses to the success, image or growth of their livelihood.

Personally, Im surprised that more employers dont ask if applicants are smokers, given that many smokers fuck off for an extra 5 minutes every hour to have a smoke while everyone else keeps working . . .
i [B]kinda get it.
BUT
ther'zz people who can function perfectly well, even under the influence.

let alone, if their use is "recreational"/ occasional, and they're not under the influence at work.

would you discriminate against someone who tested positive for amphetamine, if they had a prescription from a psychiatrist?

It should be legal to wire internal doors to the mains and leave your windows open.
It should be legal to rig a claymore in the back of the garage and leave the door unlocked.
It should be legal to beat a home invader to death.

The legal system is not invested in protection of Joe kiwi.
The police are not invested in catching crims at Joe kiwi level.

The crims prosper at the pain and expense of Joe kiwi, would you rather do nothing but weep when it is your turn?

it isn't?
bugger.
pitty da foo' breaks in here...

(there's not much to break. the door's normally open, but a bullet in the ass, they will catch.)
(fuck, that yoda shit's contagious)

[cskadizzy]

In this case. When he lied. Value is unimportant.


In this case, when he took it. Other lines he crossed: turning the phone off. Disposing of the SIM card. Deleting the photos and videos. Not handing it in to the security office, who'd been told a phone was missing. THEN lying about it.

He's a caretaker employed with building security. Finding things and keeping them isn't what you're supposed to do when you're employed doing building security.

And it was an $800 phone. Replacement value was $800. Matters not what condition it was in - it cost $800 to replace, plus the irreplaceable stuff he deleted.

[Grubber]

1) i get that, from a business perspective, but that's where the reform comes in.
but it's also a fairly big IF. you may be scared by how many people do miles while under the influence. (and manage not to a) crash and b) fuck anything up.)
2) no. no we disagree.
(i say you're wrong)

it's unfortunate that you hold that view. and probably baseless.
but hell, you're probably going to die before me, so i have more time to enjoy what's left of the planet. have fun with that.


Firstly, our industry has been chasing druggies for some time now and the amount has clawed it's way back to very few dropkicks like you would be driving trucks.
Recently there has been 3 major crashes and 3 deaths all involved with drugs, so I'm not surprised at all that they do fuck up in the end, but they won't be doing it on my watch.
Me, die before you! would have thought that was a fairly high presumption on your part.:wacko:
With your views on life i doubt that you got too much longer left to be honest.:eek5:
Oh and i'm glad that i hold this view, it keeps me from liking people like you!:motu:

[mashman]

In this case, when he took it. Other lines he crossed: turning the phone off. Disposing of the SIM card. Deleting the photos and videos. Not handing it in to the security office, who'd been told a phone was missing. THEN lying about it.

He's a caretaker employed with building security. Finding things and keeping them isn't what you're supposed to do when you're employed doing building security.

And it was an $800 phone. Replacement value was $800. Matters not what condition it was in - it cost $800 to replace, plus the irreplaceable stuff he deleted.

I get it. His mistake was not handing it in to the Security Office. For some reason his employer has decided to give him a second chance. I will assume that that is because they consider his actions to have been out of character. Yes he should have something against his record, perhaps LIAR, and I would assume that should there be another incident where he has "stolen" something, that he will lose his job. I understand the principle that you are communicating, but as mentioned, this seems to have been a one off. Shame you never got the resolution that YOU wanted.

[Smifffy]

I get it. His mistake was not handing it in to the Security Office. For some reason his employer has decided to give him a second chance. I will assume that that is because they consider his actions to have been out of character. Yes he should have something against his record, perhaps LIAR, and I would assume that should there be another incident where he has "stolen" something, that he will lose his job. I understand the principle that you are communicating, but as mentioned, this seems to have been a one off. Shame you never got the resolution that YOU wanted.

I don't think the guy should have necessarily lost his job over it. Despite having once worked with a guy who was sacked for taking 3 cable ties from where an electrician was working. I don't know whether the PHD dude wanted that or not either. For it to be restorative justice there needs to be some kind of agreement between perp & vic (hate that word) that the consequences are congruent with the offence. Surely there are a raft of options available between sacking somebody and having them write a letter in which they say they are sorry that they got caught because it made them feel bad.

Surely at the beginning the University and the aggrieved person could set their bounds for the process. E.g. it will require more than a simple paragraph or two and sacking is off the agenda.

Then the perp is asked to explain why he shouldn't be sacked. The perp is then told that if he is not to be sacked, then he needs to come up with a suitable means of restitution that he thinks the aggrieved party would accept. Maybe he could wash his car or mow his lawns or do some work for the guy's favourite charity or something, maybe simply do something extra around the university to benefit everybody. I'm not suggesting indentured servitude or breaking rocks or anything, let the guy suggest something.

[mashman]

I don't think the guy should have necessarily lost his job over it. Despite having once worked with a guy who was sacked for taking 3 cable ties from where an electrician was working. I don't know whether the PHD dude wanted that or not either. For it to be restorative justice there needs to be some kind of agreement between perp & vic (hate that word) that the consequences are congruent with the offence. Surely there are a raft of options available between sacking somebody and having them write a letter in which they say they are sorry that they got caught because it made them feel bad.

Surely at the beginning the University and the aggrieved person could set their bounds for the process. E.g. it will require more than a simple paragraph or two and sacking is off the agenda.

Then the perp is asked to explain why he shouldn't be sacked. The perp is then told that if he is not to be sacked, then he needs to come up with a suitable means of restitution that he thinks the aggrieved party would accept. Maybe he could wash his car or mow his lawns or do some work for the guy's favourite charity or something, maybe simply do something extra around the university to benefit everybody. I'm not suggesting indentured servitude or breaking rocks or anything, let the guy suggest something.

I totally agree... he should be thankful that the guy drives a toyota and not a honda.

The only "issue" I have with restorative justice is when it becomes vindictive... or at least there is that perception. I guess that's where things get a bit foggy and the "perp" is going to be seen as having reaped what they sowed. Like anything, there are levels of what an individual (the vic) will regard as a fair outcome. So who gets to judge where other party's believe that the "punishment" outweighs the "crime"?

[Smifffy]

I totally agree... he should be thankful that the guy drives a toyota and not a honda.

The only "issue" I have with restorative justice is when it becomes vindictive... or at least there is that perception. I guess that's where things get a bit foggy and the "perp" is going to be seen as having reaped what they sowed. Like anything, there are levels of what an individual (the vic) will regard as a fair outcome. So who gets to judge where other party's believe that the "punishment" outweighs the "crime"?

The adjudicator of the process, someone with recognised authority or mana. In this case I would expect it to be someone from the university hierarchy with responsibility for hiring/firing/managing the caretaker, or perhaps an independent mediator. *shrug*

[Banditbandit]

It should be legal to wire internal doors to the mains and leave your windows open.
It should be legal to rig a claymore in the back of the garage and leave the door unlocked.
It should be legal to beat a home invader to death.

The legal system is not invested in protection of Joe kiwi.
The police are not invested in catching crims at Joe kiwi level.

The crims prosper at the pain and expense of Joe kiwi, would you rather do nothing but weep when it is your turn?

Your rant is not about protecting Joe Kiwi - this is about protecting things ... items ... objects ... stuff ... it's not about protecting human beings at all ...

Typical capitalist response ... My "stuff" is more important than the life of a human being ...

[Banditbandit]

You think I am funny........ You would change your mind if I caught you in my house........

Fuck me ... I'll make sure I have my 12 guage handy when I meet you ...

[Akzle]

My "stuff" is more important than the life of a human being ...*who is trying to take my stuff

. .

[mashman]

The adjudicator of the process, someone with recognised authority or mana. In this case I would expect it to be someone from the university hierarchy with responsibility for hiring/firing/managing the caretaker, or perhaps an independent mediator. *shrug*

I thought representatives on the Uni had mediated the process? albeit with only one party present. Maybe I should hire myself out to perform such a role :blink:

[Road kill]

Or they'll resort to killing those who they burgle and keep their knees intact... sure they'll risk doing the time, but it's easier to fight off bubba and the honda riders with 2 good knees.

There's far more of us than there is them,,we'd win in the end just by numbers..

[Smifffy]

I thought representatives on the Uni had mediated the process? albeit with only one party present. Maybe I should hire myself out to perform such a role :blink:

Maybe you should. Maybe I should. I think if it was done properly and not one-sided then it wouldn't end up in the court of public opinion, which is probably the least fair process of all. Each party would accept the result and real justice would have been served. Never happen in good old NZ tho.

Edit: Actually I think that in the armed forces (broadly speaking) and at some Marae it might happen. Then again sometimes the armed forces are just after scapegoats, and some Marae go down the 'I'm sorry I got caught' path. - yeah sweeping generalisations but what else do you expect?

[mashman]

Maybe you should. Maybe I should. I think if it was done properly and not one-sided then it wouldn't end up in the court of public opinion, which is probably the least fair process of all. Each party would accept the result and real justice would have been served. Never happen in good old NZ tho.

Edit: Actually I think that in the armed forces (broadly speaking) and at some Marae it might happen. Then again sometimes the armed forces are just after scapegoats, and some Marae go down the 'I'm sorry I got caught' path. - yeah sweeping generalisations but what else do you expect?

:rofl: Honest Bastards R Us eh. From what I've read the US are doing something "similar" in regards to youth courts with some impressive results. So yeah, it could work like you say. It's better than a shoot out, hmmmmmm, mebee.

I expect Justice... or at least the truth. Something none of us are very good at. Tis a shame that people will protect people because they like them, irrespective of their "criminal" actions. Then again we'd probably all be in jail in some form or another for some of our actions. Lots of different people, lots of different generalisations. Can't be helped I guess.

[Smifffy]

:rofl: Honest Bastards R Us eh.

(cut some stuff from here - look a couple of posts up if you need the complete original)

Lots of different people, lots of different generalisations. Can't be helped I guess.

Yup AMINZ they call 'emselves I guess some more googling could show what quals are needed and what the pay is like :rofl:

[mashman]

Yup AMINZ they call 'emselves I guess some more googling could show what quals are needed and what the pay is like :rofl:

heh... I'd get very bored very quickly me thinks and I doubt I have the right range of skills for a job.

[300weatherby]

My brother in law's 15 yr old daughter arrived home from school today,just as fucktard crims were finishing up doing the house over. 3rd time in as many years. The house is fucked from the quakes and cannot be properly secured. He is fighting with the government. He is fighting with his insurers. He is fighting with EQC. Now this crap gets dropped on him. She just avoided being raped and beaten, a few minutes earlier and she would have been in the house with a bunch of fuctard little black fucksticks, wanna bet YOUR daughters/sisters/wife/mum that it wouldn't have happened?

How much is he (and her mum) going to stress around three tomorrow........?
How carefully is she going to approach the house tomorrow.........?
How often are they going to jump at an unexpected noise in the house tomorrow?

But hey, it's only stuff huh.........

By the standards of some on here, pat the crims on the head and don't be mean to them, cause it's only "stuff". Wake the fuck up! crims evolve........

Today, tagging.
Tomorrow, shoplifting,
Day after, car theft,
Next day, burglery,
Next day, violent assault on occupant of house,
Next day, rape of anything female found in house,
Next day, Murder.

Simple answer, stamp on it before it grows.

Only stuff.......... fuck you who take that attitude,I really hope it's YOUR house next. I Hope you get to be gratefull that your womenfolk are away at the time.

[300weatherby]

There's far more of us than there is them,,we'd win in the end just by numbers..

The police know who most of bad fucksticks are, all we need is for DOC to issue a permit, the police to ID them, and away we go. Most criminal activity done and dusted for ages.

The crims get to keep doing what they do, without Joe kiwi taking upon himself to wipe them out, because we know the difference between right and wrong, the connection between and action and the consequence.

The crims keep on because the law prevents us from doing anything, but does not suppress THEM.

We have a new neighbour, a bloody judge, boy am I gonna have bloody much to say........................

[gammaguy]

I was in the process of employing a couple of new drivers a few weeks ago.
We had a guy come in with tons of promise and gave him a trial on the basis that his medical and drugs test all came back clean.
He didn't do his drug test on the day of appointment and said he was worried cause he had a joint a couple of weeks back.
So i asked him his level of use and he replied with "hardly ever just the odd weekend,".
So we decided to give him a second chance and allowed him a week to clear his system so as to get a clean test.
Once done we sent him back in for another test on a Monday and low and behold he decided he wanted different type of work all of a sudden.
So he moved onto another company driving trucks (thought he wanted to do different type of work, ODD!)
Got a phone call from the company asking of his back ground, of coarse after the discussion they decided to take him in for drug test, no getting out of this one as they were near enough to holding his hand.
You guessed it, he failed miserably and i believe he is struggling to gain employment anywhere. The transport industry network is spread far and wide.
so as far as giving 2nd chances, F***k that again!:brick:

So there's a drugged out guy driving a truck somewhere....what could possibly go wrong with that?

[gammaguy]

Not sure i should actually have to explain this but....
If he has an accident and they test for drugs etc (as they do everytime) we would immediately loose our insurance for a start...still not sure why i would have to explain this....2nd thing is if he has a habit of any kind it will definitely affect his ability behind the wheel and therefore become an added risk to road users.
You seriously couldn't figure that out for yourself. That just fuckin scares me that does!

The fact that some people can view a truck driver under the influence of any recreational drug while driving as acceptable is the exact reason why the testing regime was instituted in the first place

[Grubber]

So there's a drugged out guy driving a truck somewhere....what could possibly go wrong with that?

Yes i believe there is somewhere, wish i knew where, i would sort it out pronto if i knew!
Hmmm, what could possibly go wrong??? Scary aye!

[Grubber]

The fact that some people can view a truck driver under the influence of any recreational drug while driving as acceptable is the exact reason why the testing regime was instituted in the first place

Exactly right! best thing that ever happened in my view.
The industry was rife with it some years ago and it caused mayhem like you wouldn't believe!
We just don't tolerate it at all. For the record i won't be giving any 2nd chances any-more either.

[oneofsix]

So there's a drugged out guy driving a truck somewhere....what could possibly go wrong with that?

Could be a couple high on glue fumes; http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8459089/Sticky-situation-as-glue-truck-crashes. But it is ok as they aren't driving - anymore.
:sweatdrop
Actually hope they are ok and no-one else comes to grief in the mess.

[Banditbandit]

My brother in law's 15 yr old daughter arrived home from school today,just as fucktard crims were finishing up doing the house over. 3rd time in as many years. The house is fucked from the quakes and cannot be properly secured. He is fighting with the government. He is fighting with his insurers. He is fighting with EQC. Now this crap gets dropped on him. She just avoided being raped and beaten, a few minutes earlier and she would have been in the house with a bunch of fuctard little black fucksticks, wanna bet YOUR daughters/sisters/wife/mum that it wouldn't have happened?

How much is he (and her mum) going to stress around three tomorrow........?
How carefully is she going to approach the house tomorrow.........?
How often are they going to jump at an unexpected noise in the house tomorrow?

But hey, it's only stuff huh.........

By the standards of some on here, pat the crims on the head and don't be mean to them, cause it's only "stuff". Wake the fuck up! crims evolve........

Today, tagging.
Tomorrow, shoplifting,
Day after, car theft,
Next day, burglery,
Next day, violent assault on occupant of house,
Next day, rape of anything female found in house,
Next day, Murder.

Simple answer, stamp on it before it grows.

Only stuff.......... fuck you who take that attitude,I really hope it's YOUR house next. I Hope you get to be gratefull that your womenfolk are away at the time.

You have no fucking idea at all about what I think and believe .... you're just a rabid rightwinger knee-jerking .. and jerking off on the sound of your own bullshit ...

[Paul in NZ]

You have no fucking idea at all about what I think and believe .... you're just a rabid rightwinger knee-jerking .. and jerking off on the sound of your own bullshit ...

Thats possible but that does not mean hes not correct about the theft thing....

[imdying]

Typical capitalist response ... My "stuff" is more important than the life of a human being ...And typically you hippies make it out to be something it isn't by missing critical details.

My "stuff" is more important than the life of a human being who is touching stuff that doesn't fucking well belong to him.


Now I know you're always going to come down on that viewpoint hard because you're a Maori and so are most thieves in New Zealand, but if you kept your f'n whanau in line that would not have to be the case. Top tip: IT'S NOT THE VICTIMS FAULT WANKER.

[Akzle]

And typically you hippies make it out to be something it isn't by missing critical details.

hey, ffffuuuuucckk you. i'm a hippy, that guy's just a dick.

[Banditbandit]

Hippy shit!!! Fuck .. and here I was thinking that because I believe there should be a death penalty that would count me out as a "hippy" ...

And where did I say it was the victim's fault???

It's typical of capitalist societies to value property ("stuff") over human life ... (that's a marxist analysis, not hippy shit ...) but we say that killing a humam being is the worst crime that can be committed .. and yet so many people here are prepared to kill over "stuff" ...

How does that make you any different from the person trying to steal it??? IMHO it makes you worse. They are theives but you are prepared to be a murderer ...

And as for the racist shit - there are good and bad people in all ethnicities ... ethnicity has nothing to do with criminal behaviour .. unless, of course, we go down the racist path - that all those who claim to be Māori in this country are only part Māori becuase we all have white ancestors .. maybe it's the white ancestory that makes us criminals ??? because there are white people in jail .... What shit . it's not the Māori part or the white part - it's just human beings being human beings .. and fucking up like some do

But my God ... what sort of a society have we created in GodZone ??? Is it any wonder with such a high level of verbal and social violence that there is an equally high level of physical violence? We reap what we sow .. sow violence and we reap violence ...

[Akzle]

But my God ... what sort of a society have we created in GodZone ??? Is it any wonder with such a high level of verbal and social volence that there is an equally high level of physical violence?

which came first? the chicken or the rooster?

personally, i abhor when i hear people say things like "he should suffer a slow painful death" even if the crim did rape or murder. the firestarter and the old lady on the news "well i'd like to douse him in petrol and light him" - what the fuck is that shit about?

but i'm all up for executing rapists and murderers. (and a long list of other white folk. bankers, for one)

but the other guy had it right - the crims are untouchable (basically) and know it. reminds me of that motto:
"you only have to shoot one, word will spread"
it was applied to daughters' boyfriends, but equally applicable.

until the cops do more than revenue gathering and actually have the mindset and the ability to put them down, or civvys are granted the authority (they already have it, btw. read-ey read-ey, defence of movable property, legislation.govt.nz) to do so, this shit will go on and on.

[Banditbandit]

You think the crims get away with it and are untouchable ???

Do any of you happen to know who is the longest serving prisoner in our jails and how long he has been locked up for (That gives you a clue - it's not someone in Arohata.)

And who is our longest serving prisoner convicted of murder? (Yeah - they are not the same thing ...)

Do you really believe what you read in the newspapers ???

[Banditbandit]

which came first? the chicken or the rooster?



Chicken's aren't old enough to come ... the rooster has to come in the chook first or there is no chicken ...

[Mom]

I'm just a broke guy that's a dick.

Gosh confirmation!

Hey, just a little bit of advice. You might want to change your personal settings on here. Anyone can see you RL name and contact details :wacko: :facepalm:

[Akzle]

Gosh confirmation!

Hey, just a little bit of advice. You might want to change your personal settings on here. Anyone can see you RL name and contact details :wacko: :facepalm:

rob akerman, 0220140727, come get some sweetheart.

[Akzle]

Gosh confirmation!

Hey, just a little bit of advice. You might want to change your personal settings on here. Anyone can see you RL name and contact details :wacko: :facepalm:

also. Youve been hanging around that shit head too long. Bad attitude not welcome round here.

[Edbear]

which came first? the chicken or the rooster?

personally, i abhor when i hear people say things like "he should suffer a slow painful death" even if the crim did rape or murder. the firestarter and the old lady on the news "well i'd like to douse him in petrol and light him" - what the fuck is that shit about?

but i'm all up for executing rapists and murderers. (and a long list of other white folk. bankers, for one)

but the other guy had it right - the crims are untouchable (basically) and know it. reminds me of that motto:
"you only have to shoot one, word will spread"
it was applied to daughters' boyfriends, but equally applicable.

until the cops do more than revenue gathering and actually have the mindset and the ability to put them down, or civvys are granted the authority (they already have it, btw. read-ey read-ey, defence of movable property, legislation.govt.nz) to do so, this shit will go on and on.

The Police do their job pretty well under the circumstances but they get heartily fed up with bringing the offender to the courts where there are perfectly adequate punishments available to the Judges, only to hear another faint slap with the proverbial wet bus ticket.

There are no full-blood Maori left and going on the legal terms for being able to claim such in NZ I could claim to be Somalian..!

[mashman]

The Police do their job pretty well under the circumstances but they get heartily fed up with bringing the offender to the courts where there are perfectly adequate punishments available to the Judges, only to hear another faint slap with the proverbial wet bus ticket.

There are no full-blood Maori left and going on the legal terms for being able to claim such in NZ I could claim to be Somalian..!

Isn't Maori a culture and not a breed of human being? Coz if that's the case, I'm bloody sure I've been possessed by a Maori spirit, a strong one at that. Where's my gravy?

[scumdog]

until the cops do more than revenue gathering and actually have the mindset and the ability to put them down.....

Wah-wah-fuckin' wah...

Fuckin' hippy know-it-all dreamers....:wacko:

[doc]

Wah-wah-fuckin' wah...

Fuckin' hippy know-it-all dreamers....:wacko:

I would like your badge no mister plod. "Or else I'm taking this International"

[cskadizzy]

I get it. His mistake was not handing it in to the Security Office. For some reason his employer has decided to give him a second chance. I will assume that that is because they consider his actions to have been out of character. Yes he should have something against his record, perhaps LIAR, and I would assume that should there be another incident where he has "stolen" something, that he will lose his job. I understand the principle that you are communicating, but as mentioned, this seems to have been a one off. Shame you never got the resolution that YOU wanted.

I think there's a whole host of mistakes, but unfortunately, I don't think that lying to someone's face and keeping their property for six months is a moment out of character - a "lapse" as he put it. Let's say someone gave me verbal after a few beers, and I got the mist and slapped them about a bit - that's out of character, it happens in an instant. That's a lapse. I apologise to the victim, I ask what can I do to make it right, and then I do my best to meet their expectations. If it happens. It hasn't, by the way.

This is a six month jaunt around the place with my stuff, involving lying to me, and then lying to the police. This isn't out of character - this, in my opinion, is in his character. We can combine it with all the other stuff he's been taking photos of - another cellphone he's been taking photos of. Two pairs of brand new basketball shoes. A house with more stuff out of proportion for someone on his money - electronic drum kit, big flat screen TV, games console.

There's actually a text message where, during an argument with someone about looking after the kid, he tells someone he's on his last warning at work because he keeps leaving early to pick up the kid from daycare - given this shit, and that he gets to keep his job, that's clearly not true either.

So I don't buy this bullshit about character - I think it's cronyism, not a good judgement of character, that's behind this. I think he's a manipulative little lying piece of crap. Given that there's been a spate of thefts from around the university over the past year, you'd think they'd be more concerned about it and start looking at the other thefts too.


I don't think the guy should have necessarily lost his job over it. Despite having once worked with a guy who was sacked for taking 3 cable ties from where an electrician was working. I don't know whether the PHD dude wanted that or not either. For it to be restorative justice there needs to be some kind of agreement between perp & vic (hate that word) that the consequences are congruent with the offence. Surely there are a raft of options available between sacking somebody and having them write a letter in which they say they are sorry that they got caught because it made them feel bad.

Surely at the beginning the University and the aggrieved person could set their bounds for the process. E.g. it will require more than a simple paragraph or two and sacking is off the agenda.

Then the perp is asked to explain why he shouldn't be sacked. The perp is then told that if he is not to be sacked, then he needs to come up with a suitable means of restitution that he thinks the aggrieved party would accept. Maybe he could wash his car or mow his lawns or do some work for the guy's favourite charity or something, maybe simply do something extra around the university to benefit everybody. I'm not suggesting indentured servitude or breaking rocks or anything, let the guy suggest something.

Yeah, this was the problem. I was shut out of the process right from the start. When I objected to their proposed solution and raised questions about it, Rainsforth Dix just shut me down. Then senior faculty shut me down. At the start, I would have listened to any process that actually went some way to restoring what had been lost, but at the point where I told them it wasn't acceptable and how it didn't even go 1/10 of the way to fixing actual economic loss, they told me to fuck off.

This doesn't even meet any of the obligations of utu for either him or the university.

When the Dean told me to fuck off in the weakest of ways, only then did I give David Fisher at the Herald a ring.

I've been told that this is "in line with institutional expectations" - that security staff can steal and expect to keep their jobs. So I had to OIA them and ask how many security staff have criminal histories on and off the job. I also OIA'd the security logbook, and details of this guy's duties. And other stuff. The logbook might even come back that they didn't record it, or he was sent to hand it back - we'll have to see.

What I'm actually doing is building up a civil case, if need be. The university, see, might still pursue me for the $30k or so it cost them for the first year of the PhD. So this isn't over for me by a long shot.

You end up with absolutely no faith in the institution. So, like I say on the blog, it's not that it's about Arana Kenny. It's about everything that's happened.

Of course, since the apology, and since he applied for a discharge without conviction, it's looking like the little arsewipe is going to try and get away with everything. So aside from the apology, where he's so embarrassed about it all, and the useless SIM card, it doesn't look like either him or the university want it to be recognised that he did something wrong. Applying for a discharge without conviction is a kick in the face for me, and it's him trying to dismiss what happened to me because he's a cowardly little shitstain who couldn't put his hand up and admit he's done someone wrong. So now it IS about him. Before he could have been a lost confused young man who made a mistake and pissed me off. Now he's doing a deliberate act to try and avoid accountability while I go to the wall.

Putting the case in the media is fuck all to him. Shit, even putting the posters up around campus was nothing compared to the crap I've had to deal with because of him. I've had more attention from this shit than he has: I'm the one taking the calls from journalists, I'm the one that was named first. He wasn't named until he was named in court.

I still don't think it's appropriate at all that someone who's been caught taking things that don't belong to them - theft, as the charge is and as he's pleaded guilty to - is continued to be employed in the same position. If they want him digging gardens, then fine. But just handing him the keys back and saying "bad boy, don't do it again" is well out of order. People have been fired for less.

There's a line, and I'm not entirely sure where it is - but I'm sure as fuck it comes a long way before an $800 smartphone you tried to play finders keepers with.

[mashman]

So I don't buy this bullshit about character - I think it's cronyism, not a good judgement of character, that's behind this. I think he's a manipulative little lying piece of crap. Given that there's been a spate of thefts from around the university over the past year, you'd think they'd be more concerned about it and start looking at the other thefts too.

You mean the establishment and the caretaker are in cahoots? Anyway, good luck with your quest.

[Road kill]

I still say shoot em' in the knee.

An hell yeah my stuff "is" more important to me than some thieving cunts knee,,I worked for all of it an I ain't given nothing away.

Come the revolution ?

Fuckers better come very well armed.

[awa355]

You think the crims get away with it and are untouchable ???

Do any of you happen to know who is the longest serving prisoner in our jails and how long he has been locked up for (That gives you a clue - it's not someone in Arohata.)

And who is our longest serving prisoner convicted of murder? (Yeah - they are not the same thing ...)

Do you really believe what you read in the newspapers ???


And they are both honkys. Crims come in all shades.

[cskadizzy]

You mean the establishment and the caretaker are in cahoots? Anyway, good luck with your quest.

Not in cahoots as such. I think this just reveals a level of barely concealed incompetence, cronyism and a lack of due process that I know exists in other parts of the university and in other institutions. It's never been as barefacedly put to me as this, though - hey, we know this guy stole your stuff, we know he's got keys to your office and everyone else's office, we know there's a possibility that he's been stealing before but never been caught, but we're going to protect him and fuck you if you think you've got any say about it.

And we're doing that because one person likes him and makes that decision. We're going to hide behind process when we feel like it, but fuck it if we're going to follow one when dealing with you.

Frankly, if the uni is run by cunts like Dix, and if the best they can do for faculty deans is spineless fuckwits like Bauer, they don't deserve me or my research and I don't want to be there. Anyone who has to be around that campus and doesn't want to say anything for their own self-preservation, because they're lazy or don't want to make a fuss can make their own bed and lie in it. See how well this keeping their heads below the fictional parapet works when its their job/stuff/money on the line.

[Akzle]

The Police do their job pretty well under the circumstances but they get heartily fed up with bringing the offender to the courts where there are perfectly adequate punishments available to the Judges, only to hear another faint slap with the proverbial wet bus ticket.


yes and no. i'd suspect 70% of cops are dicks. the other 30% are as you say.

..this is a national average guesstimate.

but yeha. the "justice" system, isn't.

[Edbear]

yes and no. i'd suspect 70% of cops are dicks. the other 30% are as you say.

..this is a national average guesstimate.

but yeha. the "justice" system, isn't.

It does seem that justice is rarely served in the courts. Too often it is either an argument between over-dramatic lawyers on technicalities of law, or a too soft judge claiming precedents for not handing out more meaningful sentences.

If the maximum possible penalties are to be any deterrent the offender must know that if their offending is blatant, they will likely receive the maximum. Restorative justice should be literally that. While death cannot be reversed, theft or damage should be reimbursed by the offender both financially and by working for the victim to restore what was damaged.

Yes, a bit simplistic as I have put it, but the principle should apply.

[cskadizzy]

Convenient update: thieving cuntbubble Arana Kenny was granted a discharge without conviction today. He has to pay $300 to charity.

Lessons learned:

- You're better off not catching the people who commit crimes against you. It'll just end up worse for you.
- The punishment will not relate to the crime: $300 to charity is all well and good, but what charity, and how the fuck is this reparatations to me?
- Judges are cunts until proven otherwise.

[Akzle]

Convenient update: thieving cuntbubble Arana Kenny was granted a discharge without conviction today. He has to pay $300 to charity.

Lessons learned:

- You're better off not catching the people who commit crimes against you. It'll just end up worse for you.
- The punishment will not relate to the crime: $300 to charity is all well and good, but what charity, and how the fuck is this reparatations to me?
- Judges are cunts until proven otherwise.

fuck you, you dont matter. Hes making reparation to society. And youre part me society. So be happy.

[nodrog]

Convenient update: thieving cuntbubble Arana Kenny was granted a discharge without conviction today. He has to pay $300 to charity.

Lessons learned:

- You're better off not catching the people who commit crimes against you. It'll just end up worse for you.
- The punishment will not relate to the crime: $300 to charity is all well and good, but what charity, and how the fuck is this reparatations to me?
- Judges are cunts until proven otherwise.

What sort of motorcyle is a toyota celica, is that like a mazda mx5?

[cskadizzy]

What sort of motorcyle is a toyota celica, is that like a mazda mx5?

Kind of, but my engine will last more than 100k without a rebuild.

[Paul in NZ]

fuck you, you dont matter. Hes making reparation to society. And youre part me society. So be happy.

Hey - you got so excited you forgot to colour your text green....

[Paul in NZ]

Convenient update: thieving cuntbubble Arana Kenny was granted a discharge without conviction today. He has to pay $300 to charity.

Lessons learned:

- You're better off not catching the people who commit crimes against you. It'll just end up worse for you.
- The punishment will not relate to the crime: $300 to charity is all well and good, but what charity, and how the fuck is this reparatations to me?
- Judges are cunts until proven otherwise.

I have to say that you have a point.....

[oldrider]

Worst part of all this is that Judge Hobbs has no accountability for his decision, why has he still got a job?

He can not be held to account, even though I suspect a majority of his employers (the taxpayers) are probably dissatisfied with "his" performance in this matter! :facepalm:

[awa355]

I dont know about Judge Hobbs, but here's an example of an American judge upholding the law.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/8556428/Judge-finds-himself-in-contempt