PDA

View Full Version : fucken judges



WINJA
26th September 2005, 18:27
A BROTHEL OWNER HIRES A 14 AND 17 YO GIRLS AND DOES NOT GET JAIL , THE JUDGE SAID IT WOULD BE INAPROPRIATE TO GIVE HER JAIL , BUT WHAT SORTA JUDGE IS HE OR SHE, WERE TALKING ABOUT A KID AS A SEX WORKER THIS IS NEAR THE TOP END OF OFFENDING AND THE BITCH GOT 300 HOURS COMUNITY SERVICE, THERES NO JUSTICE IN THIS COUNTRY

HDTboy
26th September 2005, 18:34
The only reason she didn't get jail was cause she's just had a baby. Should that baby's life be fucked up as well?

Hitcher
26th September 2005, 18:36
The "owner" in question apparently was of dodgy mental health and breast-feeding an "infant". More interesting was that the 14-year-old in question had 28 "clients" in the two weeks before she was sprung. There are several interesting moral issues at play here...

texmo
26th September 2005, 18:51
She should be killed, her babby well her child will be comea sex worker too. Her kid should be taken away from her she should have no rights!

madboy
26th September 2005, 19:02
I woulda thought CYF should have something to say... but then again you need less quals to be a parent than ride a bike, and she's a chick so she'll be a great parent... unlike men who need to run through a full-on bloody obstacle course before being considered worthy.

And how about those 28 punters... I bet they'll be shitting themselves... one thing to think you've porked a nice tight teenager, but when you realise they're 14 that puts a different spin on it...

NC
26th September 2005, 19:33
They said on the radio that she imported the 2 girls?

Hitcher
26th September 2005, 19:35
They said on the radio that she imported the 2 girls?
Nah. They were New Zealand new.

NC
26th September 2005, 19:37
Nah. They were New Zealand new.
High k's obviously

WINJA
26th September 2005, 19:50
High k's obviously
NAH JUST 14 YO , THATS JUST A KID , THAT MEANS THAT THE BROTHEL OWNER
AIDED AND ASSISTED IN RAPE CAUSE A KID CANT CONSENT TO SEX, SO FOR THE RAPE OF A CHILD YOU GET 300 HOURS COMMUNITY SERVICE ,WHATS WRONG WITH JUDGES THE FACT THAT SHE HAD A KID WOULD BE A BETTER REASON TO IMPRISON HER CAUSE THEN A GRATEFULL FAMILY COULD ADOPT THE KID.
AND THAT FUCKEN SLOVINIAN BOMB HOAX FUCKER HE SHOULDA GOT 10 YEARS BUT NO HE GETS A FREE FLIGHT HOME INSTEAD

scumdog
26th September 2005, 19:52
A BROTHEL OWNER HIRES A 14 AND 17 YO GIRLS AND DOES NOT GET JAIL , THE JUDGE SAID IT WOULD BE INAPROPRIATE TO GIVE HER JAIL , BUT WHAT SORTA JUDGE IS HE OR SHE, WERE TALKING ABOUT A KID AS A SEX WORKER THIS IS NEAR THE TOP END OF OFFENDING AND THE BITCH GOT 300 HOURS COMUNITY SERVICE, THERES NO JUSTICE IN THIS COUNTRY

Now you know how 'we' feel at times, all that work for nothing!!! :mad:

avgas
26th September 2005, 19:57
One lady owner

I think that they should give her a hand.............................................. .................................................. .............................. cut of her right one, then give it back to her :ar15: :2guns: :thud:

NC
26th September 2005, 20:02
NAH JUST 14 YO , THATS JUST A KID , THAT MEANS THAT THE BROTHEL OWNER
AIDED AND ASSISTED IN RAPE CAUSE A KID CANT CONSENT TO SEX, SO FOR THE RAPE OF A CHILD YOU GET 300 HOURS COMMUNITY SERVICE ,WHATS WRONG WITH JUDGES THE FACT THAT SHE HAD A KID WOULD BE A BETTER REASON TO IMPRISON HER CAUSE THEN A GRATEFULL FAMILY COULD ADOPT THE KID.
AND THAT FUCKEN SLOVINIAN BOMB HOAX FUCKER HE SHOULDA GOT 10 YEARS BUT NO HE GETS A FREE FLIGHT HOME INSTEAD
What about the kids parents?
Where were they when all of this was happening?

SuperDave
26th September 2005, 20:14
Now you know how 'we' feel at times, all that work for nothing!!! :mad:

Really sucks how the guys on the frontline do all the hard work only for a soft judge to let the person off easy. This kinda stuff makes me pissed off as well.
This women deserves more than just community service but as others have said its quite complicated with her having a young child. Although I believe that child is probably better off being taken away from the mother and put into a 'real' home.

Hitcher
26th September 2005, 20:34
What about the kids parents?
Where were they when all of this was happening?
The 17-year-old was the daughter of the 14-year-old's "care giver". Join the dots...

SixPackBack
26th September 2005, 20:45
What about the kids parents?
Where were they when all of this was happening?

good point, the parents should be up for some jail yard anal intrusive reprograming themselves, along with the brothel owner.
I know it's the sex industry but surely if you were running a brothel you would be looking for a birth certificate on any girls that looked close to 18......hell i do

NC
26th September 2005, 20:59
The 17-year-old was the daughter of the 14-year-old's "care giver". Join the dots...
Thanks, some of us didn't watch the news tonight.

Hitcher
26th September 2005, 21:03
Read all about it.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=10347356

NC
26th September 2005, 21:05
Read all about it.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=10347356
Thank you helpy helper

Biff
26th September 2005, 21:12
They said on the radio that she imported the 2 girls?

If I imported a couple of girls and asked them to hand carry some bike parts with them, would I have to pay GST?


The 17-year-old was the daughter of the 14-year-old's "care giver". Join the dots

Evil and sick.

SPman
26th September 2005, 21:15
Goods and Sex Tax?

NC
26th September 2005, 21:15
If I imported a couple of girls and asked them to hand carry some bike parts with them, would I have to pay GST?
:blink: :blink:

Fart
27th September 2005, 08:46
If I imported a couple of girls and asked them to hand carry some bike parts with them, would I have to pay GST?


No GST, just pay time in the slammer.

Lou Girardin
27th September 2005, 08:57
Has anyone here seen the 14 year old? When you've got 10 year olds dressing like mini ho's, there is no wonder that young girls are mistaken for older. The brothel owner asked for ID which was never produced. She should have pursued this before letting the girl work, but it doesn't sound like she was the brightest bulb in the chandelier.
And if the owner was in a dodgy mental state, how did she get approval to manage a brothel?
This wasn't slavery, these girls willingly worked there.

Postie
27th September 2005, 09:24
did she even get a fine? not that money is important, but i have had a speeding ticket like most people here, or a parking ticket or some shit and end up paying additional taxes, but if i was to have sex with a 14 year old (which i think is fucking sick) or i had anything to do with it in any way, would i be let off scott free if i went to court wearing a G-string, red fuzzy wig and clown shoes claiming my head was fucked up.
Or what if the brothel owner was a man? would he get 300 hours if he just had a kid?
and where is this kids mother anyway (the baby not the 14 year old)??

spudchucka
27th September 2005, 09:29
AND THAT FUCKEN SLOVINIAN BOMB HOAX FUCKER HE SHOULDA GOT 10 YEARS BUT NO HE GETS A FREE FLIGHT HOME INSTEAD
Why should we keep him here at $50, 000 + per year cost to the tax payer? A plane ride back where he came from only costs a couple of grand and he aint ever getting back in here.

kerryg
27th September 2005, 09:31
Has anyone here seen the 14 year old? When you've got 10 year olds dressing like mini ho's, there is no wonder that young girls are mistaken for older. The brothel owner asked for ID which was never produced. She should have pursued this before letting the girl work, but it doesn't sound like she was the brightest bulb in the chandelier.
And if the owner was in a dodgy mental state, how did she get approval to manage a brothel?
This wasn't slavery, these girls willingly worked there.

A 14 year old working as a sex worker isn't OK. I agree with Winja. But anybody who says " but what about the parents? why aren't they held accountable??" is not grasping the fact that parents have no effective way to control a 14 year old, if she is hell-bent on pleasing herself. I speak from experience. If she wants to leave your house, she will. If she wants to abuse her body, she will. You can call the cops ("wait 24 hours, we don't do anything for 24 hours with missing kids, they usually turn up") or CYFS (who will do a lot of tut-tutting and spout a lot of PC bullshit but won't/can't do anything to restrain your child) or the school truant officer (ditto)...yadda yadda yadda


Anyone says "blame the parents" knows fuck all. It's just too glib. It also supposes there are 2 parents, both of whom are taking responsibility for the upbringing of their child, which often there are not. Some kids fall through the cracks no matter how hard you try.

kerryg
27th September 2005, 09:36
Why should we keep him here at $50, 000 + per year cost to the tax payer? A plane ride back where he came from only costs a couple of grand and he aint ever getting back in here.


Yeah but one of the cops on that case was quoted in the paper as saying that he thought the reason the guy carried out the bomb hoax was to get a free ticket home. He was accompanied by 2 minders when he was deported to Slovenia or wherever it was so FWIW a couple of grand is nowhere near it, I'd guess, but that's beside the point. The guy exploited the system to get a free ticket home. That's what sucks. Shit, he must be laughing

Marmoot
27th September 2005, 09:39
THE JUDGE SAID IT WOULD BE INAPROPRIATE TO GIVE HER JAIL

I totally agree. Afterall, what is wrong with teenagers trying to get real work experience?
If they can work in supermarket, surely they should be able to work in a brothel! Both lines of work are legal occupation and can be a well-defined career in the future.

In fact, anyone who fancies being a prostitute should be given a chance to train themselves from as early age as possible. Who knows, we might one day have the best prostitutes in the world as we do with boat builders and IT people.

On the other hand, if you think this is wrong, then PERHAPS THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT HAVE LEGALISED PROSTITUTION IN THE FIRST PLACE?!?!?!?! :angry2:

spudchucka
27th September 2005, 09:56
Yeah but one of the cops on that case was quoted in the paper as saying that he thought the reason the guy carried out the bomb hoax was to get a free ticket home. He was accompanied by 2 minders when he was deported to Slovenia or wherever it was so FWIW a couple of grand is nowhere near it, I'd guess, but that's beside the point. The guy exploited the system to get a free ticket home. That's what sucks. Shit, he must be laughing
That may all be true but I still don't see what good would be afforded to our country by locking the guy up for X number of years simply to export him at the end of his sentence. What would it achieve?

I do however think that we, (New Zealand) should have been able to strip him of whatever assets he owned in order to cover the costs of his deportation so to that end I would absolutely support his prosecution.

Deano
27th September 2005, 09:56
Yeah but one of the cops on that case was quoted in the paper as saying that he thought the reason the guy carried out the bomb hoax was to get a free ticket home. He was accompanied by 2 minders when he was deported to Slovenia or wherever it was so FWIW a couple of grand is nowhere near it, I'd guess, but that's beside the point. The guy exploited the system to get a free ticket home. That's what sucks. Shit, he must be laughing

If that's the case he should do some hard labour community service, enough to pay for the ticket.

scumdog
27th September 2005, 10:06
A 14 year old working as a sex worker isn't OK. I agree with Winja. But anybody who says " but what about the parents? why aren't they held accountable??" is not grasping the fact that parents have no effective way to control a 14 year old, if she is hell-bent on pleasing herself. I speak from experience. If she wants to leave your house, she will. If she wants to abuse her body, she will. You can call the cops ("wait 24 hours, we don't do anything for 24 hours with missing kids, they usually turn up") or CYFS (who will do a lot of tut-tutting and spout a lot of PC bullshit but won't/can't do anything to restrain your child) or the school truant officer (ditto)...yadda yadda yadda


Anyone says "blame the parents" knows fuck all. It's just too glib. It also supposes there are 2 parents, both of whom are taking responsibility for the upbringing of their child, which often there are not. Some kids fall through the cracks no matter how hard you try.

You said it!
We're sick of taking a certain runaway back to the city, done it about 7 or 8 times now, two guys+car tied up for 2 hours each time.
Parents can't seem to contain her (and with an attitude like she has probably don't want to/know how).

kerryg
27th September 2005, 10:25
You said it!
Parents can't seem to contain her (and with an attitude like she has probably don't want to/know how).


So, how do you "contain" a teenager? Lock them in a cage? Beat them up? Send them to boarding school? The only tools available are tools of persuasion (heart-to hearet talks, inducements if they behave and punishments if they don't , like no pocket money, take away the stereo, etc). Hardly very effective if the kid wants alcohol, sex, parties etc. No pocket money is not going to change a thing. A teenager who is hell-bent on having her freedom, can't be stopped. There is NO WAY.They run away and you can't prevent. Shit, one of my kids was sent to a "home for problem kids" and she didn't like it, so she walked out. In the middle of the night. Right out in the sticks. They could not physically stop her because that would have been assault or something, so they let her go. Those who think parents should be able to control their troubled teens have either never had a troubled teenager and/or have got their heads up their arse.

scumdog
27th September 2005, 10:30
So, how do you "contain" a teenager? Lock them in a cage? Beat them up? Send them to boarding school? The only tools available are tools of persuasion (heart-to hearet talks, inducements if they behave and punishments if they don't , like no pocket money, take away the stereo, etc). Hardly very effective if the kid wants alcohol, sex, parties etc. No pocket money is not going to change a thing. A teenager who is hell-bent on having her freedom, can't be stopped. There is NO WAY.They run away and you can't prevent. Shit, one of my kids was sent to a "home for problem kids" and she didn't like it, so she walked out. In the middle of the night. Right out in the sticks. They could not physically stop her because that would have been assault or something, so they let her go. Those who think parents should be able to control their troubled teens have either never had a troubled teenager and/or have got their heads up their arse.

I didn't suggest she HAD to be contained, just that she couldn't be.

And all of the above I know, it's part and parcel of my job (and a very frustrating part, these girls seem to think they're bullet proof "I can look after myself, I have so far, nothings happened to me so there" - said after hitching 80km in the dark. Must be good to have accurate foresight eh?

yungatart
27th September 2005, 10:31
In good old NZ it is law that children from yr 7 and up must receive careers advice (Yr 7 is Form 1), including advice on the sex industry if they want it. Scary thought eh? So with PC bullshit like that it is no wonder that 14 yo end up as prostitutes, plus the pay is probably heaps better than they can get in their local McD's. To put it in perspective, there are a few 14 yo's on this site, keep them here people, safest place for them.

Pixie
27th September 2005, 10:44
would i be let off scott free if i went to court wearing a G-string, red fuzzy wig and clown shoes claiming my head was fucked up.

Keith Locke?

Pixie
27th September 2005, 10:47
.
Or what if the brothel owner was a man? would he get 300 hours if he just had a kid?

He'd be bloody famous if he had a kid

Estrella
27th September 2005, 11:12
I totally agree. Afterall, what is wrong with teenagers trying to get real work experience?
If they can work in supermarket, surely they should be able to work in a brothel! Both lines of work are legal occupation and can be a well-defined career in the future.

In fact, anyone who fancies being a prostitute should be given a chance to train themselves from as early age as possible. Who knows, we might one day have the best prostitutes in the world as we do with boat builders and IT people.

On the other hand, if you think this is wrong, then PERHAPS THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT HAVE LEGALISED PROSTITUTION IN THE FIRST PLACE?!?!?!?! :angry2:
Prostitution was legalised as a way to protect the sex workers and give them some rights. In the past, the clients were never prosecuted whereas the sex workers were prosecuted and in many cases victimised.

Paying for sex is always going to be a part of our society whether we like it or not. If prostitution had not been legalised, I doubt that this case of using underage girls would have ever made it to court.

Lou Girardin
27th September 2005, 15:10
Yeah but one of the cops on that case was quoted in the paper as saying that he thought the reason the guy carried out the bomb hoax was to get a free ticket home. He was accompanied by 2 minders when he was deported to Slovenia or wherever it was so FWIW a couple of grand is nowhere near it, I'd guess, but that's beside the point. The guy exploited the system to get a free ticket home. That's what sucks. Shit, he must be laughing

So why did people who knew him say he was depressed at not getting residencey?

Lou Girardin
27th September 2005, 15:13
In good old NZ it is law that children from yr 7 and up must receive careers advice (Yr 7 is Form 1), including advice on the sex industry if they want it. Scary thought eh? So with PC bullshit like that it is no wonder that 14 yo end up as prostitutes, plus the pay is probably heaps better than they can get in their local McD's. To put it in perspective, there are a few 14 yo's on this site, keep them here people, safest place for them.

Would you like to quote that legislation. It sounds very much like an urban myth.

kerryg
27th September 2005, 15:27
So why did people who knew him say he was depressed at not getting residencey?


I have to admit I haven't followed the story particularly closely, but unless I've missed something, I dunno that that is inconsistent, is it? Didn't get residency=needs/wants to leave=organises free plane ticket.

Anyays, I certainly concur that it's better to deport the bugger than to put him in prison as a guest of the NZ taxpayer.

Hitcher
27th September 2005, 15:32
In good old NZ it is law that children from yr 7 and up must receive careers advice (Yr 7 is Form 1), including advice on the sex industry if they want it. Scary thought eh? So with PC bullshit like that it is no wonder that 14 yo end up as prostitutes, plus the pay is probably heaps better than they can get in their local McD's. To put it in perspective, there are a few 14 yo's on this site, keep them here people, safest place for them.
An NCEA in prostitution. The concept of a staircased qualifications framework for this particular profession boggles one's mind...

Sniper
27th September 2005, 15:34
An NCEA in prostitution. The concept of a staircased qualifications framework for this particular profession boggles one's mind...

I wonder if they will advertise positions for tutors?

yungatart
27th September 2005, 15:37
Would you like to quote that legislation. It sounds very much like an urban myth.
Was working in an intermediate school when the Prostitution law was changed. Can't quote the statute but it forms part of a schools job to give careers advice-follows that since prostitution is no longer illegal, it would be a viable career for someone so inclined and schools would have to advise accordingly.

ManDownUnder
27th September 2005, 15:44
Was working in an intermediate school when the Prostitution law was changed. Can't quote the statute but it forms part of a schools job to give careers advice-follows that since prostitution is no longer illegal, it would be a viable career for someone so inclined and schools would have to advise accordingly.

FFS... there goes the neighbourhood...

At least they'll be qualified... I wonder if you can go right up to a PhD, or does NCEA not go that high?

Lou Girardin
27th September 2005, 15:48
Was working in an intermediate school when the Prostitution law was changed. Can't quote the statute but it forms part of a schools job to give careers advice-follows that since prostitution is no longer illegal, it would be a viable career for someone so inclined and schools would have to advise accordingly.

Then, can you legally advise someone about prostitution when they're under-age?

Lou Girardin
27th September 2005, 15:49
I wonder if they will advertise positions for tutors?

Are you going to demonstrate how to give BJ's?

ManDownUnder
27th September 2005, 16:16
Then, can you legally advise someone about prostitution when they're under-age?

I guess so... you should be able to advise them or bar tending. Let them know that one of the pre-req's for it is attainment of a certain age etc... but it shouldn't stop them studying the various recipes and gaining other trade knowledge through books...

I take your point though. It's more than just a bit unsavoury

Ixion
27th September 2005, 16:22
Then, can you legally advise someone about prostitution when they're under-age?

Don't see why not. You can advise them about a career as a driver even if they're too young to legally hold a license.Prostitution is now , as far as the law goes, a career like any other. As far as I am aware the ONLY thing that is different is that there is a clause that says that WINZ cannot cut your benefit for turning down a position as a whore. And that was inserted in the Act with immense reluctance, in committee. And don't forget , this doesn't only apply to girls. Male prostitution is now also legal, so the careers advisors should be advising your young lads of opportunites as male "escorts"

ManDownUnder
27th September 2005, 16:32
And don't forget , this doesn't only apply to girls. Male prostitution is now also legal, so the careers advisors should be advising your young lads of opportunites as male "escorts"

*perk* ay wot????

What's the pay like... I mean if it's lousy I won't take it lying down.

I won't just roll over you know - I might be hard up but it doesn't mean I'll let them do what they what.

Of course I'd be willing to give my pound of flesh for a decent employer...

jrandom
27th September 2005, 16:35
I'd be willing to give my pound of flesh...

it weighs a pound??

*perk*

kerryg
27th September 2005, 16:38
Don't see why not. You can advise them about a career as a driver even if they're too young to legally hold a license.Prostitution is now , as far as the law goes, a career like any other. As far as I am aware the ONLY thing that is different is that there is a clause that says that WINZ cannot cut your benefit for turning down a position as a whore. And that was inserted in the Act with immense reluctance, in committee. And don't forget , this doesn't only apply to girls. Male prostitution is now also legal, so the careers advisors should be advising your young lads of opportunites as male "escorts"


If that is true, it's outrageous. If people want to pay/receive money for sex, good on them, I don't care, but if any careers advisor or teacher or whatever tells one of my kids that prostitution is a valid career choice they go a step too far. Just 'cos it's legal doesn't make it a good career choice, not in my books

Ixion
27th September 2005, 16:44
If that is true, it's outrageous. If people want to pay/receive money for sex, good on them, I don't care, but if any careers advisor or teacher or whatever tells one of my kids that prostitution is a valid career choice they go a step too far. Just 'cos it's legal doesn't make it a good career choice, not in my books

Well, of course, just because it is not illegal, does not mean that any would actually so counsel. After all, a career as a night club stripper has always been a legal option, yet I doubt many careers advisors would have included it in their "jobs to consider " list.

yungatart
27th September 2005, 16:53
Then, can you legally advise someone about prostitution when they're under-age?
Yes, just like you can give 13 yo contraceptive advice, even though they can't legally have sex, and also provide them with free condoms. Public Health nurses givee them out at High Schools up and down the country. I very much doubt that they advise kids to abstain.

WINJA
27th September 2005, 18:31
Why should we keep him here at $50, 000 + per year cost to the tax payer? A plane ride back where he came from only costs a couple of grand and he aint ever getting back in here.
CAUSE IT SETS A BAD EXAMPLE YOU MORON , NOW ANY OVERSTAYER KNOWS THAT THEY CAN PULL THIS SHIT OFF AND BE NO WORSE FOR IT .WELL OVER $50000 WORTH OF BUSINESS WAS LOST CAUSE OF HIS ACTIONS , 10 YEARS IN THE SLAMMER WOULD BE MONEY WELL SPENT, YOU REALLY ARE STUPID

spudchucka
28th September 2005, 10:10
CAUSE IT SETS A BAD EXAMPLE YOU MORON , NOW ANY OVERSTAYER KNOWS THAT THEY CAN PULL THIS SHIT OFF AND BE NO WORSE FOR IT .WELL OVER $50000 WORTH OF BUSINESS WAS LOST CAUSE OF HIS ACTIONS , 10 YEARS IN THE SLAMMER WOULD BE MONEY WELL SPENT, YOU REALLY ARE STUPID
Are you some sort of panic merchant? Lets revisit this thread in six months and see if your predictions have come true. Will you admit to being stupid or a moron if your predictions are false?

Lou Girardin
28th September 2005, 11:31
CAUSE IT SETS A BAD EXAMPLE YOU MORON , NOW ANY OVERSTAYER KNOWS THAT THEY CAN PULL THIS SHIT OFF AND BE NO WORSE FOR IT .WELL OVER $50000 WORTH OF BUSINESS WAS LOST CAUSE OF HIS ACTIONS , 10 YEARS IN THE SLAMMER WOULD BE MONEY WELL SPENT, YOU REALLY ARE STUPID


Well I think they should just shoot a few now. That'll make hoaxers think twice.

kerryg
28th September 2005, 11:45
Well, of course, just because it is not illegal, does not mean that any would actually so counsel. After all, a career as a night club stripper has always been a legal option, yet I doubt many careers advisors would have included it in their "jobs to consider " list.


Yes, I have to agree with your logic. Well said

Patrick
28th September 2005, 11:46
Well I think they should just shoot a few now. That'll make hoaxers think twice.

One minute he is implying we live in a Police State and kiddie molesters deserve privacy, now this...me very very confused... If he was blown away, what would you have said? :weird: Or have I just taken the bait??? :slap:

Lou Girardin
28th September 2005, 12:00
One minute he is implying we live in a Police State and kiddie molesters deserve privacy, now this...me very very confused... If he was blown away, what would you have said? :weird: Or have I just taken the bait??? :slap:

Yup. It's called sarcasm, the lowest form of wit.

Patrick
29th September 2005, 01:14
Yup. It's called sarcasm, the lowest form of wit.

Hard to tell sometimes... :niceone:

WINJA
8th October 2005, 18:38
Are you some sort of panic merchant? Lets revisit this thread in six months and see if your predictions have come true. Will you admit to being stupid or a moron if your predictions are false?
DOES THIS CHRISTCHURCH HOAX TYPE JOKE BOMBER COUNT YOU STUPID CUNT, IF THE TAURANGA GUY GOT TIME IN JAIL THIS CHRISTCHURCH GUY WOULDA THOUGHT TWICE

scumdog
8th October 2005, 18:43
DOES THIS CHRISTCHURCH HOAX TYPE JOKE BOMBER COUNT YOU STUPID CUNT, IF THE TAURANGA GUY GOT TIME IN JAIL THIS CHRISTCHURCH GUY WOULDA THOUGHT TWICE

What, about throwing his dummy bomb-belt into a rubbish bin because it was to awkward to travel with?????

Wise up, when has anybody going home from a party ever "thought twice"???

Has ANYBODY being put in jail really detered anybody else from doing the same thing? - not by present prison populations it hasn't eh?

WINJA
8th October 2005, 18:50
What, about throwing his dummy bomb-belt into a rubbish bin because it was to awkward to travel with?????

Wise up, when has anybody going home from a party ever "thought twice"???

Has ANYBODY being put in jail really detered anybody else from doing the same thing? - not by present prison populations it hasn't eh?
SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT IS NOT A DETERENT .
YEAH THAT GUY IN CHRISTCHURCH WOULDA THOUGHT TWICE IF THE TAURANGA GUY GOT PRISON TIME CAUSE HE WOULD KNOW THERES NO LONGER A TIME NOR PLACE FOR BOMB HOAXES OR A FAKE BOMB

spudchucka
8th October 2005, 19:06
DOES THIS CHRISTCHURCH HOAX TYPE JOKE BOMBER COUNT YOU STUPID CUNT, IF THE TAURANGA GUY GOT TIME IN JAIL THIS CHRISTCHURCH GUY WOULDA THOUGHT TWICE
If you think it counts then you are the only stupid cunt here. It was a prop from a bad taste party left in a rubbish bin by a guy who couldn't get into a night club because of what he was wearing.

There was obviously no intenet on the part of the person that left it there, although a great deal of stupidity, have you got rellies in Ch Ch?

Your rhetoric suggests that we will be the subject of many copy cat attempts by persons of similar backgrounds because the only penalty imposed was to deport the man. That makes me think that YOU are a stupid cunt!

WINJA
8th October 2005, 20:04
If you think it counts then you are the only stupid cunt here. It was a prop from a bad taste party left in a rubbish bin by a guy who couldn't get into a night club because of what he was wearing.

There was obviously no intenet on the part of the person that left it there, although a great deal of stupidity, have you got rellies in Ch Ch?

Your rhetoric suggests that we will be the subject of many copy cat attempts by persons of similar backgrounds because the only penalty imposed was to deport the man. That makes me think that YOU are a stupid cunt!
THE TAURANGA ONE WASNT REAL EITHER , IF THAT GUY GOT PUNISHED THE CHRISTCHURCH GUY WOULDA THOUGHT FIRST , 10 YEARS AGO THIS WOULD BE FUNNY , ITS NOT FUNNY THESE DAYS THE WORLD IS A LITTLE MORE SERIOUS ABOUT BOMBERS AND THE POLICE SHOULDA MADE THAT CLEAR WITH THE TAURANGA CASE , YOU PIGS ARE FUCKEN STUPID FOR LETTING THAT TAURANGA GUY GO , ADMIT IT , YOU PIGS FUCKED UP , WHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD CAN YOU SAY YOU HAVE A BOMB THREATEN TO BLOW UP PEOPLE AND PROPERTY AND NOT ONLY LIVE (CAUSE YOU PIGS SHOULDA SHOT HIM) BUT THEN NOT GET PROSOCUTED , YOU STUPID CUNTS NOW EVERY ONE THAT DOESNT WANT GO BE SENT HOME CAN JUST BARICADE THEMSELF IN A BUILDING PRETEND TO HAVE A BOMB WASTE LOTS OF TIME AND MONEY AND BE NO WORSE OFF

marty
8th October 2005, 20:14
now winja, i know you're no fool, and i can never figure out if you're trolling or not, but the POLICE charged the tauranga guy with a large number of offences. IMMIGRATION subsequently sought his deportation, and the JUSTICE system, run by the JUSTICE dept (not the POLICE system run by the POLICE dept) allowed the JUSTICE dept to release the said suspect into the IMMIGRATION depts custody, and henceforth deport him.
you really need to move on from this POLICE letting everyone off thing.

WINJA
8th October 2005, 20:26
now winja, i know you're no fool, and i can never figure out if you're trolling or not, but the POLICE charged the tauranga guy with a large number of offences. IMMIGRATION subsequently sought his deportation, and the JUSTICE system, run by the JUSTICE dept (not the POLICE system run by the POLICE dept) allowed the JUSTICE dept to release the said suspect into the IMMIGRATION depts custody, and henceforth deport him.
you really need to move on from this POLICE letting everyone off thing.
NOT WHAT I SAW ON THE TV INTERVIEW , THAT COP SAID IT WAS NOT WORTH PROSOCUTING SO THEY RELEASED HIM TO IMMIGRATION TO BE DEPORTED , THATS THE COPS CALL TO PROSOCUTE OR NOT AND IMMIGRATION CAN THEN DEPORT HIM AFTER HIS 5 TO 10 YEARS IN JAIL, WHICH HE SHOULDA GOT

marty
8th October 2005, 20:30
if he was arrested, he was charged. from experience, it would be more like - 'it's not worth proceeding', as it would be a lost fight against immigration (who have much greater power then the police)

scumdog
8th October 2005, 20:30
THE TAURANGA ONE WASNT REAL EITHER , IF THAT GUY GOT PUNISHED THE CHRISTCHURCH GUY WOULDA THOUGHT FIRST , 10 YEARS AGO THIS WOULD BE FUNNY , ITS NOT FUNNY THESE DAYS THE WORLD IS A LITTLE MORE SERIOUS ABOUT BOMBERS AND THE POLICE SHOULDA MADE THAT CLEAR WITH THE TAURANGA CASE , YOU PIGS ARE FUCKEN STUPID FOR LETTING THAT TAURANGA GUY GO , ADMIT IT , YOU PIGS FUCKED UP , WHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD CAN YOU SAY YOU HAVE A BOMB THREATEN TO BLOW UP PEOPLE AND PROPERTY AND NOT ONLY LIVE (CAUSE YOU PIGS SHOULDA SHOT HIM) BUT THEN NOT GET PROSOCUTED , YOU STUPID CUNTS NOW EVERY ONE THAT DOESNT WANT GO BE SENT HOME CAN JUST BARICADE THEMSELF IN A BUILDING PRETEND TO HAVE A BOMB WASTE LOTS OF TIME AND MONEY AND BE NO WORSE OFF

Nice troll but I know (hope?) you're smarter than to really believe what you've just posted.

Patrick
8th October 2005, 20:38
now winja, i know you're no fool, and i can never figure out if you're trolling or not, but the POLICE charged the tauranga guy with a large number of offences. IMMIGRATION subsequently sought his deportation, and the JUSTICE system, run by the JUSTICE dept (not the POLICE system run by the POLICE dept) allowed the JUSTICE dept to release the said suspect into the IMMIGRATION depts custody, and henceforth deport him.
you really need to move on from this POLICE letting everyone off thing.

As usual, Police did do the hard work. Typical courts did their usual and let him go to Immigration, who kicked his sorry arse outta here, saving you and me $50,000 a year to feed the loser...10 years, up to at least $500,000, or a plane ticket outta here? More money to give to the unemployed gang bangers... now theres money well spent too...but thats another story I suppose...

WINJA
8th October 2005, 21:08
As usual, Police did do the hard work. Typical courts did their usual and let him go to Immigration, who kicked his sorry arse outta here, saving you and me $50,000 a year to feed the loser...10 years, up to at least $500,000, or a plane ticket outta here? More money to give to the unemployed gang bangers... now theres money well spent too...but thats another story I suppose...
SHOULD SERIOUS CRIME BE PUNISHED ? I DONT CARE IF IT COST $500,000 TO PUNISH HIM , POINT IS ITS A DETERENT FOR OTHERS. THE POLICE DID NOT DO HARD WORK AT ALL ,THEY DECIDED NOT TO PROSOCUTE , I HEARD THAT PIG ON TV SAY THERE IS NOTHING TO BE GAINED FROM A PROSOCUTION. IMMIGGRATION DO NOT HAVE THE POWER TO REMOVE FROM POLICE SOMEONE WHO IS BEING PROSOCUTED

Patrick
8th October 2005, 21:23
[QUOTE=WINJA]SHOULD SERIOUS CRIME BE PUNISHED ?
Yep...

I DONT CARE IF IT COST $500,000 TO PUNISH HIM ,
I do...

POINT IS ITS A DETERENT FOR OTHERS.
Yep

THE POLICE DID NOT DO HARD WORK AT ALL ,
????? Cordons, negotiation, armed offender squads, donut and coffee SELF SERVICE... couldn't even take it to them, had to get it themselves...

THEY DECIDED NOT TO PROSOCUTE ,
Probably on legal advice...

I HEARD THAT PIG ON TV SAY
Where can I get a talking pig? Would be great in bars, win lots of bets and free beer...

THERE IS NOTHING TO BE GAINED FROM A PROSOCUTION.
As before, legal advice probably...

IMMIGGRATION DO NOT HAVE THE POWER TO REMOVE FROM POLICE SOMEONE WHO IS BEING PROSOCUTED
They do have some awesome powers, but if not prosecuting, give him to them, they kick him out, get rid of him.

I think getting rid of the wanker is far more cost effective. Why keep him here? He fled his country to live the good life here, but stuffed that up, didn't he? What better punishment to send him back to his country...let him be their problem, not ours. IMHO...

scumdog
8th October 2005, 21:24
C'mon WINJA, worry more about your unpainted roof otherwise your about to take the "Windmill Jouster" trophy from Lou.

Clockwork
9th October 2005, 06:47
Where did we get the idea that this guy did it because he wanted a free ticket home? I would have assumed that any over-stayer could get his return ticket bought by the state by simply refusing to buy his own.

spudchucka
9th October 2005, 11:28
THE TAURANGA ONE WASNT REAL EITHER , IF THAT GUY GOT PUNISHED THE CHRISTCHURCH GUY WOULDA THOUGHT FIRST
You are talking absolute shit! The ChCh guy went to a bad taste party dressed as a suicide bomber. No harm in that. He then went out on the town but found that he couldn't get into night clubs dressed the way that he was so he discards his getup in the nearest rubbish bin. His only inent was to get into the night club. There's no harm in that. He should have thought about the consequences of somebody finding it the following day, in that he has been reckless. However to draw comparisons between this event and the Tauranga event simply highlights how retarded your thought processes are.

Lou Girardin
10th October 2005, 15:02
C'mon WINJA, worry more about your unpainted roof otherwise your about to take the "Windmill Jouster" trophy from Lou.

Don't bring me into this one chummy. I'm on the side of the angels here.

Skyryder
10th October 2005, 16:59
SHOULD SERIOUS CRIME BE PUNISHED ? I DONT CARE IF IT COST $500,000 TO PUNISH HIM , POINT IS ITS A DETERENT FOR OTHERS. THE POLICE DID NOT DO HARD WORK AT ALL ,THEY DECIDED NOT TO PROSOCUTE , I HEARD THAT PIG ON TV SAY THERE IS NOTHING TO BE GAINED FROM A PROSOCUTION. IMMIGGRATION DO NOT HAVE THE POWER TO REMOVE FROM POLICE SOMEONE WHO IS BEING PROSOCUTED

I can see half a mil better spent than wasting it on some tosser when the better option is deportation.

Skyryder

Ixion
10th October 2005, 17:23
Who says that if y'deport them the country has to pay for an airline ticket ? " See the sea? Nice fresh air. Sea leads to all places. Can y'swim. Well, nows a good time to learn". Seriously, there's ships. Put them on a ship, let them work their passage. No work, no eat.

muzz
10th October 2005, 18:19
Quote: Put them on a ship, let them work their passage.

Are you sugesting that we prositute them to the merchant navy :whistle:

Ixion
10th October 2005, 20:37
Quote: Put them on a ship, let them work their passage.

Are you sugesting that we prositute them to the merchant navy :whistle:

Sounds good to me.