Here's a great ad opportunity for Tui

[Crasherfromwayback]

Clint Rickards isn't a rapist.

[bistard]

yeah right

[Crasherfromwayback]

The guy's filth. I hope he gets to share a cell with Burton.:sick:

[Squeak the Rat]

The guy's filth.

You could almost say he's the chief of filth :lol:

[Steam]

I think someone stuck up that on a Tui billboard during the trial for the rape of Louise Nicholas, it got taken down pretty damn fast.
What a bastard eh, I guess all of NZ knows the suppressed information by now, he's SO going to jail.

[0arbreaka]

agreed, he is a sick fuck... something something bottle something something vagina

[Hitcher]

This matter is still before the Courts. Under New Zealand's "justice" system people are considered innocent until proven guilty. Speculation as to the guilt or otherwise of any defendant in public media in these circumstances is a highly risky business. You may not care as to what happens to your personal reputation, but ill considered posts put at risk the reputation of this site and its owner.

You have been warned.

[ynot slow]

i agree with hitcher innocent till proven guilty,granted very dubious

[Crasherfromwayback]

This matter is still before the Courts. Under New Zealand's "justice" system people are considered innocent until proven guilty. Speculation as to the guilt or otherwise of any defendant in public media in these circumstances is a highly risky business. You may not care as to what happens to your personal reputation, but ill considered posts put at risk the reputation of this site and its owner.

You have been warned.

That's not actually always the case I'm afraid.
They (the police) claim I was clocked at 143 kph and they suspended my licence on the spot for 28 days. The officer in question (who was travelling in the opposite direction at 100kph on the other side of a concrete median barrier higher than the bike I was riding) has 'identified' me by my 'multi coloured' helmet. That's a closing speed of 243kph. I was stopped app 10km's up the road by a seperate officer and held there until officer 'A' turned back, and came to identify me by.....yes, my multi coloured helmet.

I'm going to court to defend the charge, as it's bollicks.

So how come, I'm guilty before proved so? I've had no licence for 23 days now....not that I'm counting....what happens if the charge is thrown out (as it should be)?

I certainly don't want to bring the site into disrepute, and I'd like to think it'd be me in person they'd wanna have words with over my views.

Bring it on. It's a personal view. The jury has been selected. They're not allowed to be swayed by anything they may see here outside of the court room. I think you're panicking over nothing.

[Hitcher]

I think you're panicking over nothing.

No panic. Just a warning about people taking care about what they post on this thread.

[Crasherfromwayback]

As long as they are simply 'opinions', I doubt there's a problem.

[Steam]

The rule is called "Sub judice" or some spelling like that, and it means you can't discuss it in the media, and that includes on a web forum like this, so technically if we discuss the trial or his crimes, beyond reporting of what happened in court, KB could be done for contempt of court.
ALso if we say what a lot of people know already about the suppressed evidence then we can be done for ... um, contempt again?
Yeah, something like that.

[Donor]

you can't discuss it in the media, and that includes on a web forum like this

Does it?

I thought that could only be an issue if the site was hosted on NZ soil, as the NZ judicial system would have no jurisdiction nor sway over a foreign service provider.

Interested to know the answer to this - after all, CYFSwatch is a prime example.

[Hitcher]

Steam has summarised things well. The voracity of any "opinion" counts not a jot.

[Steam]

Does it?
I thought that could only be an issue if the site was hosted on NZ soil, as the NZ judicial system would have no jurisdiction nor sway over a foreign service provider.
Interested to know the answer to this - after all, CYFSwatch is a prime example.

Yeah, interesting point of law. Lawyers out there? Opinions?

[Hitcher]

Does it?

I thought that could only be an issue if the site was hosted on NZ soil, as the NZ judicial system would have no jurisdiction nor sway over a foreign service provider.

Interested to know the answer to this - after all, CYFSwatch is a prime example.

This has yet to be put to the test under New Zealand law. Although the server may be in a foreign country, the opinions expressed on this site are provided by (in some cases identifiable) New Zealanders and the site itself is owned by a New Zealander.

In the anti-CYF blog site, various internet agencies buckled to political pressures.

Rather than initiating a test case, let's just be careful what we post until after the Court has handed down its decision, OK?

[Lou Girardin]

Guilty or not. These guys have a real prediliction for gangbangs. Definitely sexually suspect.
I would bet that the girl is just an intermediary for their true desires. They should all come out of the closet. (Before they get a cell with bubba)

[Crasherfromwayback]

The rule is called "Sub judice" or some spelling like that, and it means you can't discuss it in the media, and that includes on a web forum like this, so technically if we discuss the trial or his crimes, beyond reporting of what happened in court, KB could be done for contempt of court.
ALso if we say what a lot of people know already about the suppressed evidence then we can be done for ... um, contempt again?
Yeah, something like that.

Not true. That only applies to anyone DIRECTLY INVOLVED in the case.
You can't be done for contempt of court by stating facts that are no longer suppressed, that have nothing to do with this particular trial anyway.
The group of people that were handing out the flyers with SUPRESSED information at this arseholes last trial were in contempt. But even then, they didn't go down for it.


Steam has summarised things well. The voracity of any "opinion" counts not a jot.

Again, not true Hitcher. The only risk you run for placing your own PERSONAL OPINION is the slight risk of a slander/deffamation case against you.

So I'm only voicing my opinion, that this total piece of poo, is a big bully boy rapist that hid behind his police unifrom and commited numerous indecencies upon scared defensless women.

Gee.....this is hardly supressed evidence either......did you notice that on the first day of his last trial he turned up in his full POLICE UNIFORM??
This, while he was actually suspended!! "I'm obviously not guilty, I mean look, I'm a policeman!"

[Steam]

Did you know he's on suspended on FULL PAY until the trials are over?

[Crasherfromwayback]

And just in case you're wondering why I've got such a bee in my bonnet about this, I'll tell you.

I was involved with a woman a couple of years back who was pack raped by filthy animals. The damage done by such poeple is often (as it was in this case) irreparable.

Pack mentality.

It needs punishment only a bullet can fix.
And yes, I'd pull the trigger.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Did you know he's on suspended on FULL PAY until the trials are over?

Yes I do. That's the system for ya.
And hey....if they guys innocent, fair enough. If NOT, he should have to pay back every fucking cent.

[Toaster]

I agree with Hitcher. Good points made.

[Madness]

It needs punishment only a bullet can fix.
And yes, I'd pull the trigger.

Just how I feel about the "man" from Naenae. Sorry, off topic.

[Crasherfromwayback]

I agree with Hitcher. Good points made.

You can agree with Hitcher all you like, but he's wrong in this instance.

He, and maybe you too must think I'm pretty stupid if I'd write such posts without knowing the law governing such things.

Hug those 'pc' trees guys. They're your friends.

[Toaster]

You can agree with Hitcher all you like, but he's wrong in this instance.

He, and maybe you too must think I'm pretty stupid if I'd write such posts without knowing the law governing such things.

Hug those 'pc' trees guys. They're your friends.

Dude, I dont think you are stupid at all. We are all free to express our opinions - that is what forums are for, but in especially media hyped cases maybe giving them 'the accused' a bit more 'slack in the rope' might be called for(?) Then they can hang themselves (Rickards that is...) if he is guilty.

But that is merely my worthless opinion. I actually thought the thread was interesting and worth putting out there... good debate. So don't think badly of people just because they may see things differently. I certainly don't.

[Steam]

you too must think I'm pretty stupid

No way, anyone who works in a bike shop gets Respekt.
You guys know the mysteries, you are the high priests of the Two-Wheeled God,

[Crasherfromwayback]

Dude, I dont think you are stupid at all. We are all free to express our opinions - that is what forums are for, but in especially media hyped cases maybe giving them 'the accused' a bit more 'slack in the rope' might be called for(?) Then they can hang themselves (Rickards that is...) if he is guilty.

But that is merely my worthless opinion. I actually thought the thread was interesting and worth putting out there... good debate. So don't think badly of people just because they may see things differently. I certainly don't.

Yeah sorry, tad strong on my reply to you. As I said in another post here, a really touchy subject for me, and I'm sure others here.

Your opinion is far from worthless, and that's what I was looking for. Opinions.
There's no need to hide from the law when it comes to 'opinions' as there's no law against having one.

He in my 'opinion' has already been given plenty of rope, it's yet to do it's job.
I for one do not fully trust our 'justice system', nor the police when it comes to such high profile things.

Arthur Allen Thomas.

[Toaster]

Yeah sorry, tad strong on my reply to you. As I said in another post here, a really touchy subject for me, and I'm sure others here.

Your opinion is far from worthless, and that's what I was looking for. Opinions.
There's no need to hide from the law when it comes to 'opinions' as there's no law against having one.

He in my 'opinion' has already been given plenty of rope, it's yet to do it's job.
I for one do not fully trust our 'justice system', nor the police when it comes to such high profile things.

Arthur Allen Thomas.

No worries mate. It's all good. I reckon our justice system needs some serious work to fix it up, it's a blimmin mess!

[Crasherfromwayback]

No worries mate. It's all good. I reckon our justice system needs some serious work to fix it up, it's a blimmin mess!

Yeah, why on earth they consider it a good idea to have twelve members of the general public as a jury I don't know.
They (generally) know nothing of the intricacies of the written law, and are far too easily swayed by people (lawyers) that do.

12 People that know and understand law is a far better idea I feel.

[Toaster]

Yeah, why on earth they consider it a good idea to have twelve members of the general public as a jury I don't know.
They (generally) know nothing of the intricacies of the written law, and are far too easily swayed by people (lawyers) that do.

12 People that know and understand law is a far better idea I feel.

Yep, it's all set up by lawyers for lawyers - getting rich off us taxpayers while victims get diddly squat.

[Lou Girardin]

This matter is still before the Courts. Under New Zealand's "justice" system people are considered innocent until proven guilty. Speculation as to the guilt or otherwise of any defendant in public media in these circumstances is a highly risky business. You may not care as to what happens to your personal reputation, but ill considered posts put at risk the reputation of this site and its owner.

You have been warned.

You are getting far too sensitive Hitcher. The justice system does not forbid the voicing of opinions.
I doubt that a bike forum meets the definition of a public medium that the public at large are exposed to.

[Hitcher]

You are getting far too sensitive Hitcher. The justice system does not forbid the voicing of opinions.
I doubt that a bike forum meets the definition of a public medium that the public at large are exposed to.

And neither am I forbidding the voicing of opinion. I'm just saying let's be careful about the context and content of any opinion posted prior to the Court's judgement on this case.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Well here's a question for one and all.....and seeing as it relates to the last time this 'fellow' was before the courts facing very similar charges, it's perfectly safe.

What sort of person would wear his full police uniform to a rape trial even though he's actually suspended from the police force?

A big bully boy that's trying to hide behind the uniform and intimidate the jury?

[Patrick]

Well here's a question for one and all.....and seeing as it relates to the last time this 'fellow' was before the courts facing very similar charges, it's perfectly safe.

What sort of person would wear his full police uniform to a rape trial even though he's actually suspended from the police force?

A big bully boy that's trying to hide behind the uniform and intimidate the jury?

Fair call... bad move on his part, but maybe it worked for him...

But... (with tongue in cheek, I am not sticking up for him either...) even though he was found innocent, what if he actually was innocent in the Louise matter?

Even though he was found innocent then, I bet he will be found guilty now... and I mean not from the evidence in this case either...

[avgas]

I actually agree and dissagree - if this was international soil i could also talk about your mum etc or how i like eating people.
Its a double edge sword freedom.

[avgas]

Well here's a question for one and all.....and seeing as it relates to the last time this 'fellow' was before the courts facing very similar charges, it's perfectly safe.

What sort of person would wear his full police uniform to a rape trial even though he's actually suspended from the police force?

A big bully boy that's trying to hide behind the uniform and intimidate the jury?
Some one who doesn't own any nice clothes?

[avgas]

And neither am I forbidding the voicing of opinion. I'm just saying let's be careful about the context and content of any opinion posted prior to the Court's judgement on this case.

And watch your spelling!

[pete376403]

Well here's a question for one and all.....and seeing as it relates to the last time this 'fellow' was before the courts facing very similar charges, it's perfectly safe.

What sort of person would wear his full police uniform to a rape trial even though he's actually suspended from the police force?

A big bully boy that's trying to hide behind the uniform and intimidate the jury?

IIRC he got a bollocking for that from the judge and was ordered not to wear the uniform to court again

[pete376403]

Steam has summarised things well. The voracity of any "opinion" counts not a jot.
VORACITY? Extreme gluttony, extreme desire to eat? Sure you don't mean "veracity"?

(Sorry, couldn't resist, not often one gets to fault Mr Hitchers use of language...)

[Crasherfromwayback]

IIRC he got a bollocking for that from the judge and was ordered not to wear the uniform to court again

A bollocking?? Fuck that, he should've been arrested for impersonating a Police Officer!:nono:

[Guitana]

A bollocking?? Fuck that, he should've been arrested for impersonating a Police Officer!:nono:

As John Cambell would say MARVELLOUS!!!!!!!!

[Guitana]

Yep, it's all set up by lawyers for lawyers - getting rich off us taxpayers while victims get diddly squat.

Do something about it!!!!

I'm going to take a shit on my member of parliaments door step and then piss in his letterbox but that's got nothing to do with this!!!

[Lou Girardin]

It's funny how so many people complain about political correctness, then toe the line without a thought.
How about saying "fuck the system, I'll say/print what I like".
Gosh, If enough people did that we may end up with a democracy.

[Guitana]

Remember guys it's not just Clint Rickards involved in this theres the other two Bob Schollum and his faithful side kick who's name evades me at this point of time!! But it would appear if all accounts are correct that these guys were on the big power trip and out to prove themselves!!
The only people that know the truth are the ones directly involved and they know it's three against one!
Besides NZ police are the most honest in the world

[Hitcher]

How about saying "fuck the system, I'll say/print what I like".
Gosh, If enough people did that we may end up with a democracy.

Such an environment carries considerable responsibilities and requires a level of maturity not found in your average New Zealander.

[avgas]

It's funny how so many people complain about political correctness, then toe the line without a thought.
How about saying "fuck the system, I'll say/print what I like".
Gosh, If enough people did that we may end up with a democracy.

Nah just burnt down schools and protests on the beach - thats all your gonna get here

[Faster]

A bollocking?? Fuck that, he should've been arrested for impersonating a Police Officer!:nono:
Hard Candy! Pete he needs to be taught a lesson! :0) Icepack anyone?

[Crasherfromwayback]

Hard Candy! Pete he needs to be taught a lesson! :0) Icepack anyone?

Not really Love, as she didn't actually cut his balls off!

[Faster]

Not really Love, as she didn't actually cut his balls off!
But I like what she got him to do to himself........... Is that wrong??

[Crasherfromwayback]

Not at all!

[Ixion]

The rule is called "Sub judice" or some spelling like that, and it means you can't discuss it in the media, and that includes on a web forum like this, so technically if we discuss the trial or his crimes, beyond reporting of what happened in court, KB could be done for contempt of court.
ALso if we say what a lot of people know already about the suppressed evidence then we can be done for ... um, contempt again?
Yeah, something like that.

Nonsense.

So long as no mention is made of matter that is the subject of a suppression order, then, apart from those directly involved (jurors, witnesses etc) there is no law in this country that forbids fair comment of a trial while it is in progress.

It is totally legal for me , for instance , to say "It doesn't look good for Defendant X, the evidence is looking pretty damning" . or, "I don't think the prosecution evidence about XXXX amounted to much".

TPTB would dearly love people to believe that any matter that is any way under the jurisdiction of a court cannot be mentioned at all, ever. That way , it is very easy for them to hush things up. Those who pander to their attempts to stifle fair comment and reasonably stated opinion should carefully reflect on how little freedom would be left us if such a consition were to come to pass. Very little indeed, methinks.

EDIT BTW cyfswatch is back up at http://cyfswatchnz.wordpress.com/. Though I doubt that is a very good example of responsble public comment.

[Guitana]

See Clint can't have done it he was in a full leg cast plus an all blacks backing him up on the night in question they were busy screwin some other bird!!!!

[Hitcher]

We should start a poll as to whether the accused will get acquitted or not. That full-leg plaster cast has potential as a robust alibi.

[Guitana]

We should start a poll as to whether the accused will get acquitted or not. That full-leg plaster cast has potential as a robust alibi.

Dosent excuse the other two though but still pokes a huge hole in the case!!
like a hole the size of the entrance to the MT VIC tunnel!!!

[Squeak the Rat]

Dosent excuse the other two though but still pokes a huge hole in the case!!
like a hole the size of the entrance to the MT VIC tunnel!!!

I thought he was the one with the bottle. Can still use a bottle when your legs is a cast......

[Crasherfromwayback]

We should start a poll as to whether the accused will get acquitted or not. That full-leg plaster cast has potential as a robust alibi.

Yeah that's a good one alright! Although, if I'm not wrong aren't the dates the alledged offence/s took place something like between Nov-April or something? Didn't he get the cast off in Dec? Crutches till mid-late Jan?

Here's the way I see it (Him).

1: He was a policeman.
2: His mates that he seems to have spent a lot of his time with have been convicted of rape.
3: His name keeps coming up with these same 'mates'.
4: He's an ex undercover that's used to lying to, and deceiving people to get the right 'outcome'
5: My mates know who I sleep with, and under what circumstances.
6: I know who my mates sleep with, and under what circumstances.
7: Even IF he's never forced sex upon a woman, or he's NEVER sexually violated a woman, he without doubt IN MY MIND has known his mates have been doing so/have done so.
8: So seeing as he was a policeman (as were some of the perpertrators), why does that make him any better than the ones that've gone down for it?

I tell you all here and now, if I EVER knew any of my friends had done such heinous acts, I'd have no hesitation in going straight to the POLICE.

Although it seems if you lived in Rotorua around the time of the 'alleged' offending, they'd more than likely tell you to piss off and ask your mate if he wanted to join their 'gang'!