Chef stabs assailant and now faces prison.

[Delerium]

Not sure thats quite right...

The Police regularly decide that its "not in the public interest" to prosecute. Recent examples of course are Helen Clarks electoral spending fraud, but I'm sure any watcher of the news could name another half dozen or so.

All New Zealanders in theory have the right to self defence.

I'm not sure of the exact words, but basically the law says something like "you are allowed to use reasonable force for the defence of yourself or others, in the circumstances as you believe them to be"

So I can't understand why regularly as clockwork, the police prosecute Joe Citizen if he uses force to defend himself.

After all, it's exactly the same law as the police rely on for their use of force.

Except when it involves exhuming a body, then you dont prosecute.

[Indoo]

So I can't understand why regularly as clockwork, the police prosecute Joe Citizen if he uses force to defend himself.

Do you know how many times the Police turn a blind eye or condone Joe Citizen using force to defend himself?

The cases where people have been prosecuted are when the force used is in the extreme, ie stabbing someone, shooting someone etc, the vast majority of cases where Joe Citizen might have gone a bit overboard are not prosecuted although legally they surely could be.

[Wolf]

OK, so I gather from reading it all that a bunch of wannabe gangstas patterning themselves off an American gang decided that some straight-looking bloke wearing a certain-coloured shirt is a member of a rival gang of wannabes, also patterned off and American gang, and start threatening him, throwing things at him, spitting on him and one of them punches him as they are about to leave the bus.

The bloke then grabs a knife out of his roll and plunges it up to its hilt in one of the gangstas. He then flees the scene and is later arrested and pleads guilty. It is inferred in the original report that this bloke does have a minor criminal record.

It is later revealed that the gangstas are carrying concealed weapons.

What is not reported: whether or not the gangstas are arrested for intimidation, assault and carrying concealed weapons (and illegal - the switchblade).

If they were not arrested and charged, then they should have been - including the wounded one.

They were engaged in criminal activities whilst carrying weaopns: they committed assault (spitting is assault under the law, as is the punch that was throw), they deliberately intimidated the bloke.

It could be argued (anywhere but here in NZ) that he was in fear of his life - outnumbered by a threatening mob and then assaulted.

That could be argued as justification for an armed response in several States in the USA.

However, it is also stated that they were leaving when one of them hit him so it could be counter-argued that the "threat" was about to go away, removing justification for self-defence.

Even in "gun-crazy" USA, you're not allowed to plug an assailant who is leaving/escaping.

If they were leaving, the "in fear of one's life" argument is nullified and the stabbing becomes an offence.

NZ law needs tightening up in a lot of areas.

Those gangstas also should have been arrested and charged with a variety of offences.

What next? In a brawl between Mongrel Mob and Black Power they'll arrest only the members of one of the gangs and let the other gang go home?

While one could argue that the chef was in the wrong for stabbing one of them as they were about to leave, the yoofs were also in the wrong for intimidating him, assaulting him and carrying offensive weapons.

Much is made of the police having an "obligation" to prosecute the chef. Do they not also have an obligation to prosecute the youth gang?

[Ocean1]

Much is made of the police having an "obligation" to prosecute the chef. Do they not also have an obligation to prosecute the youth gang?

Indeed. In fact the only rational I can think of for denying someone in the chef's situation the right to take whatever action he sees fit to minimise the chance of serious injury or death is the premis that the police will deal with the offenders on his behalf.

The fact is they're rarely there at the time of such an incident, so as far as I can see the law is inappropriate. Surely someone under attack by a superior force should have the right to employ superior weapons. It's fuck all consolation for the next of kin that one obeyed the law if it costs you your life.

[mstriumph]

"the chef stabbed the fella as he was leaving so it wasn't self-defence"
how could the chef be certain he was leaving?
he could have turned to check that no-one was coming before turning back to finish the job .... or swivelling away to get another good swing at the chef ..... one would hope that a reasonable defence lawyer could think of a dozen such things that would raise a reasonable doubt

i certainly hope the chef is not imprisoned or fined for this .......:(

[Wolf]

Indeed. In fact the only rational I can think of for denying someone in the chef's situation the right to take whatever action he sees fit to minimise the chance of serious injury or death is the premis that the police will deal with the offenders on his behalf.

The fact is they're rarely there at the time of such an incident, so as far as I can see the law is inappropriate. Surely someone under attack by a superior force should have the right to employ superior weapons. It's fuck all consolation for the next of kin that one obeyed the law if it costs you your life.
If you're outnumbered and they show no signs of backing down, I feel any rational person would have reason to fear for his/her life and so should be allowed to respond appropriately, whether or not there are "weapons" on display. Boots are weapons if used badly enough (a single person kicking the shit out of another is justification for an "assault with a lethal weapon" charge in Texas, apparently) people have been beaten to death by "unarmed" gangs all over the world.

Superior numbers = reason to fear for one's life = justification for extreme force - shoot to stop.

Of course, if you plug one of your 7 attackers and the other 6 run away, you're not allowed to shoot them in the back.

[Wolf]

"the chef stabbed the fella as he was leaving so it wasn't self-defence"
how could the chef be certain he was leaving?
he could have turned to check that no-one was coming before turning back to finish the job .... or swivelling away to get another good swing at the chef ..... one would hope that a reasonable defence lawyer could think of a dozen such things that would raise a reasonable doubt
All good points, which is why I think it should have gone to trial rather than a plea-bargain.

Best to let a jury decide if the chef genuinely had reason to believe his life was in danger at the time he plunged the knife in or whether it was "red mist" time.

[Mr Merde]

This thead is still progressing and still staying relatively on topic.

I am impressed.



This kid has fallen foul of the "Nanny State".

He took responsibility for his own safety and the result was a wanna be bully boy got hurt.

His problem has been the fac t that we are not allowed to do this anymore. The bleeding heart, liberal, tree hugging, politicos have decided that the right to protect ones self and ones family is an archaic right and therefore not relevant to their view of todays society, unless it is their safety or pocessions that are involved.

Look at the anti firearms fraternity in the US. Preaching fire and brimstone and protecting themselves with armed bodyguards. Sarah Brady and Teddy kenedy are both guilty of these double standards.

I notice that some people have suggested that here in NZ we do not have the right of self defence. RUbbish. Our laws are based upon those imported into this country by the original British settlers. Those laws that were copied by the signees of the American Declaration of Independence. The 2nd ammendment was a re write of the English Bill of Rights. Written about 150 years earlier. in the time of oliver Cromwell.

Even the UN recognises the factr that the most basic of human rights is that of self protection and safety in the life of the individual.

Our problem is that we are not encouraged to be individuals. We might start asking awkward questions of the government. Questions that the y powers would rather we didnt ask.

I agree that those gang members should be charged. The other thing I wish to know is who stood witness for the proscecution? The gang members? They have a v ersted interest in putting this kid away. makes them look tough. It also gets back some of their lost reputation.

I fully believe that any injury received in the commision of a crime is the fault of the criminal and any evidence from them is null and void.

Merde

[Wolf]

Well said, Mr Merde.

Personally, if I felt in fear of my life (or feared for the lives of my family/friends) and was not paralysed by fear, I would do what it took to stop the assailant(s) and then let the jury decide whether or not I acted out of line.

I would also be loudly baying to any reporter within earshot that those who threatened me or mine should be arrested for putting me in that life-threatening situation.

Whether or not the chef "went too far" is irrelevant to the question of the gangstas - they were committing crimes and they should have been arrested and charged. If the chef did go too far, then there would be reason to send all of them to jail, not just the chef.

They sought him out and threatened him, not the other way 'round. If, subsequently, he over-stepped the mark - like some store keepers in the States have done by exiting their shops and shooting at the fleeing armed robbers, then that is a separate matter.

One rule for all - put all of those who committed crimes on trial, not just one person.

[Patrick]

Well, I'd read some of the media stuff about the case, including these snippets:

Read those snippets, the court stuff was fine, the rest was utter shite. FACTS they claim... what a load of bollocks. Gutter trash is what that was.


i have ALWAYS wondered why a hulking great, fit, young policeman, trained up in all sorts of japanese nose-holds and other mayhem-restraining measures, is permitted to legally carry a gun and shoot someone in self-defence

1 training day in 6 months is all we get for these Japanese Nose Hold thingies... You have to train daily so that the reaction comes naturally. If you have to think about how to do the hold, you lose.

The real world is quite different to your imaginings... Ever struggled with a nutter? Took 7 of us once to restrain one. All skin, cock and ribs and I was the smallest at 6'2 and 95kgs. I almost broke his leg with a baton strike but it didn't even make him flinch. They call that type of drive "goal oriented." They feel no pain and have absolutely amazing power and strength.


IV done a few forms of martial arts over the years. It takes a significant period of time to become proficient and requires constant training to remain so. It gives you the ability to look after yourself agains an angry adversary, two at a pinch. go up against somebody with a weapon and the odds ara against you.

Besides if somebody is prepared to pull a knife on you that tells me they are prepared to use it and kill me. Then its game on.. you do what it takes to survive. you have a bigger meaner weapon, then use it.

Never a truer word spoken... bling to you...


Get a whack in the head by a golf club and you are unlikely to get up. I have no doubt that the police officer considered his life in peril.

However having said that I am unsure if said officer was in a position of where he could retreat or if he was cornered. I have not followed this too closely ...Skyryder

He had backed up, was met by the curb and could go no further, could not take his eyes from the offender as he approached. Also had other obstacles in the area, again unable to take his eyes from the offender because if he did, and he rushed at him, copper would lose. How quick do you think a fit young man could move in a second or two while you took your eyes off him?


What is not reported: whether or not the gangstas are arrested for intimidation, assault and carrying concealed weapons (and illegal - the switchblade).

If they were not arrested and charged, then they should have been - including the wounded one.

Exactly... and yet still no word from anywhere on this....

[davereid]

I clearly heard the cops telling Mr Wallace to please be patient and not do anything silly, that back-up would be here soon, otherwise they would be obliged to baton, pepper-spray or shoot him - and oh, could he please refrain from beating them with the golf-club if they had to get close to him and use their batons.
And please stay down-wind of them in case they had to pepper spray him, and by the way, pepper-spray DOES work on you, doesn't it?.


Scumdog has hit the mark. Wallace was shot for not doing as he was told. The Police were only endangered because they made a threat, and Wallace didn't do as he was told. He wasn't killing or even scaring anyone. He was just breaking windows. All the cops had to do to avoid shooting him was walk away. And all that would have happened was a few more windows would have been broken.

I'm not passing judgement as to shooting him was justified or not. I don't really think it matters that Patrick and 10 other cops were needed to subdue a similar offender.

I am saying that Police shoot based on exactly the same self defence laws as Joe Citizen.

So when looking at a citizen who uses force in self defence, the question is, "Would a Police officer have been charged ?and if so, found guilty ?"

[Wolf]

All the cops had to do to avoid shooting him was walk away. And all that would have happened was a few ore windows would have been broken.
And if it had been your property he had vandalised you'd probably be asking why they hadn't arrested him while they were there. Fucking cops, bloke's smashing up my property and they just get back in their cars and drive away, leaving him to have a fucking field-day on my premises. Should've arrested him, the cocks.

So they go to arrest the guy as per their duty and instead of putting the club down he elects to directly threaten them, obliging them to shoot-to-stop or wind up with their brains splattered over the surrounding countryside.

"Shoot to stop" is as many rounds in the centre of mass as it takes to down the person. if they crumple quickly enough they won't get shot very often. They may be lucky and be one of the 85% (OK, US figure there but it shouldn't be too different to elsewhere) who survive being shot in the centre of mass by a cop.

Sometimes they die - them's the breaks when threatening to kill a police officer.

Read Tueller's report. A baseball bat, golf club or knife is a clear and present danger to life at up to 21 feet. That fact is recognised by law enforcement officials and is treated accordingly.

Don't want to be shot? Put down anything that could be used as a weapon and surrender when told.

[davereid]

A baseball bat, golf club or knife is a clear and present danger to life at up to 21 feet. That fact is recognised by law enforcement officials and is treated accordingly.

Exactly the point .. the police (in theory) face exactly the same test as Joe Citizen.

The Chef would have passed that test...

[Wolf]

Exactly the point .. the police (in theory) face exactly the same test as Joe Citizen.

The Chef would have passed that test...
The assailants were definitely well within lethal range - of their boots, if they weren't carrying that assortment of weapons.

I do not know the full story behind why the chef's lawyer advised him to take a plea bargain rather than defend the greater charge before a jury. I do not know if, in his situation, the use of potentially lethal force was "justifiable". Perhaps he stabbed the crim after it was "obvious to a reasonable person" that the ordeal was over and they were leaving. Maybe it's just "they had empty hands, you drew a knife, therefore you're wrong." I don't know.

I strongly think that the law should recognise basic inequalities - me vs a hardened gang member the size of Lias, two or more against one, etc and recognise that there is no such thing as an "unarmed" attacker, that boots and fists DO kill.

Perhaps some of these scummy little toe-rags should kick a few politicians to death (I know, fat chance of that as these anti-gun, anti-self-defence arsewipes spend all their time surrounded by armed personal protection specialists) and do the country three favours at once - they'd get the law changed to recognise the seriousness of so-called "unarmed" attacks, they'd remove a few of the wastes of oxygen in parliament and they'd be shot by the cops so they'd be removing themselves from the gene pool as well.

The cops can't be everywhere at once and the intelligent ones know it. The citizenry should be able to take an appropriate course of action if they feel their lives are in danger, which means the legal system should recognise that 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 etc vs one is not a "fair fight" that the average member of public can get out of by running (ever hear of a wolf pack?) or gentlemanly fisticuffs.

Only the drongo politicians in their little ultra-safe universe of armed bodyguards seem to think that a half dozen gangstas pose no threat.

[Mr Merde]

...or gentlemanly fisticuffs.

....


When I was a very young man (about 13 years old) my father (a regular soldier and a vetran of the Malaya campaign and the Vietnam police action) gave me one of his few fatherly pieces of advice.


He told me that if I had to fight then I better fight to win by any means. He told me to forget about fighting like a GENTLEMAN as one who was such wouldnt be fighting in the first place.

Gentlemen dont fight, they talk, they evade, they leave but when they have to resort to violence all gentlemanly behaviour goes by the board.


BTW. Missed the full account but the late news had a breaking story about the police shooting dead a man who was threatening them with a hammer. Not six gang members reportedly with knives and such but a hammer. I dont know the full story but they felt they were in such danger that they shot to kill.

Double standards again? A civilian can't defend themselves but the "armed forces" can. What would have happened if there had of been 6 atagonists all armed with knives? The perfect excuse to break out the Bushmasters and go full rock and roll I bet.


Merde.

[Delerium]

Im a little unsre what you mean when referring to 'armed forces'. Those in the NZDF can be charged with murder just like anybody else. They are issued with a rules of engagement card and receive briefs on these also. You dont follow them you get charged. Im fairly certain that the policw will be bound by similar rules.

The thing is its easy to pick apart and criticise a situation like this when your not there, its a lot harder to make the correct decision when your pumped full of adrenalin and have 2 seconds to decide. It comes down to what can do in order to not get myself hurt.

[mstriumph]

........................The real world is quite different to your imaginings... Ever struggled with a nutter? Took 7 of us once to restrain one. All skin, cock and ribs and I was the smallest at 6'2 and 95kgs. I almost broke his leg with a baton strike but it didn't even make him flinch. They call that type of drive "goal oriented." They feel no pain and have absolutely amazing power and strength......................

yes actually
minding a deli for a mate
young fella my height but half my age, twice my strength and high on something other than adrenaline took exception to my not handing over the takings when told
attacked me with a large rusty screwdriver i hit him around the ear with a chairleg - it didn't even touch him [so i do know what you mean, Patrick] - disarmed him but copped a fair beating in the process [what did i expect? superman to intervene? -lol -but what the heck, i had nowhere to run to ...]and he took the money anyway
- on the bright side i think i may have ruptured him because he was certainly running funny as he left
- on the dark side a very young policeman that attended said i should have just handed over the money and that, as i had used a 'weapon' on him i could be prosecuted if they caught him and he was hurt

are you suprised i am cynical?

if i had had a firearm would i have shot him? .......probably
but if i had had a firearm would he have regarded me as prey? .......probably not :lol:

[Wolf]

- on the dark side a very young policeman that attended said i should have just handed over the money and that, as i had used a 'weapon' on him i could be prosecuted if they caught him and he was hurt
WTF? He attacked you with a screwdriver - lethal weapon within 21 feet - you equalised it with a chair leg. Doubt a jury would do you for clobbering an armed bloke with whatever came to hand. Yours was an iompromptu weapon, he deliberately carried a weapon into the shop (as I doubt he grabbed a screwdriver that just happened to be left on the counter by a serviceman who'd been fixing something in the shop.)

[mstriumph]

--- i think it was inexperience talking - he WAS very young ..

... but it IS advertised police policy over here that the general public should hand over the money without resistance when told to do so by a robber [which is probably why there are so many robberies, no?]

personally i believe that, if you do that, you are complicit in the crime because you are a] tacitly agreeing that the robber has a right to rob you and, b] by not resisting, are actually helping him do so ......... then again, i'm a cynic with some VERY quaint notions at times!

[Patrick]

He was just breaking windows.

And that is what the media kept on repeating... not the fact that he attacked a taxi and its occupants, the copp windscreen, advanced on a cop who went to talk to him beciase he thought he recognised him, but while advancing and threatening, cop drew his weapon while backing away until he could back away no further...


Exactly the point .. the police (in theory) face exactly the same test as Joe Citizen.

The Chef would have passed that test...

Totally agreed.... lawyer was either incompetent or there actually was more to this than what the "media" told everyone.... Perhaps the chefs story wasn't quite true and the kids were picked on by him.... but who knows, we haven't heard anything from these kids, if they were charged for any wrongs they were meant to have done to the chef, nothing..... Hmmmm.....


yes actually
- on the dark side a very young policeman that attended said i should have just handed over the money and that, as i had used a 'weapon' on him i could be prosecuted if they caught him and he was hurt

are you suprised i am cynical?

if i had had a firearm would i have shot him? .......probably
but if i had had a firearm would he have regarded me as prey? .......probably not :lol:

That is a kid robber, not a nutter..... but yes, I can see how one could be cynical... that cop was "technically speaking" correct.... In reality, you would be hailed as a hero and I bet a jury would not convict.

As for the handing over money thing, that is what they say everywhere...

"Better to hand over the money than end up dead." Your call, but is it really that hard a call???

Its just some money, but it is potentially your life you might be throwing away for not handing the money over.....

Personally, You're a hero and deserve a DB...

[Goblin]

Totally agreed.... lawyer was either incompetent or there actually was more to this than what the "media" told everyone.... Perhaps the chefs story wasn't quite true and the kids were picked on by him.... but who knows, we haven't heard anything from these kids, if they were charged for any wrongs they were meant to have done to the chef, nothing..... Hmmmm.....
Is there any way to find out? Once it's been through the court process, are the public allowed to know what the story really was?

[Wolf]

And that is what the media kept on repeating... not the fact that he attacked a taxi and its occupants, the copp windscreen, advanced on a cop who went to talk to him beciase he thought he recognised him, but while advancing and threatening, cop drew his weapon while backing away until he could back away no further...
What is it with people these days? (Oh, fuck, I'm sounding old)

Bloke up in Auckland brandishes realistic a toy pistol, refuses to drop it when the police a) warn him and b) wound him TWICE, so is shot and killed.

Bloke tampering with some Westie's motorbike is challenged by the owner; instead of running, stabs him in the neck with a screwdriver and puts him in hospital.

Drongo on a rampage with a golf club threatens cop rather than submitting to arrest - even after the cop has drawn a firearm.

This whole "fuck everyone else, my rights to do as I like are paramount" attitude (though probably not as eloquently expressed in the head of the average citizen) is getting out of hand.

Small wonder people around here cringe whenever there's another "fuck the pigs, if they try to pull me over I'll do a runner 'coz I'm fucken Rossi, man" post.

High time that when people like that survive long enough to get arrested, they get some huge motherfucker pounding their head against the wall screaming "TAKE FUCKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR ACTIONS, YOU SOFT-COCKED RETARD!"

Seriously. Too many people seem to think they can do as they bloody please and not have to face the music.

Seriously: Break the law, by all means - but if the rozzers turn up, at least have the nuts to say "it's a fair cop".

[Patrick]

Bwahahahahaha Wolf... gotta spread the bling...

[Edbear]

I fully believe that any injury received in the commision of a crime is the fault of the criminal...



Hey, now there's an idea!!!! Surely you're not suggesting justice, here, are you...?:gob:

[Delerium]

and well deserved. in fact they shourd charge the prick for the hospital costs.

[Wolf]

I fully believe that any injury received in the commision of a crime is the fault of the criminal and any evidence from them is null and void.


Hey, now there's an idea!!!! Surely you're not suggesting justice, here, are you...?:gob:


and well deserved. in fact they shourd charge the prick for the hospital costs.
Right with you, there. Our ACC levies go, in part to pay for some bastard who injures himself in the commission of a crime.

If we're going to be forced into paying money to the most useless Insurance Company on the planet, we should at least have some satisfaction in knowing that their reluctance to pay out has a reason rather than just them being a pack of greedy pricks who like raking in but not paying out.

To that end, I propose that ACC should follow the procedures all other insurance companies follow - and refuse to pay out if it's the claimant's own stupid fault - i.e. breaking the law

That prick that got $20K for breaking both his legs trying to escape from prison should have not got a cent. Rather, he should have paid the full price for X-rays, plaster casts etc and, if he couldn't afford them. Tough shit.

Sick of paying through the nose to subsidise someone else's criminal lifestyle

[toycollector10]

I was at the pub last night and a guy I know told me about having his wallet picked from his back pocket while he was walking in the Westfield Mall in Riccarton. It happened this week. Just after leaving an ATM and withdrawing quite a lot of cash.

He felt the pick, identified the thief and chased him down from about 15 meters. Dropped him, and according to the mall security camera film, he put four good punches into his head and three into his gut and ribs before he was pulled off the guy.

There were five of the scrotums so you could call it a gang, from a shangri-la well to the north of New Zealand. The same five believed to be involved of a bag snatch last week. Unfortunately, the snatch caused the 80 year old lady to go down, and, you guessed it, broke her hip. That will probably end her life prematurely for sure, as these injuries always seem to.

So that's one for the citizens and I hope they throw the bastards in jail.

There's some sort of pathetic "eastside"/"westside" bullshite going on is this town, so they are probably part of it. The tagging here is getting really bad but the council doesn't give a sh*t. If they did, there would be some action on it.

[Delerium]

Little wannabe 'im from east compton LA yo' gangastas that only have the balls to take you on when your outnumbered 3 to one.

[Goblin]

Little wannabe 'im from east compton LA yo' gangastas that only have the balls to take you on when your outnumbered 3 to one.Was it Lucy and Ramona and Sunset Sam? :cool:

[toycollector10]

They met at a zoo for sure but on what side of the bars??

"Lucy was from Compton and she met Ramona at the zoo"

[Puddlejumper]

Seems theres 2 distinct points of view in this thread. One says basically, face fists with fists even if you are outnumbered. The reasonable force proposition. The other says , use what you can but don't be a victim.

Over the years I've read of quite a few people murdered here in NZ by unarmed thugs. Hell, I aint no fighter and twice now I've had the crap beaten out of me. Both times I found myself in the wrong place at the wrong time. Both times I attempted to talk, move away etc but found myself unable to do so. The first time was a group of younger guys at a crowded night club who thought my mate was looking at them funny. Both of us were hit repeatedly, my nose broken.

The second time I was walking out to my car after visiting friends and encountered an angry young man. He cornered me against a car. He left a dent in my skull as a lifelong reminder that still gives me headaches. I can still hazily remember him kicking the crap out of my head while some girl said "leave him alone he's not worth it" just before I passed out. Neither time did I even get round to throwing a punch. ( Actually, although she probably saved me from further harm that comment has really pissed me off ever since. Not worth it.. I didn't even know the guy, hadn't even spoken to him. He was obviously angry and I was there. )

No-one was charged after either of these incidents.

That tossbag could easily have killed me kicking me in the head and I know I'm no match for 1 angry, unarmed man who probably has spent his life fighting. That ain't no fair fight. I have never caused a confrontation nor will I ever but I know one thing for sure. I won't ever be a victim again. Take that however you like but the cops can't always be there to protect you.

So I believe in the second point of view. Use whatever it takes but don't be a victim. Dead people can't turn the other cheek.

[caesius]

Seems theres 2 distinct points of view in this thread. One says basically, face fists with fists even if you are outnumbered. The reasonable force proposition. The other says , use what you can but don't be a victim.

Over the years I've read of quite a few people murdered here in NZ by unarmed thugs. Hell, I aint no fighter and twice now I've had the crap beaten out of me. Both times I found myself in the wrong place at the wrong time. Both times I attempted to talk, move away etc but found myself unable to do so. The first time was a group of younger guys at a crowded night club who thought my mate was looking at them funny. Both of us were hit repeatedly, my nose broken.

The second time I was walking out to my car after visiting friends and encountered an angry young man. He cornered me against a car. He left a dent in my skull as a lifelong reminder that still gives me headaches. I can still hazily remember him kicking the crap out of my head while some girl said "leave him alone he's not worth it" just before I passed out. Neither time did I even get round to throwing a punch. ( Actually, although she probably saved me from further harm that comment has really pissed me off ever since. Not worth it.. I didn't even know the guy, hadn't even spoken to him. He was obviously angry and I was there. )

No-one was charged after either of these incidents.

That tossbag could easily have killed me kicking me in the head and I know I'm no match for 1 angry, unarmed man who probably has spent his life fighting. That ain't no fair fight. I have never caused a confrontation nor will I ever but I know one thing for sure. I won't ever be a victim again. Take that however you like but the cops can't always be there to protect you.

So I believe in the second point of view. Use whatever it takes but don't be a victim. Dead people can't turn the other cheek.

Yeah that sucks. I remember a couple of years back, a party in Hastings (some may already be able to finish the story with that), where a "gang" turned up, we calmly explained that it was our mates leaving party, and that they were, well, not our mates. It wasn't exactly huge so I don't even know how they found it. Long story short, escalates out of control, a girl gets hit (by a guy), a lot of us get hit, I personally get two black eyes and a gash on the back of my head from being stomped while lying on the road (after being hit obviously). Then the cops turn up but these assholes just walked away casually like they were invincible.

What pisses me off is these fcuking losers didn't have any reason kick the crap out of us "white boys", they were just looking for trouble. Sounds like too many people have familiar stories.

[Goblin]

What pisses me off is these fcuking losers didn't have any reason kick the crap out of us "white boys", they were just looking for trouble. Sounds like too many people have familiar stories.And what really pisses me off is that if you retaliate with force, you'll end up with Bubba as a room mate for a couple of years.

[caesius]

And what really pisses me off is that if you retaliate with force, you'll end up with Bubba as a room mate for a couple of years.

+1. Victims <==> Aggressors are literally swapped in that situation.

[Wolf]

Was out watching videos at my dad's place with a group of mates, and some guys who'd been hassling my brother for a while (ex-mates of his) turned up and started threatening him, one of them started trying to smash up his car with a length of wood. Dad, me and my mates went outside and basically demanded to know WTF was going on and they scarpered like scared rabbits (their ringleader took off so fast he left one of his boots behind.)

Next day the cops turned up, accused me of shooting at these toe-rags and took us all down to the station for questioning.

Seems that one of these cowardly bastards had said to their other mates that the reason they ran like yellow sacks of shit was because we were shooting at them.

Of course our stories all matched because I hadn't shot at the bastards, but I went through considerable hell being cross-examined on firearms-related charges.

"Why do you think they would make such an accusation?"
"Well, at a guess, they came out to smack over my brother and trash his car, discovered that there were more people there than they had anticipated, ran like the gutless pricks they were and then lied to their mates to save face."

Must be so sad to be such a soft cock you need four of your mates armed with sticks to go and express your disagreement with one weedy teenager. Small wonder they ran when me, two of my mates and my dad came out of the house.

[Hitcher]

And what really pisses me off is that if you retaliate with force, you'll end up with Bubba as a room mate for a couple of years.

Bullshit. Name me the last case in New Zealand where somebody did serious jail time for retaliating in a situation where they were protecting life, limb or their personal dwelling.

And Bubba would be OK as a room mate, if Bubba wanted to be "mummy"...

[Goblin]

Bullshit. Name me the last case in New Zealand where somebody did serious jail time for retaliating in a situation where they were protecting life, limb or their personal dwelling.

And Bubba would be OK as a room mate, if Bubba wanted to be "mummy"... Chef gets 2 years for self-defence
Quick summary of the story :

Its late at night, 21 year old chef Shyan Ricky Hill is on his way home in the bus with his uniform, hat and work knife.

6 Gang members are offended by his red shirt, and as they leave the bus they assault him.

They are armed with a flick knife, iron bars, a hammer and spanners.

They spit on him, throw a lighter at him and punch him in the face.

Mr. Hill defends himself by stabbing one of the gang with his chef knife.

Police charge him with attempted murder, and plea bargin it down to injuring with intent to get a guilty plea.
__________________
I sure do hope for your own sake Hitcher, that you are never faced with these groups of young thugs who take joy in beating up unsuspecting people for a laugh....but I guess living in your protected little one eyed world, you aren't even aware of their existence.

[Hitcher]

You still haven't answered my question. I am very familiar with this case. The chef is not doing serious jail time.

[Goblin]

You still haven't answered my question. I am very familiar with this case. The chef is not doing serious jail time.So what do you consider serious jail time Hitcher?

[Hitcher]

So what do you consider serious jail time Hitcher?

Has the chef been sentenced yet? Not that I have last heard. I think the maximum term for that particular charge is two years, but I haven't seen anything published regarding how long our friend the chef got handed down by the Court.

Edit: I had missed this. http://www.stuff.co.nz/4209128a10.html. Thank you Google. My apologies.

[Mr Merde]

2 years for defending one self from a bunch of arseholes who arent worth the energy their parents expended concieving them.

Harsh.

What did the 6 gang members get.

Fucking nothing.

There is something seriously wrong here.

Kick out the beeding heart liberal arse kissers. They have screwed the system so much that the crims are in charge.

I bet the dick that got stabbed is now getting all the benifits that can be thrown at him, all the "victim support" those tree hugging bastards think he should have and the chef is paying for it.

[Hitcher]

What did the 6 gang members get.

Fucking nothing.

There is something seriously wrong here.

A valid point. It is unclear as to whether or not the Police actually followed up on these folk. But it is also unclear as to whether or not they committed a crime that required Police attention. The fact that none were charged makes me suspect that the Police thought not, or that the act of being nearly killed was presumed to be punishment enough.

[Mr Merde]

A valid point. It is unclear as to whether or not the Police actually followed up on these folk. But it is also unclear as to whether or not they committed a crime that required Police attention. The fact that none were charged makes me suspect that the Police thought not, or that the act of being nearly killed was presumed to be punishment enough.

Surely terrorising a member of the public is a crime. If they were hurt whilst commiting the crime that is their own fucking fault and they should bear all the ramifications and costs of such. If the police are too scared of upsetting them by charging them then the police are definitely in the wrong also. A crime is a crime.

What sot of example is shown here.

If you get hurt while commiting a crime it isnt your fault. It is the fault of an innocent who had the temerity and nerve to actually stand up and say that he would not be a victim.

[peasea]

This whole thing sucks big time, and you know what's going to happen about it? Nothing, that's what! You wanna know why? Coz people are too busy blabbing their arses of on internet forums to scribble a letter to the Minister of Justice (sic), their MP and let them know how we feel.

THAT'S WHY!!!

[Ocean1]

The fact that none were charged makes me suspect that the Police thought not, or that the act of being nearly killed was presumed to be punishment enough.

Not a decision I'd have them make, if the actions ammount to assault with a weapon. The court is the place for serious crime, and last time I looked assault of any flavour was considered serious.


Surely terrorising a member of the public is a crime. If they were hurt whilst commiting the crime that is their own fucking fault and they should bear all the ramifications and costs of such. If the police are too scared of upsetting them by charging them then the police are definitely in the wrong also. A crime is a crime.

What sot of example is shown here.

If you get hurt while commiting a crime it isnt your fault. It is the fault of an innocent who had the temerity and nerve to actually stand up and say that he would not be a victim.

Yup, at the risk of repeating myself the law should at the least disallow any recourse ro compensation for violent criminals. The law should also indemnify the defendants in any such situation, that or guarantee safety from such attacks.

[Goblin]

Surely terrorising a member of the public is a crime. If they were hurt whilst commiting the crime that is their own fucking fault and they should bear all the ramifications and costs of such. If the police are too scared of upsetting them by charging them then the police are definitely in the wrong also. A crime is a crime.

What sot of example is shown here.

If you get hurt while commiting a crime it isnt your fault. It is the fault of an innocent who had the temerity and nerve to actually stand up and say that he would not be a victim.Unfortunately it goes right to the top of the Police force. Our thin blue line is made up of very successful thugs and bullies and any good cop who tries to stand up to the bullies will always be silenced and kicked out.

I know for a fact that Police here in Rotorua wont do anything to upset the local gangs here. The gangs can do what ever the hell they want and they know the cops wont get involved.

[JimO]

whats the bet that if the arsehole that was stabbed had stabbed the chef (instead of the other way round) he wouldnt have got 2 years because he is a poor little maori who has got into the wrong crowd. The chef on the other hand is a real crim how dare he be alone on a bus coming home from fucking work, he desirved to go away for life for defending himself, and for having a job and i bet he wasnt even a fucken maori

[peasea]

Unfortunately it goes right to the top of the Police force. Our thin blue line is made up of very successful thugs and bullies and any good cop who tries to stand up to the bullies will always be silenced and kicked out.

I know for a fact that Police here in Rotorua wont do anything to upset the local gangs here. The gangs can do what ever the hell they want and they know the cops wont get involved.


That's assuming that they're NOT already involved. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

[mstriumph]

.....................
Its just some money, but it is potentially your life you might be throwing away for not handing the money over.....


on one level yes
on another level it isn't really the money, is it .... it's the victim's 'participation in [and therefore tacit approval of]' the wrongdoing - could be difficult to come to terms with oneself as a person who did that.


.....................Personally, You're a hero and deserve a DB...

i'd rather have a VB :drinkup:.. but only if you're buying!!

[mstriumph]

..............There is something seriously wrong here.

.................

yes

but unfortunately he pleaded guilty to stabbing his attacker 'with intent to do grievious bodily harm'

once again one wonders at at the competency of those supposed to be legally advising and defending him

the devil's in the detail - even wen caught standing over a corpse hacked to death with a meat cleaver - with said cleaver still clutched in one's hot little hand and smothered in blood, guts and gore, the only SENSIBLE thing to say, surely, is either nothing or "i never meant to hurt him i was scared for my life and just defending myself"

as it is the poor sod now has two years to figure out what he did/said wrong.

[peasea]

yes

but unfortunately he pleaded guilty to stabbing his attacker 'with intent to do grievious bodily harm'

once again one wonders at at the competency of those supposed to be legally advising and defending him

the devil's in the detail - even wen caught standing over a corpse hacked to death with a meat cleaver - with said cleaver still clutched in one's hot little hand and smothered in blood, guts and gore, the only SENSIBLE thing to say, surely, is either nothing or "i never meant to hurt him i was scared for my life and just defending myself"

as it is the poor sod now has two years to figure out what he did/said wrong.

Find his lawyer and shoot the fuck.

[Finn]

Find his lawyer and shoot the fuck.

No, you're not listening. Visit the lawyer with the objective of discussing how his professional advice was rather fucking stupid. Then tell the cops he was alive when he left the appointment.

[davereid]

Bullshit. Name me the last case in New Zealand where somebody did serious jail time for retaliating in a situation where they were protecting life, limb or their personal dwelling.

Police have regularly prosecuted people for self defence.

The fact they can't find a jury that will convict does not diminish the fact that they try.

Part of the chefs problem was most likely money - he didn't have enough to get a good lawyer.

[peasea]

No, you're not listening. Visit the lawyer with the objective of discussing how his professional advice was rather fucking stupid. Then tell the cops he was alive when he left the appointment.

Thank you, sheer brilliance. Where shall we meet?

[peasea]

Police have regularly prosecuted people for self defence.

The fact they can't find a jury that will convict does not diminish the fact that they try.

Part of the chefs problem was most likely money - he didn't have enough to get a good lawyer.

Oh so true.

[JimO]

Police have regularly prosecuted people for self defence.

The fact they can't find a jury that will convict does not diminish the fact that they try.

Part of the chefs problem was most likely money - he didn't have enough to get a good lawyer.

did QC Williams not defend him then.............no he would be on the gangstas side

[peasea]

did QC Williams not defend him then.............no he would be on the gangstas side

He's a worry, that critter. Sometimes I scratch my head.

Sometimes I scratch my ball bag.

[JimO]

Sometimes I scratch my ball bag.

thats a vision i can do without

[peasea]

What can I say? I play a lot of tennis.

[crshbndct]

should have killed the entire group of punks. with a spoon.


that may sound a tad harsh, but i have no time at all for littel punks who think they are 50 cent or eminem or some stupid shit. case in point:
my 7 mth pregnant cousin and her husband were walking to their car after going out to watch a rugby game at a bar about 2 years ago, when they were accosted by a group of teenagers, (probably spouting some similiar pseudo-gangs style bull shit about bloods and crips, which is horseshit in new zealand) one of the gangies decided to give my cousin a push, which knocked her over, so my cousin in law immediately got on the ground to see how she was. becasue he was down they decided to attack him.

he is now blind in one eye, has only one kidney, and cant recognise my cousin, or anyone from later than about when he was 15 years old, and has no idea that he has a baby. he cannot work anymore and is violent a lot.

[peasea]

should have killed the entire group of punks. with a spoon.


that may sound a tad harsh, but i have no time at all for littel punks who think they are 50 cent or eminem or some stupid shit. case in point:
my 7 mth pregnant cousin and her husband were walking to their car after going out to watch a rugby game at a bar about 2 years ago, when they were accosted by a group of teenagers, (probably spouting some similiar pseudo-gangs style bull shit about bloods and crips, which is horseshit in new zealand) one of the gangies decided to give my cousin a push, which knocked her over, so my cousin in law immediately got on the ground to see how she was. becasue he was down they decided to attack him.

he is now blind in one eye, has only one kidney, and cant recognise my cousin, or anyone from later than about when he was 15 years old, and has no idea that he has a baby. he cannot work anymore and is violent a lot.

Was there any action taken against the perps?
That sounds like a serious deal and in need of some jail time. What was the outcome in regards to the attackers?

[Teflon]

Sounds like they were a bunch of young kids who watch to much T.V. If they were street hardened, the chef would have been beaten to death, simple.

Personally, i think it's a little weak stabbing a 15yr kid. If the kid had pulled a knife out, sure, kill him.

If you look like a victim, you'll become one..

[crshbndct]

well they ran off before they were caught and the description was young man in hoodies of average height and weight... so the cops did nothing

[Wolf]

In the case of the chef, there is so much we do not know.

There was at least one witness to the incident - the bus driver - who would have been questioned in depth about it. The chef's lawyer would have knowledge of the driver's statement and any statements made by other witnesses if there were any.

Was there something in that/those statement(s) that would have made a self-defence plea indefensible? Did the chef say or do something that would, if brought to light in court, support a charge of attempted murder?

Remember: all the chef would have to do is yell "I'll fucking kill you cunts" in a moment of anger and a prosecutor would make a meal of that in the court room:

"Did you hear the accused threaten to kill his victim?"
"Yes, he screamed that he was going to kill them all then stabbed one of them."

Not saying it happened that way, but that is one possibility - something that could possibly be said in anger that would be twisted by a prosecutor to look like intent to commit murder.

Remember: anything that could be used to reflect badly upon the chef would be used by the prosecutor in an attempt to prove a charge of attempted murder beyond reasonable doubt.

Was there something said or done that, in the legal opinion of the defence lawyer, would be sufficient to warrant that accusation?

I recall being obliged to eat my dinner outside the fish and chip shop because I could not get back into the street in which I lived - the area had been cordoned off by armed police due to a bloke yelling at his wife in a fit of temper "I'll fucking shoot you, you bitch". That was sufficient to provoke an armed call-out. He didn't actually have a weapon, not even a toy, he was screaming in anger and got carried away with his threats. Then he got driven away by the police.

If the chef said or did anything in his anger at being assaulted and intimidated that a prosecution lawyer could deem to be "excessive" or a death threat, he'd be bang in trouble.

Under NZ law, not even cops are allowed to "shoot to kill", only "shoot to stop". If it can be demonstrated that a person's intent when wielding a weapon was to kill, then a murder charge could conceivably be prosecuted. If, for example, a cop were to be heard to say "stop or I'll kill you" or "I'm gonna kill that motherfucker", and subsequently fired a pistol at a person, there would be sufficient grounds for a murder charge.

"Stop or I'll shoot" is acceptable as there is no stated intent to kill.

All the chef had to do is say the wrong thing in a fit of anger and he'd completely destroy his chances of a successful self-defence plea.

"I was angry when I said it, I didn't really mean it" wouldn't hold water in court - the expectation is that we are to be in control of our temper, especially in a situation like that.

Not saying that's how it happened but it is plausible and would fit in with the initial charge, and the acceptance of a plea bargain:

"You go to court, the prosecution will tear you to shreds, better to admit to a lesser charge".

[davereid]

Karl deFresne of the "Dominion" has been stealing my posts... or maybe lots of middle ground kiwis feel like me.

Its in todays paper, so not yet online so I had to copy it by hand sorry for typos.

"A young chef is going home from work late at night on a Christchurch Bus. He is by himself and mindng his on business. A group of young thug start harassing him be cause he happens to wear a red sweatshirt.. he is spat on and a cigarette lihter is thrown at him. The bus security video reportedly shows hin cowering and frightened. As the bullies leave the bus, the 21 year old chef is punched in the mouth. He takes out his chefs knife...and stabs one of his tormentors"

Then he comments about the chef lacking the presence of mind to react proportionally to the situation.

"Something seems to be serously wrong here. If we apply the same rule of proportionality to sentancing, isnt two years jail also "over the top" for someone who wasn't looking for trouble and merely retaliated against an unprovoked assault?

And isn't there a danger that if the police insist on prosecuting peole for exercising their right of self defence that the thugs will become even bolder

Astonishingly the police originally charged Hill with attempte murder. You may well wonder whose side they are on.

You might also wonder whether the law of proportionate response applies where a man armed with a hammer is shot dead by a man with a Glock pistol"
"

[Finn]

he is now blind in one eye, has only one kidney, and cant recognise my cousin, or anyone from later than about when he was 15 years old, and has no idea that he has a baby. he cannot work anymore and is violent a lot.

Sorry to hear. This makes my blood boil.

I hope these punks and their entire family (including extended) gets cancer.

[caesius]

It's been asked hypothetically but I'd really like to know, if the chef had done what the liberal hippie peace-out socialists expected (nothing) and one of the "misguided" young fellows had stabbed him:

What do you seriously think the young guy's punishment would have been?

[crshbndct]

Sorry to hear. This makes my blood boil.

I hope these punks and their entire family (including extended) gets cancer.

the worst part is, it was just some hoodrats out looking for a fight. didnt realise that kicking someone in the head had kill/maim/severely injure. they probably ran off going: "wow we really gave that cunt the bash eh? cool"

[crshbndct]

It's been asked hypothetically but I'd really like to know, if the chef had done what the liberal hippie peace-out socialists expected (nothing) and one of the "misguided" young fellows had stabbed him:

What do you seriously think the young guy's punishment would have been?

there would have been a report on police 10-7 (this is excerpted from 99% of reports on police 10-7(and sorry about the possible racist overtones much love to my brothers from another colour)


A young man, was accosted and attacked by3 youths stabbed and killed. Police are looking for 3 Men, possible ages between 18 and 30, wearing gang-themed hoodies, and baggy jeans. they are all of average height and weight. if you have any infor mation as to their whereabouts please call......

noone can do anything because they are all the smae, and have the same description.

[Patrick]

on one level yes
on another level it isn't really the money, is it .... it's the victim's 'participation in [and therefore tacit approval of]' the wrongdoing - could be difficult to come to terms with oneself as a person who did that.

i'd rather have a VB :drinkup:.. but only if you're buying!!

I hear ya, but, at the end of the day, it is your life for the sake of a few dollars... is that a bargain? And yep, I'll shout ya!


well they ran off before they were caught and the description was young man in hoodies of average height and weight... so the cops did nothing

With that description, what did you expect???? Looks just like town on any Friday/Saturday night.

Could be my neighbour... he wears a hoodie...

Still, can't understand how even a failed legal aid lawyer could not have got the chef out of this one with a medal instead of a prison/home detention sentence... he could have sorted it himself without a lawyer.

[Wolf]

Still, can't understand how even a failed legal aid lawyer could not have got the chef out of this one with a medal instead of a prison/home detention sentence... he could have sorted it himself without a lawyer.
It sounds like a matter of timing. Both the initial report and the bit from the Dominion:


The bus security video reportedly shows hin cowering and frightened. As the bullies leave the bus, the 21 year old chef is punched in the mouth. He takes out his chefs knife...and stabs one of his tormentors

suggest that he stabbed as they were leaving, thus making a self-defence plea indefensible - the danger was about to go away.

Had he stabbed them earlier, he probably would have gotten away with it.

Even in gun-totin' kill-'em-all-and-let-God-sort-'em-out USA it is an instant murder charge if you shoot an armed robber in the act of fleeiong from your premises.