Chef stabs assailant and now faces prison. [Archive]

jrandom

6th August 2007, 09:09

Every one is justified in using, in the defence of himself or another, such force as, in the circumstances as he believes them to be, it is reasonable to use.

I've been punched in the mouth a few times. It's not pleasant, but it doesn't warrant a retaliatory stabbing. It doesn't sound like any of the youth gang were armed.

Sorry, but I'm afraid we all have a responsibility to act with restraint and good judgement. Busting out a lethal weapon in response to fisticuffs, however annoying or nervewracking the situation may have been, is over the top. I'm speaking as someone who 'carries' 24/7. I'm sure that the chef's 'guilty' plea would have been made after taking appropriate legal advice.

I don't think any Western jurisdiction would countenance the use of a gun or knife in 'self defence' against unarmed harrassment and a single closed-fist punch.

Less drastic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kubotan) self-defence weapons are readily available.

avgas

6th August 2007, 09:22

I agree, the chef should be punished....
He didn't finish the job.
There is a fine line between war hero and Vietnam vet

vifferman

6th August 2007, 09:28

It's a tricky one all right.

Years ago I worked with a young guy who lived in a rough part of Rotorua. When he was younger, he'd been set upon by a bunch of guys who broke his arm and stole his bicycle. After that he was terrified it would happen again, so he carried a pocket knife.
At the time I was working with him, he was walking home one night when three guys (one armed with a hatchet) stopped him and refused to let him go till he gave them some money. One grabbed him around the neck, so he stabbed him in the arm with his pocketknife. Guess who was arrested? And he was only a weedy little guy, so given the circumstances, what he did seemed very reasonable.
Here's another peculiar thing: we were working in a bush gang, cutting scrub, pruning, etc., and most of the guys (including the female ones) were very rough, and in either the Mongrel Mob or Black Power (can't remember now). I was very surprised at their reaction to this story - I expected, "Fair enough". Instead, their reaction was "He better not try that shit round here or we'll do him!"

Smorg

6th August 2007, 09:31

I'd have jammed it up under his chin.....piece of shit hoodrat.

Hitcher

6th August 2007, 09:31

avgas

6th August 2007, 09:34

Sorry, but I'm afraid we all have a responsibility to act with restraint and good judgement.
I disagree here, poor kid is 21, doesn't have a bad bone in his body, is a good worker and friend, and is all alone while a bunch of thugs pick on him until he snaps. When he snaps it will only be animal nature as a reaction.
I was in one of these situations many years ago, eventually i snapped, picked up whatever i had available (in my situation it was a mountainbike) and swung full force at the assailant.
Long story short, if you box someone into a corner and keep poking - dont expect to walk home. If the said person is carrying a weapon that could kill you, dont expect to live.
I would expect the same from any other creature on this planet.

jrandom

6th August 2007, 09:41

I disagree here, poor kid is 21, doesn't have a bad bone in his body... When he snaps it will only be animal nature as a reaction.

Read the article - the chef's "little history of offending" can also, depending on how the reporter wants to slant the story, read as "two previous convictions".

And he ran from the scene instead of staying and taking responsibility for his actions. It's all very sad, but the bottom line is, an unarmed guy got stabbed.

Personally, I would be disappointed in myself if I ever 'snapped' and failed to contain my 'animal nature'. I despise individuals who lack the capability to control those impulses.

The redneck nonsense along the lines of "the kid had it coming" that people are spouting on this thread is typical of the childish, irresponsible bullshit that drags NZ society down.

And you wonder why we have a problem with ethnic gangs and child abuse?

cynna

6th August 2007, 10:06

justice.........there is no fuking justice

vifferman

6th August 2007, 10:06

I hadn't actually read the article - I'd say that given the size of the blade, and the fact he jammed it in the boy's side up to the hilt, his actions were a bit excessive. But, we weren't there, we don't know whether he was very scared or just really pissed off, and what might have happened if he hadn't stabbed the guy. And maybe he ran off because he feared retaliation? Or just felt really bad because he'd never stabbed anyone before? I mean, a 15 year-old boy's a bit different to an aubergine, or cabbage...

jrandom

6th August 2007, 10:09

a 15 year-old boy's a bit different to an aubergine...

Oh, I dunno... renegade master could probably have passed for one.

toycollector10

6th August 2007, 11:02

Well maybe he was running for his life before the street trash reinforced and came back for him. I certainly wouldn't have been hanging around.

Okay, a 25 X 5 cm blade is over the top. This thread is about how victim and assailant have swapped roles. It's about taking responsibility for your actions, i.e. abuse and punch someone and you just might get a response you weren't expecting.

Those little c*nts might think twice next time before they make their pathetic eastside westside hand moves and crap on about their colors. How pathetic they all are. As far as I'm concerned the chef seems to have "lost it" all right but I think he is a bloody hero for reclaiming the streets for the rest of us who go about our days peacefully without punching people for wearing the wrong shirt, or shoes, or haircut, or what-ever-the-fuck-else!

Rock on chef.....

Skyryder

6th August 2007, 11:16

Sounds like the 'offender' had some ' previous.' The problem with this is that the police are caught in between the rock and the hard plate. If they don't prosecute the victim's family make a lot of noise and if they do prosecute there are those that cry pc bullshit etc.

If there was no other weapon involved the offender may be in trouble. Sometime late at night you just gota use you head and sit out of trouble.

Will be interesting to see how this one pans out. I'd let him off on princple that he tried doing society a favour by reducing one shithead.

Skyryder

scumdog

6th August 2007, 11:31

Or just felt really bad because he'd never stabbed anyone before? I mean, a 15 year-old boy's a bit different to an aubergine, or cabbage...

Oh, I don't know- an aubergine could probably out-think a lot of 15 year-olds - especially the 15 year old in this incident.

MisterD

6th August 2007, 11:50

avgas

6th August 2007, 12:23

Read the article - the chef's "little history of offending" can also, depending on how the reporter wants to slant the story, read as "two previous convictions".
And yet they still tried him on, shit those hoodies were really stupid. You have to remember here all he did was stab out - it wasnt like he attempted to lacerate tendons or remove an organ

And he ran from the scene instead of staying and taking responsibility for his actions. It's all very sad, but the bottom line is, an unarmed guy got stabbed.
You have just stabbed one out of a group of thugs, one has already swung at you, the others think you an opposing gang member. But your right, lets hang around an see what happens. Worked for the Chinese pizza delivery guy

Personally, I would be disappointed in myself if I ever 'snapped' and failed to contain my 'animal nature'. I despise individuals who lack the capability to control those impulses.
No comment - you have made your point.

The redneck nonsense along the lines of "the kid had it coming" that people are spouting on this thread is typical of the childish, irresponsible bullshit that drags NZ society down.
Really i thought it was the punks on the streets who annoy the rest of us so they can get rep

And you wonder why we have a problem with ethnic gangs and child abuse? Not anymore - you cleared that right up for me

idb

6th August 2007, 12:28

I have trouble sympathising with the "inappropriate response" argument.

Taking the story at face value;

If the guy was terrified for his safety already he's going to use whatever's at hand to stop it happening, it appears just unfortunate that a knife was the handy object, if he was carrying a rolling pin or a cheese grater he may have used them.

The little thugs had already escalated the violence from verbal abuse to throwing objects to a physical assault, how is this young bloke to know where it might stop?

Fatjim

6th August 2007, 12:28

Not a bad report, doesn't seem to filled with the usual inflammatory language tainting "journalism" nowadays.

Firstly, when you're attacked by a group, you're a bloody good fighter if you can defend yourself with just your fists. It ain't a Jackie Chan movie where they all wait round to have their turn one at a time.

Secondly, how many times have we seen people charged with manslaughter after just punching somebody. I can think of 2 or three cases, one being that pro fighter who killed his Uncle.

Thirdly, if one guy from a group attacks you, if you choose to defend yourself then you are fighting the whole group.

The liberal leadership in this country, and I believe this includes the Police leadership wants us not to defend ourselves but leave this to the Police. Unfortunately this will never work. People rarely attack others when the coppers are around.

And when someone attacks you, you have no way of knowing how it will turn out. Sure the guy has thrown a punch, but what if the next one lands and knocks you down??? How do know what will happen then? Will the others join in, will you be left in a wheelchair with brain damage?

I believe that you have a right to defend yourself, not only from the immediate threat, but from what is reasonably likely to happen, and if that right to how you do that is over restricted then the deterrent to attacking people is removed.

jrandom

6th August 2007, 12:30

And yet they still tried him on, shit those hoodies were really stupid. You have to remember here all he did was stab out - it wasnt like he attempted to lacerate tendons or remove an organ

Lacerating tendons would have been a smarter thing to do. More disabling and less life-threatening. And he 'didn't attempt to remove an organ'? What do you call burying a 25cm knife up to the hilt in someone's torso?

You have just stabbed one out of a group of thugs, one has already swung at you, the others think you an opposing gang member. But your right, lets hang around an see what happens. Worked for the Chinese pizza delivery guy.

The Chinese pizza delivery guy was attacked with a baseball bat. Cops shoot guys with baseball bats. I have no doubt that if the kids on the bus had been swinging baseball bats, the situation would have been very different. But they were unarmed. Big difference.

Not anymore - you cleared that right up for me

Try to argue the point without getting snotty, dude.

avgas

6th August 2007, 12:30

It just got me thinkin, he is a chef with knives, comming home from work.
Wouldn't he be in his whites? What side is that?
The more i look into this, the more these 15 year olds should have stayed in school.

Delerium

6th August 2007, 12:33

Serves the kid right. Its real brave taking on one guy when you outnumber him istn it:angry: The chef just happend to have something he could use to defend himself and used it. Good job. Maybe the little shit will think twice next time. Im built like a weed and dont fancy the idea of some louts picking a fight with me for no good reason. what would of happened if the guy hadnt of had his knives on him? hed probably be in hospital himself.

Its easy to criticse, but you werent there. The guy was probably packing himself. These situations can escalate quick and can end up a case of do something or get your head bashed in.

If the little shits hadnt of been out looking for troubble it wouldnt of happened. they got what they desrved.

idb

6th August 2007, 12:34

Wouldn't he be in his whites? What side is that?

Ku Klux Klan?

jrandom

6th August 2007, 12:38

I believe that you have a right to defend yourself, not only from the immediate threat, but from what is reasonably likely to happen...

The chef wasn't trapped in a dark alleyway. He was on a bus, fer chrissakes.

"As the group got off the bus, they made more comments and one of them punched him in the mouth."

Sounds like a parting shot that he could have ignored and walked away from with nothing more than a sore face. Let's not fuck about - his pride was injured, he was carrying a weapon, the red mist came up and he used it. I'm sure a few of you can imagine doing the same thing. Doesn't mean it was the right thing to do.

I have no doubt that as it was on a bus, there were witnesses. The bus driver at least. Their description of events will have been taken into account.

And don't forget - the chef pleaded guilty to the charge of injuring with intent to cause grevious bodily harm. That means that he doesn't think he has a reasonable chance of convincing a jury that his actions met the simple definition of self defence in NZ law.

I hear a lot of ranting and beating of chests, here, about the wrong done to a guy who's already admitted in Court that he fucked up. Get some perspective, guys.

avgas

6th August 2007, 12:42

Lacerating tendons would have been a smarter thing to do. More disabling and less life-threatening. And he 'didn't attempt to remove an organ'? What do you call burying a 25cm knife up to the hilt in someone's torso?
The Chinese pizza delivery guy was attacked with a baseball bat. Cops shoot guys with baseball bats. I have no doubt that if the kids on the bus had been swinging baseball bats, the situation would have been very different. But they were unarmed. Big difference.
Try to argue the point without getting snotty, dude.
He stabbed - admittably i would have swung the knife, but who knows mabey it was already very close quarters (headlock etc). There was no tact.
The only unarmed person in my eyes is just that - i've seen people beaten into a puddle with teeth, makes motorbike accidents seem light.
I'm not saying let the chef go - all im saying is if you drag one down, sink the ship.
Cops shoot guys with knives - good thing he left it in the scumbag.
My point is that we cannot walk around with rose colored lenses and say that the world cannot hurt us. You have stated your point, i stated mine - it was a stalemate so i left it how it was. I don't bicker about pointless things at home and i wont here.
In a true society these punks would already be in schemes to show them not how to be scumbags, the chef could safely catch a bus home, and the news would always be boring.

Ocean1

6th August 2007, 12:46

Sorry, based on the basics of the story (and personally I wouldn't trust most journos to get even that right) I believe the response was appropriate.

I know the law sees it differently but I don't agree. If you're alone and being attacked by a group I believe you have an ethical right to use a bigger stick. If you're going to use it then make it count, you won't get too many chances.

The only way you'll ever really know if he was justified in his actions is if you're there. I hope you never are, but the odds are getting better that one day you will be.

jrandom

6th August 2007, 12:47

You have stated your point, i stated mine - it was a stalemate so i left it how it was. I don't bicker about pointless things at home and i wont here.
In a true society these punks would already be in schemes to show them not how to be scumbags, the chef could safely catch a bus home, and the news would always be boring.

Fair enough. I see where you're coming from, and anyway, I'm intentionally just arguing for one particular side here, because I think it needs to be said.

In the end, I agree that the real problem is the stupid little hoodlums, and the chef sounds like a good guy who ended up reacting naturally to a situation that he shouldn't have had to deal with.

idb

6th August 2007, 12:53

The chef wasn't trapped in a dark alleyway. He was on a bus, fer chrissakes.

"As the group got off the bus, they made more comments and one of them punched him in the mouth."

Sounds like a parting shot that he could have ignored and walked away from with nothing more than a sore face. Let's not fuck about - his pride was injured, he was carrying a weapon, the red mist came up and he used it. I'm sure a few of you can imagine doing the same thing. Doesn't mean it was the right thing to do.

I have no doubt that as it was on a bus, there were witnesses. The bus driver at least. Their description of events will have been taken into account.

And don't forget - the chef pleaded guilty to the charge of injuring with intent to cause grevious bodily harm. That means that he doesn't think he has a reasonable chance of convincing a jury that his actions met the simple definition of self defence in NZ law.

I hear a lot of ranting and beating of chests, here, about the wrong done to a guy who's already admitted in Court that he fucked up. Get some perspective, guys.

I'm sorry, whether it be due to the red mist, or fear or hurt pride or whatever...if someone initiates unprovoked violence on someone else how can they have any right to surprise when the response is beyond their control?

WRT

6th August 2007, 13:01

"As the group got off the bus, they made more comments and one of them punched him in the mouth."

Sounds like a parting shot that he could have ignored and walked away from with nothing more than a sore face.

Not picking at you in particular here, jrandom, but there is another point that I think should be made.

The cops always tell you to walk away, to let them sort it out. But lets face it - if the chef took the punch in the mouth, let the group get off the bus and then gone to the cops, nothing would happen. The cops wouldn't have time or resources to follow up, and the group all head off thinking that they can get away with punching people in the mouth.

The guy should have used a smaller knife, then gone to the cops himself, and when they ask him who punched him he can say check the emergency rooms for a guy wearing a knife. Then he looks like he wasnt the aggressor, the cops know who the crim is, and the group know better than to fuck around with people minding their business on the bus.

jrandom

6th August 2007, 13:14

The guy should have used a smaller knife, then gone to the cops himself...

This is why I carry a Chinook II (http://www.knifenetwork.com/reviews/review_02_spyd_chinook_al.shtml). 9.5cm blade, so it's a 'pocket knife', and it's perfect for doing just enough in the right way to make someone back off. It's designed to take out tendons.

And it's amazingly handy for just about any general-duties situation you can think of :)

Lias

6th August 2007, 13:35

This is why the law needs to be changed, so that bullshit prosecutions like this cannot happen in NZ.

If you genuinely fear for the safety of yourself, or others, you should have the legal right to use any force necessary (including lethal) to negate that threat.

If I was in that blokes shoes I'd have done the same thing (well maybe not.. I'd probably have pulled the knife out of the cunt and chased the rest of them with it)

Lias

6th August 2007, 13:46

justice.........there is no fuking justice

Too true.. However the BDOTGNZA wishes to inform you that the word you seek is "fucking".. I believe fuking is a place in China :innocent:

The chef did little to help himself in this case. Carrying an offensive weapon is a criminal act, as is using it. So too is running from a crime scene.

And it's his word against those of his alleged assailants, one of whom was stabbed.

Let's let the criminal justice system sort this out.

You can call it a criminal system, or a legal system, but given the state of it I dont see how you can sit there and call it a justice system Mr H, because their isn't a lot of justice dished out by it.

scumdog

6th August 2007, 14:27

Looks like a bit of over-reaction by the chef - but who knows what the poor bugger actually thought was going to happen to him?

And for the mouthy littles escapee from a condom? - I bet he thinks (hahaha 'thinks' mwahahah-sorry!) twice before opening his repository for excessive junk-food at a stranger.
(I wonder if he can eat and breathe at the same time?)

imdying

6th August 2007, 14:34

I doubt it... he's probably big man on campus now 'coz I got stabbed bro, they tried to take me down like fiddy cent yo'.

JimO

6th August 2007, 14:41

This is why I carry a Chinook II (http://www.knifenetwork.com/reviews/review_02_spyd_chinook_al.shtml). 9.5cm blade, so it's a 'pocket knife', and it's perfect for doing just enough in the right way to make someone back off. It's designed to take out tendons.

And it's amazingly handy for just about any general-duties situation you can think of :)

use that and you will be in the cell with the chef

avgas

6th August 2007, 14:59

fiddy cent yo'.
I love his name - its the most polite way call yourself a loser.
He's 50 cent, not the whole buck.
But then again there was
2 pac, not 6
Easy E
Shaggy, (who loves scooby snacks)
Mims......the only person who read couldnt afford actual M&M's so just got MM's

I'm just waiting for one to roll up, a say
"Yo Nigga's you know me, im a mother fucker undenied, mother fucker Petafile"

jrandom

6th August 2007, 15:15

use that and you will be in the cell with the chef

Depends entirely on the situation, and I back myself to not be stupid with it.

JimO

6th August 2007, 15:17

Depends entirely on the situation, and I back myself to not be stupid with it.

tell that to the judge bud

jrandom

6th August 2007, 15:19

tell that to the judge bud

I'd rather be tried by twelve than carried by six.

toycollector10

6th August 2007, 15:31

I would rather see the street rat with a knife in his side than some guy going about his own business lying in a pool of blood with these violent little c*nts jumping up and down on his head.

What is wrong here is all the liberals like jrandom, the prosecutor, the guys lawyer and the police lining up to jump up and down on the chef. All your touchy feely stuff just doesn't wash with me.

Summary justice was issued and it was a clear case of self defence.

jrandom

6th August 2007, 15:35

liberals like jrandom... touchy feely...

Fuck off. Who else in this thread has admitted to daily self-defence knife carry?

Fact is, the chef didn't handle the situation perfectly, and he's having to suck up some pretty harsh consequences. Life's a bitch.

avgas

6th August 2007, 15:38

Why is so expensive for meat at the supermarket? plenty of it walking round acting gansta.

HenryDorsetCase

6th August 2007, 15:54

Read the article - the chef's "little history of offending" can also, depending on how the reporter wants to slant the story, read as "two previous convictions".

And he ran from the scene instead of staying and taking responsibility for his actions. It's all very sad, but the bottom line is, an unarmed guy got stabbed.

Personally, I would be disappointed in myself if I ever 'snapped' and failed to contain my 'animal nature'. I despise individuals who lack the capability to control those impulses.

The redneck nonsense along the lines of "the kid had it coming" that people are spouting on this thread is typical of the childish, irresponsible bullshit that drags NZ society down.

And you wonder why we have a problem with ethnic gangs and child abuse?

but presumably someone who thought deeply about their situation, and then calmly and rationally decided to do something that was LATER perceived by people who werent there to be an over reaction would be OK?

hmmmmmm

I loved this bit of that article:

The chef then pulled a chef's knife with 25cm long and 5cm wide blade out of his bag and thrust it into the side up to handle of a 15-year-old boy.

I cant remember having a handle (well, maybe one...) when I was 15.

I can see that self defence wouldnt run here: the assailants were alighting the bus, the punch had been thrown and the weasels were running away. [edit] so he wasnt in any more clear and present danger, and so self defence not available. Presumably the limited excuse of provocation was argued or would have been. The guys lawyer is the second last person in the world to call a liberal too. BTW.

Poetic justice on scumbag, sure, but legal? definitely not.

HenryDorsetCase

6th August 2007, 15:56

Why is so expensive for meat at the supermarket? plenty of it walking round acting gansta.

mmmmmmm long pork.

the problem is I only buy meat that I know where and how it was farmed and that "on the hoof" variety you describe is likely to be tainted by all sorts of nasty chemicals, not to mention bad diet and not enough exercise.

u4ea

6th August 2007, 16:16

The little shit head had it coming to him.. crips crap bollocks..they just wanted a fight and they got one.Hope the chef gets off with a smack on the hand.

imdying

6th August 2007, 16:33

they just wanted a fight and they got oneHard to take much from the article, always is, a grain of salt is safest with anything the media says... but I'd say that there it pretty accurate.

cynna

6th August 2007, 17:13

Too true.. However the BDOTGNZA wishes to inform you that the word you seek is "fucking".. I believe fuking is a place in China

didnt want to offend the kiwibiker police

avgas

6th August 2007, 17:25

mmmmmmm long pork.

the problem is I only buy meat that I know where and how it was farmed and that "on the hoof" variety you describe is likely to be tainted by all sorts of nasty chemicals, not to mention bad diet and not enough exercise.
I wonder what would happen if i dumped a body at Progressive (foodmore/foodcap) in Mt Wellington....................
I'd prob pay $6/kg to get it back.

Patrick

6th August 2007, 17:25

Personally, I would be disappointed in myself if I ever 'snapped' and failed to contain my 'animal nature'. I despise individuals who lack the capability to control those impulses.

The redneck nonsense along the lines of "the kid had it coming" that people are spouting on this thread is typical of the childish, irresponsible bullshit that drags NZ society down.

And you wonder why we have a problem with ethnic gangs and child abuse?

He was probably a guy just like you, going home from work, assaulted by a group unexpectedly and unwarranted, and perhaps forced to face off to a group of thugs, intent to stomp on his head to see what colour his brains are, if he reacted to the one who punched him

the police are caught in between the rock and the hard plate.

No word about if they prosecuted the assaulter? The one who punched him and the one who threw items at him??

What do you call burying a 25cm knife up to the hilt in someone's torso?

I have no doubt that if the kids on the bus had been swinging baseball bats, the situation would have been very different. But they were unarmed. Big difference.

Preventing further attack.

NOt so sure... unarmed groups can kill a lone victim....

I have no doubt that as it was on a bus, there were witnesses. The bus driver at least. Their description of events will have been taken into account.

And don't forget - the chef pleaded guilty to the charge of injuring with intent to cause grevious bodily harm. That means that he doesn't think he has a reasonable chance of convincing a jury that his actions met the simple definition of self defence in NZ law.

Would be nice to know the whole facts....

Summary justice was issued and it was a clear case of self defence.

Not so clear, but depends how you read the story I suppose...

I can see that self defence wouldnt run here: the assailants were alighting the bus, the punch had been thrown and the weasels were running away. [edit] so he wasnt in any more clear and present danger, and so self defence not available. Presumably the limited excuse of provocation was argued or would have been. The guys lawyer is the second last person in the world to call a liberal too. BTW.

Poetic justice on scumbag, sure, but legal? definitely not.

Wonder what would have happened if he just shoved the knife up under the little oxygen thiefs nose and said, "Where do you want this?"

The little shit head had it coming to him.. crips crap bollocks..they just wanted a fight and they got one.Hope the chef gets off with a smack on the hand.

I hope it is not as harsh as that...

Biff

6th August 2007, 17:27

I've been punched in the mouth a few times. It's not pleasant, but it doesn't warrant a retaliatory stabbing. It doesn't sound like any of the youth gang were armed.

What the man said. Sounds like a case of over-reaction by the chef IMO.

IMO when you stab someone you know that the chances are quite high that you're going to kill them. Endofacto. Not acceptable.

SPman

6th August 2007, 17:34

What is wrong here is all the liberals like jrandom, the prosecutor, the guys lawyer and the police lining up to jump up and down on the chef. All your touchy feely stuff just doesn't wash with me.

Jrandom liberal??!!
About as liberal as me when it comes down to it - do all you can to avoid a situation, but if it's inevitable, get in first, fast and fierce!
Whilst I feel sorry for the guy, in any civilised country, an eight inch blade against an "unarmed" person won't wash in the courts. All he can do is mitigate his circumstances as much as possible and hope the judge realises he felt threatened, scared and desperate for his safety so lashed out with what was to hand - his work tools he was carrying home!

Hitcher

6th August 2007, 18:03

didn't want to offend the kiwibiker police

It takes some pretty fucking strong language to offend those cunts. Missing apostrophes? Different story...

JimO

6th August 2007, 18:38

I'd rather be tried by twelve than carried by six.

perhaps thats what the chef was thinkng

jrandom

6th August 2007, 18:48

perhaps thats what the chef was thinkng

Nah, more likely it was just the red mist.

Anyway, he didn't even wait to be tried by twelve. He pleaded guilty to injuring with intent!

Skyryder

6th August 2007, 19:52

The chef wasn't trapped in a dark alleyway. He was on a bus, fer chrissakes.

"As the group got off the bus, they made more comments and one of them punched him in the mouth."

Sounds like a parting shot that he could have ignored and walked away from with nothing more than a sore face. Let's not fuck about - his pride was injured, he was carrying a weapon, the red mist came up and he used it. I'm sure a few of you can imagine doing the same thing. Doesn't mean it was the right thing to do.

I have no doubt that as it was on a bus, there were witnesses. The bus driver at least. Their description of events will have been taken into account.

And don't forget - the chef pleaded guilty to the charge of injuring with intent to cause grevious bodily harm. That means that he doesn't think he has a reasonable chance of convincing a jury that his actions met the simple definition of self defence in NZ law.

I hear a lot of ranting and beating of chests, here, about the wrong done to a guy who's already admitted in Court that he fucked up. Get some perspective, guys.

Some good points made with this post. :yes:

Skyryder

Delerium

6th August 2007, 20:27

Patrick

6th August 2007, 20:44

Some good points made with this post. :yes:

Skyryder

And some not so good...

Being on a bus with plenty of witnesses didn't stop the shitkickers... Witnesses? What did any do when they were throwing things at the chef? What did they do when he was punched? Would they be witnesses? May not want to be involved... "I didn't see anything" perhaps?

Cops a smack in the mouth and not do something about it? I sure as hell would react, I'm nobodys punchbag.. but not to this guys extent obviously.

Some good points made, perhaps, but also claims to carry a knife himself and "claims" he would have the control not to use it? Hmmmmmm.... Tui???

Patrick

6th August 2007, 20:47

What would of happend if the little shits had kept having a go at him, he did not pull his knife, and they found him, how do you think it would of turned out then? they were looking for a fight and when they did they did everything they could to give some guy a hiding by stacking the odds in their favour, and now that the tables got turned on them we are meant to punish the guy?!?!?

We dont know WHY he pleaded guilty, perhaps because he did not think he would win the court case and wanted a potentially lighter sentence by pleading so?

Would rather he pleaded not guilty, so the little shites would have to give evidence, and while they are in the box, ask some real pressing questions about what occurred... the gangsta crap, the things thrown, the punch, the numbers... discredit the little feckers and walk away free as a free thing...

jrandom

7th August 2007, 07:51

Some good points made, perhaps, but also claims to carry a knife himself and "claims" he would have the control not to use it? Hmmmmmm.... Tui???

Not to use it inappropriately, dude. Key difference.

If I had a problem with anger or lack of control, I wouldn't dare. But I don't.

It's easy enough to run a blade around or down someone's arm when they're having a go at you. No reason to stab them in the torso if you're not trying to kill them. Do you think that the same charges would have been laid if Mr Chef had kept his cool and gangsta boy had turned up at the A&E with a severed bicep?

Anyone who carries a weapon, particularly an immediately lethal one, has a responsibility to train with it and exercise restraint in its use. Failing in that regard was Mr Chef's main fuckup.

u4ea

7th August 2007, 08:04

Preventing further attack.

NOt so sure... unarmed groups can kill a lone victim....

I had a freind years ago who was a loving father and not a violent man who helped out a guy who was being attacked by local thugs.His head was kicked soo hard he was DOA...These teenagers are not innocent .They roam the streets and places just to antagonise anyone .Standover tactics the lot.Then they grow up and become bigger thugs.I have always carried personal protection for that very reason.Namby pamby pc bullshit says the baby thugs are just misundertood. Watever!!!

Goblin

7th August 2007, 08:19

Anyone who carries a weapon, particularly an immediately lethal one, has a responsibility to train with it and exercise restraint in its use. Failing in that regard was Mr Chef's main fuckup.Except Mr Chef wasnt carrying a lethal weapon...it was a tool of his trade. It was self defence. The little shit got what he deserved! Good luck to Mr Chef, I hope he gets off with a slap on the wrist...but know our "justice" system, he will be made an example of. How dare a young man with a job and goals in life defend himself against a group of wannabe gangsters.:nono:

mdooher

7th August 2007, 08:40

Anger, lack of control, inappropriate response.... PC bullshit. Humans have these responses for a reason ... they keeps us alive.

If you are approached by a gang of teenage scum and try to ignore them, walk away or wait until one of them hits you before you do something, it is only going to end badly for you.

As soon as you think there is going to be trouble attack the one you can get to. It MUST result in a debilitating injury (break an arm, poke out an eye, kill one of them whatever) then go after the next one. Oh they will run alright.

Remember, just like the police you have the right to win and you must win. Use whatever force you deem appropriate ...and a gang of kids is a serious DEADLY threat. Don't ever think they are JUST kids. They will behave just like a pack of dogs. Show any weakness and at the very least you will end up being kicked in the head.

I say teach the little fuckers what the real world is like.

Patrick

7th August 2007, 09:10

Not to use it inappropriately, dude. Key difference. If I had a problem with anger or lack of control, I wouldn't dare. But I don't.

Thats probably just what Mr Chef boy thought too... until he found himself in a "situation..."

Too thick to defend the charge, or his lawyer is useless... or both......

jrandom

7th August 2007, 09:49

Thats probably just what Mr Chef boy thought too... until he found himself in a "situation..."

He was weighed in the balance, and found wanting.

I hope to fare better when my time comes.

Too thick to defend the charge, or his lawyer is useless... or both......

... or he and his lawyer realise that his actions went beyond the bounds of reasonable self-defence, and that a defence in Court would have been very unlikely to succeed, making a guilty plea to the reduced charge appropriate.

Patrick

7th August 2007, 10:08

He was weighed in the balance, and found wanting.

I hope to fare better when my time comes.

Like he thought too, perhaps???

... or he and his lawyer realise that his actions went beyond the bounds of reasonable self-defence, and that a defence in Court would have been very unlikely to succeed, making a guilty plea to the reduced charge appropriate.

I have had burglars caught red handed with the literal sack over the shoulder, still in the house they broke into, and lawyers running a not guilty plea the whole way....

Why not in Mr Chefs case??????? He definitely has a case worth defending. I reckon I could have won this one for him easy....

jrandom

7th August 2007, 10:48

Are you some sort of fucking retard?

I wonder, sometimes. :o

He wasn't carrying a weapon, he was carrying his work tools...

Hence the lack of charges relating to carrying an offensive weapon, I suspect.

little pieces of shit... not cutting each of them ear to ear, and then cutting the cocks off of their fathers...

You present as an angry, impotent man who will never make a difference to anything he rants about.

Skyryder

7th August 2007, 11:19

Except Mr Chef wasnt carrying a lethal weapon...it was a tool of his trade. It was self defence. The little shit got what he deserved! Good luck to Mr Chef, I hope he gets off with a slap on the wrist...but know our "justice" system, he will be made an example of. How dare a young man with a job and goals in life defend himself against a group of wannabe gangsters.:nono:

Absolutey Goblin. These shits saw some easy meat and one of them came off second best. If they had all just minded their own buisness instead of all this 'colour' thing no one would have got hurt. But that's just too difficult for these retards.

Skyryder

Mr Merde

7th August 2007, 11:24

......
Anyone who carries a weapon, particularly an immediately lethal one, has a responsibility to train with it and exercise restraint in its use. Failing in that regard was Mr Chef's main fuckup.

Anyone who has been trained to carry a weapon will know that, if and when it is brought into use, it is used to its fullest capabilities.

All this crap about wounding or incapacitating someone with a careful thrust of a blade or an aimed shot at a bodily extremity is just that, crap.

When faced with a potential life threatening situation a trained person will go for a shot or a thrust that immediately nulifies that threat. In most cases that will be a fatal decision.

Not picking on you here jrandom but TV and the movies have a lot to answer for with respect to peoples perceptions of how these situations should be answered.

In my particular case I was trained to carry a pistol and that training involved learning to use it in these situations. In every scenario it was stressed that we fired two shots to the central mass and then one to the head of our antagonist.

BTT

Delerium

7th August 2007, 12:39

Anyone who has been trained to carry a weapon will know that, if and when it is brought into use, it is used to its fullest capabilities.

All this crap about wounding or incapacitating someone with a careful thrust of a blade or an aimed shot at a bodily extremity is just that, crap.

When faced with a potential life threatening situation a trained person will go for a shot or a thrust that immediately nulifies that threat. In most cases that will be a fatal decision.

Not picking on you here jrandom but TV and the movies have a lot to answer for with respect to peoples perceptions of how these situations should be answered.

In my particular case I was trained to carry a pistol and that training involved learning to use it in these situations. In every scenario it was stressed that we fired two shots to the central mass and then one to the head of our antagonist.

BTT

x2. Just like asking your average policeman to shoot somebody in the leg or arm during an armed standoff. HA! Fat chance. Pumped up with adrenalin, hands shaking, trying to protect your own ass and possibly somebody elses. Nobody wants to put in this sort of situation, and nobody should, but if you are, use it or lose it.

jrandom

7th August 2007, 12:52

All this crap about wounding or incapacitating someone with a careful thrust of a blade or an aimed shot at a bodily extremity is just that, crap.

Hmm, I went back and read what I wrote, and figured someone would bring that point up.

You're quite right, of course. I shouldn't be supporting my argument with movie-plot scenarios.

I think it boils down to one of two things being the case. Either:

(a) Mr Chef shouldn't have drawn; or

(b) Mr Chef should be defending the charge.

And I guess we'll never really know which of the above is true.

Goblin

7th August 2007, 13:13

I think it boils down to one of two things being the case. Either:

(a) Mr Chef shouldn't have drawn; or

(b) Mr Chef should be defending the charge.

And I guess we'll never really know which of the above is true.I think Mr Chef should be defending the charge as it was self defence. Little shit stain should be done for assault.

Only in NZ can the perp turn it around and make the victim face charges.

terbang

7th August 2007, 13:29

Well if your a tough guy and punch someone in the head that just happens to have a bloody big knife in his pocket, then it just isn't your day. A consequence you should have considered before throwing the punch.
Bit like if you rob a gunshop while wielding machete... There are risks with everything we do and we really should consider them.

scumdog

7th August 2007, 14:13

jrandom

7th August 2007, 14:18

Well if your a tough guy and punch someone in the head that just happens to have a bloody big knife in his pocket, then it just isn't your day. A consequence you should have considered before throwing the punch.

Actually, to be honest, I'd prefer to live in a society where I could feel secure in the knowledge that a guy who insulted me enough to receive a punch would not be likely to subsequently respond by drawing a lethal weapon and killing me.

Yes, I know that that scenario has undoubtedly played out plenty of times throughout history, human nature being what it is, but I support the idea of criminal law that attempts to create civilised constraints on such behaviour.

Not that I have any plans on punching anyone in the head, mind you. It's just a thought experiment. And consideration of those consequences is why you'll never catch me starting a fight...

ManDownUnder

7th August 2007, 14:23

I think Mr Chef should be defending the charge as it was self defence. Little shit stain should be done for assault.

Only in NZ can the perp turn it around and make the victim face charges.

Yeah but... little shit was angrily throwing words and a tanty - not lethal doses of anything. Whereas the chef responded as if to a lethal threat.

Get angry yes, shout back by all means, maybe even have him evicted from the premise... but stabbing him????

terbang

7th August 2007, 14:36

Mr Merde

7th August 2007, 14:38

....As far as shoot-to-wound goes: If it comes to the crunch I'll shoot and keep on shooting until the 'target' does as I say - and that will be "lie down on the ground".

If they do so dead? - well they picked a bad day to be a target for me.:yes:

I have a personal friend who was employed as a bullet catcher in the diplomatic service ( of another country). He told me of a time where he was leading the group and someone used the magic word "gun"

To my mate it was instantaneous. He dropped to one knee whilst drawing his Browning. He then fired two shots ( he thought). Apparently training took over and he kept firing til the target stopped moving. His two rounds turned out to be 2 magazines, or 30 rounds. To this day he says he still only remembers firing twice.

ManDownUnder

7th August 2007, 14:46

Hmm yeah, but if you wish give someone some lip then also consider that they may up the ante and, perhaps, punch you, stab you, shoot you, nuke you or whatever back. Regardless of where it lays in the law, poking shit at others for no reason can have a consequence. Who is at fault? The provoker or the provoked? The trick is, if you arn't prepared for same or possibly worse back, breathe through your nose and move on.

So you're saying I can come and shoot you if your message above pisses me off? Let's face it "giving someone lip" is defined by the recipient, so any time I choose to interpret anything you say in a manner that doesn't suit me... I can retaliate with force right?

.. errr... no....

ManDownUnder

7th August 2007, 14:51

Three coons accost you on the bus, they're abusing you (for no other reason than you're wearing the wrong colour jacket I might add), they start throwing stuff at you... there's every chance they'll get off at your stop and attempt to 'give you the bash'. I'm bloody glad that I'm reading about some arse wipe getting stabbed (a stabbing he earnt, probably the only thing he'll earn in his life) rather than another victim of teenage crime, which I might also add is at an all time high.

Should've cut the throats of all three of them.

Bling given

peasea

7th August 2007, 14:51

Like riding a motorbike while standing on the pegs and not wearing a helmet....:whistle::shutup:

Anyway, back on track..
As far as shoot-to-wound goes: If it comes to the crunch I'll shoot and keep on shooting until the 'target' does as I say - and that will be "lie down on the ground".

If they do so dead? - well they picked a bad day to be a target for me.:yes:

Why did I think of Waitara when I read that?

Anyway, I can't help but wonder why this chef was carrying such a knife in the first place. Can't he leave his tools of trade at his place of work? That's where my tools always used to stay when I was throwing spanners. Maybe he was temping and prefers his own blades, fair enough. However, he had it on his person and used it to defend himself; I see no problem here apart from a fucked-up legal system (it's not a justice system....) and lawyers laughing all the way to the bank.

As usual.

terbang

7th August 2007, 14:53

So you're saying I can come and shoot you if your message above pisses me off? Let's face it "giving someone lip" is defined by the recipient, so any time I choose to interpret anything you say in a manner that doesn't suit me... I can retaliate with force right?

.. errr... no....

Oh groan you still picking fights with me. Then fire away big fella, the stage is yours. But before you do re-read the posts again, I didn't say it was right or should be the law for an excessive retaliation, I just said it was a possible consequence. People should consider that there are people out there who may retaliate in a less than pleasant fashion.

imdying

7th August 2007, 14:55

Bling givenYou can red bling me all you like, but the fact is, these street gangs that hang out outside of The Palms in the 'east' and Northlands in the 'west' are made up of no hoping little coons. That might offend your delicate sensibilities, but it's a fact.

ManDownUnder

7th August 2007, 15:04

You can red bling me all you like, but the fact is, these street gangs that hang out outside of The Palms in the 'east' and Northlands in the 'west' are made up of no hoping little coons. That might offend your delicate sensibilities, but it's a fact.

No the red bling was for a childish attempt to inflame the argument with derogatory racist name calling. Per the comment on the red bling (I think I have this right) "Come back to me when you have a decent argument".

Decent being an intentional pun BTW.

It also doesn't alter my base argument. Addressing minor threats with lethal force is outrageous and the sooner anyone doing that is out of society the better for me and mine. I have no problem with both the chef and the guy provoking him being held accountable for their actions.

Why didn't the chef just leave? Or call the cops? Those are the key questions here. The chef's use of potentially lethal force is an entirely separate issue.

Here's my interpretation.

Young guy (21) got shouted at, lost the plot - saw red and grabbed whatever was handy to kill the little mofo having a go at him. So now, in a strange kind of way... the little mofo wins. Chef loses job, has to pay said mofo compensation etc etc etc.

Why do it? There IS no upside apart from a possible 20 seconds of "feelgood"

Mr Merde

7th August 2007, 15:07

ManDownUnder

7th August 2007, 15:07

But before you do re-read the posts again, I didn't say it was right or should be the law for an excessive retaliation, I just said it was a possible consequence. People should consider that there are people out there who may retaliate in a less than pleasant fashion.

I did miss previous posts... (can't find 'em now - this thing goes for pages...) you able to help?

And yes, responses of a less than pleasant fashion (I like the understatement) should always be considered. But overwhelming force has a time and place. I don't think one spotty dick shouting rude words at another spotty dick is it.

imdying

7th August 2007, 15:08

Here's my interpretation.

Young guy (21) got shouted at, lost the plot - saw red and grabbed whatever was handy to kill the little mofo having a go at him.Oh, I get it, you're delusional... it all makes sense now.

Closer to the truth is: 'The chef was abused and something was thrown at him. As the group got off the bus, they made more comments and one of them punched him in the mouth.'

And then the little piece of gutter trash got stabbed, as he so richly deserved :yes:

/edit: To be clear, if your version of the events was what actually took place, and it was just a little lip, then yes stabbing the guy would've been an over reaction. But you out number me, punch me in the mouth, all whilst I've got a carving knife, you better have your medical insurance paid up...

ManDownUnder

7th August 2007, 15:14

Oh, I get it, you're delusional... it all makes sense now.
Quite - but that's beside the point. I prefer "idealist" - so much classier.

Oh, I get it, you're delusional... it all makes sense now. Closer to the truth is: 'The chef was abused and something was thrown at him. As the group got off the bus, they made more comments and one of them punched him in the mouth.'
OH MY GOD - lots of people were calling him names, and and and someone threw something... *sob*.

He should have used his machine gun!

And then the little piece of gutter trash got stabbed, as he so richly deserved :yes:
If the guy had a restaurant full of mates behind him when he was stabbed, the Chef was lucky not to have the living TAR kicked out of him.

STILL a dumb move. STILL no excuse for raising things to a lethal threat, and to do it in the face of potentially overwhelming force? Either brave or (more likely) stupid... fuelled by testosterone.

LOL and chap... "Not my fault all those little black kids are trouble makers." ain't a good tag on the red bling. At least you're racist in private too - consistancy is important..

Grahameeboy

7th August 2007, 15:14

Why did I think of Waitara when I read that?

Anyway, I can't help but wonder why this chef was carrying such a knife in the first place. Can't he leave his tools of trade at his place of work? That's where my tools always used to stay when I was throwing spanners. Maybe he was temping and prefers his own blades, fair enough. However, he had it on his person and used it to defend himself; I see no problem here apart from a fucked-up legal system (it's not a justice system....) and lawyers laughing all the way to the bank.

As usual.

Some chefs use their own knives at work and take home at the end of a shift so that could explain why he had the knife on him...

imdying

7th August 2007, 15:17

OH MY GOD - lots of people were calling him names, and and and someone threw something... *sob*.Excellent, so you mum is on the way home from work, accosted by a street gang, abused, has stuff thrown at her, and punched in the face, you'll be happy for nothing to happen... excellent, where does she work again? Got a picture? Good enough for that chef, good enough for your mum I say.

ManDownUnder

7th August 2007, 15:23

Excellent, so you mum is on the way home from work, accosted by a street gang, abused, has stuff thrown at her, and punched in the face, you'll be happy for nothing to happen... excellent, where does she work again? Got a picture? Good enough for that chef, good enough for your mum I say.

So lets say it's your 8 year old brother that punches my Mum, and my Mum stabs your baby brother... It's the same childish argument. You're not adding credibility to either side by swapping the characters involved. Nice try to make it personal by the way - again - stick to facts, not emotions... although I can see merit in why you did it.

Both sides simply need to be accountable for their behaviour.... don't they?

avgas

7th August 2007, 15:24

Anyway, I can't help but wonder why this chef was carrying such a knife in the first place. Can't he leave his tools of trade at his place of work? That's where my tools always used to stay when I was throwing spanners.
Pretty much every young chef i know takes their knives home, main reasons being - most knife sets will back about $500-1000 for the good stuff. So in a kitchen its like leaving ya wallet at the pokies.
Most young chef's are training, so they take their knives from work, to tech to home.
Good, sharp knives are worth their weight in gold for a young chef. I got on good with the local chef's as i used to sharpen their blades to perfection for them (i was a dishwasher at the time).

justsomeguy

7th August 2007, 15:24

The chef did what anyone would have done. Fight or flight - he did both.

Having been in a similar situation the only reason I didn't do something similar was because I had nothing to use. In those circumstances you don't think, you react or simply act.

Call the cops, well... you might as well ask for divine intervention as you have a higher chance of a response.

JRandom mate, you talk a lot of sense. However you also talk as though you got all your reasoning out of a book. Unless one is a veteran police officer/firefighter/ambo or defence force recruit there is no bloody way in hell that they can "predict" their reaction under immediate physical threat.

justsomeguy

7th August 2007, 15:26

Good, sharp knives are worth their weight in gold for a young chef.

Exactly.

That's why he always would have them around while going to work or back, just like a plumber's van full of tools, a cop car with a radar, a construction workers helmet and boots...geddit?

imdying

7th August 2007, 15:28

So lets say it's your 8 year old brother that punches my Mum, and my Mum stabs your baby brother... It's the same childish argument. You're not adding credibility to either side by swapping the characters involved. Nice try to make it personal by the way - again - stick to facts, not emotions... although I can see merit in why you did it.

Both sides simply need to be accountable for their behaviour.... don't they?
Then not only does my brother need a good stabbing, but my mother would too. WTF was she doing letting my brother join a hoodie (more politically correct for you) gang in the first place??

Basically at the core, the Chch City Council has invested huge sums of money into building a public bus infrastructure that is becoming quite good in most areas. What is the point of even bothering if if can't even be used in safety... and for what, because you can't ride certain routes in a certain coloured jacket? WTF? It warms my heart to see someone standing up to those little punks, and reeducating them on basic manners. I don't really see what choice he had... stab one in a confined place allowing for a get away, or ignore them, get off the bus, and get the crap kicked out of him... it's happened before, but gladly, not this time.

ManDownUnder

7th August 2007, 15:37

Basically at the core, the Chch City Council has invested huge sums of money into building a public bus infrastructure that is becoming quite good in most areas. What is the point of even bothering if if can't even be used in safety... and for what, because you can't ride certain routes in a certain coloured jacket?
Agreed

It warms my heart to see someone standing up to those little punks, and reeducating them on basic manners. I don't really see what choice he had... stab one in a confined place allowing for a get away, or ignore them, get off the bus, and get the crap kicked out of him... it's happened before, but gladly, not this time.

Agreed re someone standing up to them.

But therein lies a key difference - you're saying it was an immediately life threatening situation... I'm not convinced. A punch to the mouth and a few names?

If, and this is a hypothetical, the guy had no option but to return lethal force (note RETURN. not "opt to use")... he still needs to be held accountable for it. I don't care who uses what force - they are accountable for it.

Again - it would like he was bloody lucky the law of the jungle didn't turn on him and he had the living tar kicked out of him. He escalated it to a use of lethal force, and anyone else that got into the fight would have the defence of standing in defence of another. The hoodies win.

justsomeguy

7th August 2007, 15:37

Isn't the general arse saving protocol when faced with a group to disable as severely as possible one of the group and hope the others don't wanna be next?

Something along the lines, "Together you can kill me but the next fella to try anything gets the same fate."
--------------------------------------------
MDU, If they want to be criminals then shouldn't they be fine with being reacted to outside the law?

ManDownUnder

7th August 2007, 15:46

Isn't the general arse saving protocol when faced with a group to disable as severely as possible one of the group and hope the others don't wanna be next?

Something along the lines, "Together you can kill me but the next fella to try anything gets the same fate."

Yup - life or death stuff. Find the smallest target, incapacitate them and use them as a shield (ideally). Best way to win a fight is by at least 100m though.

MDU, If they want to be criminals then shouldn't they be fine with being reacted to outside the law?

I see what you're saying and while it is deliciously tempting, no. That's a justification for vigilante justice the world over, closely followed by the breakdown of justice and mayhem.

Iraq's a great example of the moment.

Accountability is paramount.

imdying

7th August 2007, 15:51

Again - it would like he was bloody lucky the law of the jungle didn't turn on him and he had the living tar kicked out of him. He escalated it to a use of lethal force, and anyone else that got into the fight would have the defence of standing in defence of another. The hoodies win.Agreed, he was bloody lucky. It's assumption, but I'm picking that most hoodie gangs don't understand that even a few kicks to a persons head can quite easily kill them, and I'd wager that if they'd got him on the ground he would've taken a few.

The poor bastard should never ever have been put in that position in the first place, hence I will never feel sorry for those that put him there.

Having seen these gangs, I'm sure that his life could have been in danger if he'd made the wrong move, showed too much weakness, whatever. That poor bugger delivering pizza and having his head stoved in by a baseball bat is evidence enough of the seriousness of the problem we have with these little bastards.

terbang

7th August 2007, 15:55

If they want to be criminals then shouldn't they be fine with being reacted to outside the law?

A good point and close to the origional thrust of this thread. I can operate outside the law as much as I like until it backfires on me and I get hurt. Then I will take advantage of it's full protection.
As a result of 'the rights of criminals' we have to sit around and wait for the cops while being out-numbered and punched in the head for wearing the wrong coloured clothes. I'm all for law and order but if attacked by a group of pricks, I'll defend myself and show how sharp my teeth really are as well. Though it probably wouldn't involve sticking a knife into someone.
However, it is a reality that there are shitheads out there who want to do bad stuff to us and it is better to prevent than react. Stay away from dodgey areas.

jrandom

7th August 2007, 15:59

Call the cops, well... you might as well ask for divine intervention as you have a higher chance of a response.

Have you ever actually called in an assault in progress?

I have. Er, well, actually, someone else did.

:shutup:

But the response was pretty fucking impressive.

JRandom mate, you talk a lot of sense. However you also talk as though you got all your reasoning out of a book...

... and you reckon the book's wrong?

imdying

7th August 2007, 15:59

Stay away from dodgey areas.Like public transport systems? :lol:

terbang

7th August 2007, 16:00

Iraq's a great example of the moment.

And if you say that in the context that the US invasion of Iraq is a vigilante act. Then I'll shout yer beer.

jrandom

7th August 2007, 16:00

I'm all for law and order but if attacked by a group of pricks, I'll defend myself and show how sharp my teeth really are as well. Though it probably wouldn't involve sticking a knife into someone.

Hang on, you're not agreeing with me, are you?

terbang

7th August 2007, 16:09

Well yeah, sometimes you have to agree to agree as well.

justsomeguy

7th August 2007, 16:15

Have you ever actually called in an assault in progress?

Yes.

"I see, do you need an ambulance? No? Ok. Please drive to the nearest station and report it." Then they did sweet f'ck all. Still nothing.

A couple of weeks later - when I saw the guy and called 111.

"I'm sorry there is nothing we can do at the moment, the nearest police station is Onehunga, please visit there during office hours and report your sighting".

----------
If I didn't decide to be a bigger man and let karma get them, plans were in place for house calls...

Vigilante justice does have it's place and these guys deserve everything they get.... Unless you use your Chinook to pick your nose.

... and you reckon the book's wrong?

Yes it is, for it doesn't take the random nature of human reaction into account.

rwh

7th August 2007, 16:42

....Anyway, I can't help but wonder why this chef was carrying such a knife in the first place. Can't he leave his tools of trade at his place of work? ...

Having run a pub/restauant in the UK I cant think of any chef who left his knives unattended at his place of work.

They are very possesive of the tools of their trade and never risk leaving them.

Those chefs who have worked their way through from prep to chef have probably built their collection of knives up over a number of years and spent a lot of money on them. They will not leave them in the kitchen or similar place.

This bit puzzles me. I thought these guys kept their fancy knives in fancy cases - not the sort of thing you'd be able to extract one from in the heat of a fight? Was this guy carrying it loose in case he needed it on the dodgy bus? In that case, IMHO, he was carrying an offensive weapon.

Richard

terbang

7th August 2007, 16:45

Fark I'm slow today..!

As far as shoot-to-wound goes: If it comes to the crunch I'll shoot and keep on shooting until the 'target' does as I say - and that will be "lie down on the ground".

Totaly agree. No good shooting to wound if youve got one of CB's famous casseroles in mind too.

Mr Merde

7th August 2007, 17:03

This bit puzzles me. I thought these guys kept their fancy knives in fancy cases - not the sort of thing you'd be able to extract one from in the heat of a fight? Was this guy carrying it loose in case he needed it on the dodgy bus? In that case, IMHO, he was carrying an offensive weapon.

Richard

Had one chef who kept his in a canvas roll.

Sort of like a builders apron.

Each knife had its own compartment.

When all in it was rolled up and tied off with a cord round the middle.

You could easily extract a knife from the open end where the handles were.

I guess he may have had this sort of roll as you dont really get to look which knife you are getting, just the handle

Hope this makes sense.

jrandom

7th August 2007, 17:06

"I see, do you need an ambulance? No? Ok. Please drive to the nearest station and report it."

You called and said "Person A is beating up on person B. Help!" and they said that?

Something smells wrong.

Unless you use your Chinook to pick your nose.

It's put down and taken apart a few critters, but it mostly gets used in the kitchen, to be honest. :)

Yes it is, for it doesn't take the random nature of human reaction into account.

Human reactions are not random. They can be both anticipated and trained.

peasea

7th August 2007, 17:58

[quote=peasea;1162542]....Anyway, I can't help but wonder why this chef was carrying such a knife in the first place. Can't he leave his tools of trade at his place of work? ...quote]

Having run a pub/restauant in the UK I cant think of any chef who left his knives unattended at his place of work.

They are very possesive of the tools of their trade and never risk leaving them.

Those chefs who have worked their way through from prep to chef have probably built their collection of knives up over a number of years and spent a lot of money on them. They will not leave them in the kitchen or similar place.

Thank you for that insight, I did wonder.
Funny they don't provide suitable lockers for them in that case. It can't be cool to commute all the time with a pack of knives under your jacket.

With that; I'd say why the bloody hell doesn't said chef defend the charge?

toycollector10

7th August 2007, 20:35

This thread has stirred it up a bit...

Lots of opinions which is great but get this...

Some citizen gets on a bus, just wants to get home for tea and to settle down by the fire. Then some idiots want to disturb him. Assault him. Hurt him. Flash-bang-boom and then he's inside doing jail time.

I don't give a shit about the rights and wrongs of knifing some c*nt that deserves it.

The shame is that chef-boy has to do time for reacting the way he did, reacting unexpectedly and violently......that was just in his nature is my guess...

I hope I get called for jury duty, he will walk!

davereid

7th August 2007, 20:53

I hope I get called for jury duty, he will walk!

Yep, thats how I would vote too.. none of this being lectured on the law of self-defense.

They started it. He finished it.

As long as the facts are as stated I'd send him home. (In a taxi though)

Street Gerbil

7th August 2007, 20:53

Bullies thrive on those who leave response to the police. The worst nightmare of a bully is a victim that fights back. The little shit just got the taste of his own medicine. Serves him perfectly right.
Good luck Mr. Chef, I am praying for you. I hope you walk free.
P.S. Re: Lethality. A friend of my parents was beaten to death by an unarmed gang of teenagers. They peacefully asked him to take off his trousers and he refused.

toycollector10

7th August 2007, 20:59

Hi Street Gerbil..yes, was that the poor bastard up on Colombo. The Mercedes did a U-turn, they piled out and killed him. For what, the wrong coloured trousers? Was that the circumstance?

Street Gerbil

7th August 2007, 21:18

Hi Street Gerbil..yes, was that the poor bastard up on Colombo. The Mercedes did a U-turn, they piled out and killed him. For what, the wrong coloured trousers? Was that the circumstance?
No that was back in '79 in the old country. This guy was wearing expensive jeans brought from abroad (that kind was not sold in stores and was something of a status symbol) and the gang leader decided that he wants it. In court they explained that they have never met any resistance and "were outraged by his insolence and decided to teach him some respect". They were not on drugs or even inebriated. They were just drunk with power over "lesser human beings". Same as folks in our story.

justsomeguy

7th August 2007, 21:19

I hope I get called for jury duty, he will walk!

Same here.

Delerium

7th August 2007, 21:40

A good point and close to the origional thrust of this thread. I can operate outside the law as much as I like until it backfires on me and I get hurt. Then I will take advantage of it's full protection.
As a result of 'the rights of criminals' we have to sit around and wait for the cops while being out-numbered and punched in the head for wearing the wrong coloured clothes. I'm all for law and order but if attacked by a group of pricks, I'll defend myself and show how sharp my teeth really are as well. Though it probably wouldn't involve sticking a knife into someone.
However, it is a reality that there are shitheads out there who want to do bad stuff to us and it is better to prevent than react. Stay away from dodgey areas.

Exactly, carrying out a criminal act often as in this case involves taking away the rights of others. You do that you should have yours taken away from you.

Delerium

7th August 2007, 21:49

This is why OSH is evil. It stops natural selection and keeps the dumb ones alive.

Storm

7th August 2007, 21:55

This is why OSH is evil. It stops natural selection and keeps the dumb ones alive.

Quite right. Darwin is being robbed of his prime candidates these days, by PC bs, and all the bleeding heart liberals.

Indiana_Jones

7th August 2007, 21:58

Well that stupid cunt of a hood rat had to expect a reaction, maybe the chef over-reacted (but it's one of those spur of the moment things, we've all been there), but still a reaction non-the-less.

-Indy

Mr Merde

7th August 2007, 22:57

Just a question for you all to ponder and an attempt at keeping an interesting discussion going (well to me it is anyway)

I have noticed in this thread a couple of mentions of the

Criminal Justice System

Is it called that because only the criminals can expect justice?

Stirring the pot.

Street Gerbil

8th August 2007, 00:53

[SIZE=4]Criminal Justice System
[COLOR=tan]Is it called that because only the criminals can expect justice?

The little shit got his share of criminal justice. Too bad he found it hard to stomach (pun intended).

Patrick

8th August 2007, 12:01

He wasn't carrying a weapon, he was carrying his work tools. If I catch a bus with my torque wrench, get accosted by some piece of shit coons that need to get cleansed from the gene pool, and beat one of the little pricks round the swede with it, that still doesn't make it a weapon.

Anything in its normal form is not a weapon, unless specifically designed as such. When he chose to use it as a weapon, it became one, just like your wrench would. The wrench is not a weapon, but use it as one, it becomes one.

Hence the lack of charges relating to carrying an offensive weapon, I suspect.

He was hit with a big one... you don't normally worry about the minor stuff. Murderers don't get charged with weapon offences, what is the point?

I think it boils down to one of two things being the case. Either:

(a) Mr Chef shouldn't have drawn; or

(b) Mr Chef should be defending the charge.

I vote (b)....

[quote=peasea;1162542]....Anyway, I can't help but wonder why this chef was carrying such a knife in the first place.

They are extremely valuable and personal tools. Would you leave yours lying around work? I can't even leave my torch lying around or it goes "walkies."

OH MY GOD - lots of people were calling him names, and and and someone threw something... *sob*.

STILL a dumb move. STILL no excuse for raising things to a lethal threat, and to do it in the face of potentially overwhelming force? Either brave or (more likely) stupid... fuelled by testosterone.

These little shites were raising the ante throughout, and no doubt would have kept raising it, once they got off the bus to follow him perhaps? (Until he reacted and stopped it?).

Both sides simply need to be accountable for their behaviour.... don't they?

Exactly... what about the ones who threw stuff and punched him???

Unless one is a veteran police officer/firefighter/ambo or defence force recruit there is no bloody way in hell that they can "predict" their reaction under immediate physical threat.

How can these guys predict exactly how they would react? I couldn't, and I am classed as a veteran.

Goblin

8th August 2007, 12:36

These little shites were raising the ante throughout, and no doubt would have kept raising it, once they got off the bus to follow him perhaps? (Until he reacted and stopped it?).

Exactly... what about the ones who threw stuff and punched him???

I'd like to know why the police havn't charged the little shits with assault at the very least. What about Public nuisance or disturbing the peace....there must be something they can charge them with. If they only do Mr Chef then that sends the clear message to the little shits that they can keep doing this kind of shit and the police WILL protect them. Next time they're in their little gang on the streets, I bet they do more than throw rubbish an punch someone in the face. It's what these lowlife little mongrel scumbags are taught from birth and now the law enforces it. These shits will think they're untouchable now.

Mr Merde

8th August 2007, 12:41

... they can keep doing this kind of shit and the police WILL protect them. ....
. These shits will think they're untouchable now.

Yep and more than likely ACC will pay them out with megabucks if in the course of their activities they get hurt in anyway.

ManDownUnder

8th August 2007, 12:44

I'd like to know why the police havn't charged the little shits with assault at the very least.

OH MY GOD Ain't that the truth! Bling given...

jazbug5

8th August 2007, 19:59

Bah, he deserves to go to jail.... for not cutting that stupid little niggers head off.

Um... am I the only one here who has a problem with this post?

FWIW I agree with what Mr. Random has been saying. It's all too easy to kill someone with a knife if you don't know what you're doing. If you do, there are lots of ways to make superficial injuries that either slow them down or bleed so much they freak out.. but it can STILL go horribly wrong, and if your assailant is unarmed then you are going to jail.

davereid

8th August 2007, 20:35

...if your assailant is unarmed then you are going to jail.

Not if I'm on the jury... I don't care if you throttle, stab, shoot or push the bad guy off a bridge.. I won't send you to jail, all I'd do is buy you a beer after the hearing!

Street Gerbil

8th August 2007, 21:07

Um... am I the only one here who has a problem with this post?.
I truly hope that the answer is "yes".

there are lots of ways to make superficial injuries that either slow them down or bleed so much they freak out..

That's suicide from the tactical standpoint. You either absorb the attack and fall back or retaliate in full force in order to eliminate the threat. Limited response merely invites intensified attacks from the assailant.

if your assailant is unarmed then you are going to jail.
Note that "assailant" is the key word here. The right to self-defense is one of the most basic human rights in my book. The assailant or as it happened in this specific case "assailant_S_" do not require to be armed to pose a lethal threat. As I mentioned earlier, a friend of my parents was beaten to death by a gang of unarmed teenagers in similar circumstances (sans the knife).

imdying

8th August 2007, 21:08

It's all too easy to kill someone with a knife if you don't know what you're doing.One of the things I was taught is that if I was drawn into a fight at school, to only ever hit people with chairs in the arms and legs. It is all to easy to kill someone by punching them in the face/head. Thus why this man was justified in stabbing the little prick after getting a punch to the head, imho.

There has been more than one person in this country accidentally killed in a bar brawl (or whatever) by getting punched in the head... the brain does not like to bounce.

I admit it's hearsay, but potentially they as a group could've easily had him on the ground once they tailed him off the bus, and kicked him repeatedly in the head. If they do not wish to be stabbed, then they should not accost people on the bus who are merely going home from work... and for what? Because in their little hoody gang world wearing the wrong colour jacket is a good enough reason?

They should count themselves lucky that he merely defended himself and didn't psyche out and kill the lot of them, which by the way would have been doing this country a favour.

Nothing would please me more than to see hoody gang members covered in petrol and set on fire. Limb by limb.

toycollector10

8th August 2007, 22:37

28 March 2006 By JOHN HENZELL

A group of teenagers used a baseball bat to murder a stranger within minutes of seeing him walking home, the Christchurch District Court has been told.

Christchurch accountant Trevor Clague, 43, was only a few streets from his house after a night out with friends when the carload of teenagers spotted him in Colombo Street, Sydenham.

Within minutes, the teenagers had parked their Mercedes-Benz in his path and two of them allegedly Rexon Mataese Piilua, 18, and a 16-year-old, who cannot be named because of his age got out of the car with a baseball bat.

A witness told the murder depositions hearing yesterday that the first physical contact was when Piilua raised the bat above his head and smashed it into Clague's skull. Clague fell to the footpath, fatally wounded. The teenagers fled.

Piilua faces a charge of murder after the incident on October 15 last year.

The 16-year-old and the driver of the car, Phillip Stephen Daikee, 18, are not accused of directly injuring Clague but have also been charged with his murder on the basis they were party to what Piilua allegedly did.

Prosecutor Kerryn Beaton said the three defendants, along with car owner Sam Smith and his girlfriend, Jacinda, had been driving around in Smith's Mercedes.

About 2am, they were leaving the Mobil service station in Colombo Street, Sydenham, when they spotted Clague walking south.

"None of the accused knew Clague but they saw him and decided to turn their car around, did that and parked on Colombo Street facing north," Beaton said.

"Daikee was driving the car. Piilua and (the youth) were in the back. Piilua and (the youth) got out of the vehicle, armed with a small wooden baseball bat.

"They both approached Clague and stopped in front of him. Piilua then hit Clague once in the head with one swing of the baseball bat.

"They both then ran away, got in the car and left the scene. Piilua took the bat home, and the next day, he and Daikee were involved in burning the bat.

"Clague suffered severe head injuries. He was taken to hospital but died several hours later."

Smith told the court he was in the front-passenger seat, having drunk "about 15 cans" during the night.

The first time he saw the baseball bat was when Piilua and the youth left the car and walked towards Clague. "I saw Rexon (Piilua) had some bat down by his side. The man was running and stopped and was shaking his fists. Rexon just hit him once and he fell down."

Smith demonstrated the swing as if holding the bat with both hands and swinging over his shoulder.

"(The youth) and Rexon came running back to the car. They got in and there was a bit of shock, saying something along the lines of, `Drive, drive'. That was probably Rexon," he said.

"Phil hesitated for half a minute it was all loud and yelling then we drove off. I didn't say much. I was sitting in the front trying to figure out if what happened had just happened.

"We went to Rexon's house. There was a lot of talk. `What have you done?' That was from Jacinda and Phil. I didn't say anything.

"We decided to go back and see what happened, so we put my car at my house and took Jacinda's car. I thought we'd probably have been seen (in my car), with what happened. When we got there, it was all taped off."

The next morning, they got The Press to see what had happened, and then went to see Piilua.

Beaton: "Did Rexon say anything to you about why he'd hit this man with the bat?"

Smith: "No, there wasn't much said in the car, but it was a short time I saw him. We heard on the radio what had happened, that there was an assault on Colombo Street at the same place and we knew what had happened. We were in a bit of shock."

By then the baseball bat had been broken in half by Piilua and he and Daikee were burning it in the fireplace. Later, they talked Piilua into going to the police station.

The hearing continues today.

toycollector10

8th August 2007, 22:48

I can't find the internet link for the middle aged guy kicked in the head after being lured off the street in Bishopdale. A group of little c*nts were trashing his letterbox and he took objection to it.

What about the kids beaten up in Jellie Park by a gang wearing colours. Baseball bats and other weapons. I'm sure that they don't even belong over on that side of town.

This bloody town has a very nasty underbelly.....

jazbug5

8th August 2007, 23:13

I truly hope that the answer is "yes".

That's suicide from the tactical standpoint. You either absorb the attack and fall back or retaliate in full force in order to eliminate the threat. Limited response merely invites intensified attacks from the assailant.

Note that "assailant" is the key word here. The right to self-defense is one of the most basic human rights in my book. The assailant or as it happened in this specific case "assailant_S_" do not require to be armed to pose a lethal threat. As I mentioned earlier, a friend of my parents was beaten to death by a gang of unarmed teenagers in similar circumstances (sans the knife).

I see. So you hope that everyone agrees that it's okay to advocate "cutting the heads off 'stupid little niggers'". Have I just slipped through into an alternate dimension here, or something... wtf?

Incidentally, I don't entirely disagree with your concept of self defence, and I'm well aware of the commitment that needs to be taken into a fight where you fear for your life, if you take the decision to fight and not scarper. (I've done more than a little bit of training in my time, a lot of it with weapons.)
This is a very important point, which MDU (I believe) raised. He had been punched. On a bus. Not an alley. They were quite possibly grandstanding, being pricks, yes, but he had no reason at that point to kill someone, no matter how humiliated or afraid he was feeling. What their further intentions were, none of us know. However, surely the message should be that on a bus, where the driver has access to a radio and can summon help, there are still some options to go before you plunge a knife in someone's torso?

I am from a country that has the highest murder rate in the Western world, and the reason for that is the knife culture and the fact that people underestimate how they escalate things in a fight and how easily people can be killed as soon as they are pulled out. And it isn't necessarily the person who pulls it out originally that will do the fatal stabbing. It's easy to drop a knife in a fight. Escalate adrenaline levels, and your peripheral vision is impaired, as is your coordination.
I have been in a situation where I was in fear of my life, alone, and armed with a knife. I 'knew' how to use it. I didn't, and thank God I didn't, because my life would have changed forever for the worse, assuming I would have lived. I used psychology, and luckily that turned out to be the right decision.

Yes, unarmed fights can be fatal- but not quite as quickly and easily.
And if, out of the two of you, witnesses point at you and say that you used a weapon on an unarmed person after they had 'only' punched you, once- you will go to jail. That's how it works.

Biff

9th August 2007, 16:37

I think Mr Chef should be defending the charge as it was self defence. Little shit stain should be done for assault.

Only in NZ can the perp turn it around and make the victim face charges.

But where do you draw the line?

Maybe the chef should have been legally entitled (in the name of self-defence) to have cut the punk's ear off. That would have hurt like fuck, and bled like fuck. Little chance of killing him though.

Maybe gouged an eye out with a spoon. That would have permanently impaired his vision, but again probably not killed him.

Or stab him, in his torso, in an upward motion, with a butchering knife. Up to the handle. Nice n deep.

Hmmm. Choices, choices.

I take great delight in knowing that the little punk who slapped that guy got stabbed for his efforts. Love to have done it myself, in my mind's eye.

ManDownUnder

9th August 2007, 17:15

I don't give a shit about the rights and wrongs of knifing some c*nt that deserves it.

The shame is that chef-boy has to do time for reacting the way he did, reacting unexpectedly and violently......that was just in his nature is my guess...

I hope I get called for jury duty, he will walk!

Same here.

And that'd be based on all the facts right... I mean you do have all the facts don't you?

It's a bit premature for judgement guys...

One of the things I was taught is that if I was drawn into a fight at school, to only ever hit people with chairs in the arms and legs. It is all to easy to kill someone by punching them in the face/head.
That I respect

Thus why this man was justified in stabbing the little prick after getting a punch to the head, imho.
That I don't respect. Why not shoot him? Would he be ok to do that too?

Nothing would please me more than to see hoody gang members covered in petrol and set on fire. Limb by limb.

You're not serious are you? That's subhuman. At best you're lowering yourself to their level and at worst you're a psychotic premeditating arsonist/murderer.

Either way you're a threat to me and mine.

Of course you could be just posturing... naaa - on the web - what are the chances of that happpening?

imdying

9th August 2007, 17:32

No, I'm not serious... unless you can fix social problems by fabricating the answer out of carbon fibre, then it's currently under my radar. I just think the whole thing is absurd, they brought it upon themselves. (unless of course the chef actually carries his knives for the express purpose of knifing hoodies, but even then, in this situation, good on him).

Goblin

9th August 2007, 17:44

But where do you draw the line?
Where do you draw the line as far as what these little shitheads can get away with?
I just dont see how the law can take the side of the perpetrators just because one of them came off second best. The hoodies started it and Mr Chef finished it quickly and effectively. The cops should be thanking him!

Hitcher

9th August 2007, 17:54

Some of the comment in this thread is, in my opinion, getting a bit ridiculous and taking considerable license with the facts, as reported in the media.

I am appalled by comments from people who clearly aspire to be Chuck Norris or have spent way too much time playing first-person-shooter games for vicarious pleasure, and who now want to act out their blood-lust fantasies on Christchurch public transport.

The fact that the convicted offender was a chef is surely immaterial. He was a passenger on a bus who was carrying a fucking big knife in a manner which made it easy to use. Which he did. Unhesitatingly, according to eye witnesses. No fannying around while he unpacked his assembled collection of hand-crafted, French steel bladeware. He had easy access to a knife with a 25cm blade which he buried to the hilt into an alleged aggressor. If he had been less fortunate and severed a major artery in his victim, he would be doing life for murder.

Our stabber has no leg to stand on. He clearly used excessive force before fleeing the scene. Nobody, including bolshie hoodie losers, deserves to be stabbed in such a manner.

All buses in Christchurch (and most other major centres) have drivers with two-way radios. If any passenger ever feels threatened, attracting the driver's attention will soon have Police quickly on the scene.

scumdog

9th August 2007, 17:58

All buses in Christchurch (and most other major centres) have drivers with two-way radios. If any passenger ever feels threatened, attracting the driver's attention will soon have Police quickly on the scene.

Sadly Mr.H, how many kicks or head-stomps do you think a group of shitheads could get in even before the Police started for the scene??

Hitcher

9th August 2007, 18:07

Sadly Mr.H, how many kicks or head-stomps do you think a group of shitheads could get in even before the Police started for the scene??

I hate to think. But in this case we have no information to determine the nature of the "threat" from the hoodie losers in question. I guess I have a problem with pre-emptive retaliation.

imdying

9th August 2007, 18:12

I hate to think. But in this case we have no information to determine the nature of the "threat" from the hoodie losers in question. I guess I have a problem with pre-emptive retaliation.That's fair enough. I for one would be just as pissed off about you even having to consider this situation for real, as I am about this one. It's pretty shitty world if you can't just go about your own business.

avgas

9th August 2007, 18:14

I just found out about "Enzo" in tauranga. I fig its not worth a whole thread so i thought i'd just say here that my thoughts are with the owner.
Sorry to be off topic - but i just felt like saying something.
Back on topic - yes you are right Hitcher is saying that the stabbing is too far. It is however all he could do at the time.

Goblin

9th August 2007, 18:23

Our stabber has no leg to stand on. He clearly used excessive force before fleeing the scene. Nobody, including bolshie hoodie losers, deserves to be stabbed in such a manner.
So, in effect, the hoodie losers are allowed to get away with whatever they want. Next time they feel the urge to harrass some innocent going about their business, they know they can beat the living snot out of them as long as they dont use a weapon.
Yeah that makes sense....NOT!

Hitcher

9th August 2007, 18:30

So, in effect, the hoodie losers are allowed to get away with whatever they want. Next time they feel the urge to harrass some innocent going about their business, they know they can beat the living snot out of them as long as they dont use a weapon.
Yeah that makes sense....NOT!

We are not living in the wild west, and citizens are discouraged from taking the law into their own hands. I am not arguing with the rights of citizens to defend themselves, their families and others who they see being unfairly dealt to from agressors, armed or otherwise. In this case people seem to be leaping to conclusions about what happened on a bus prior to somebody being stabbed, allegedly in self defence. Nobody in this instance had "the living snot beaten out of them" and there is nothing that has been reported to suggest anything other than a bit of intimidation happened prior to the stabbing.

Skyryder

9th August 2007, 19:07

We are not living in the wild west, and citizens are discouraged from taking the law into their own hands. I am not arguing with the rights of citizens to defend themselves, their families and others who they see being unfairly dealt to from agressors, armed or otherwise. In this case people seem to be leaping to conclusions about what happened on a bus prior to somebody being stabbed, allegedly in self defence. Nobody in this instance had "the living snot beaten out of them" and there is nothing that has been reported to suggest anything other than a bit of intimidation happened prior to the stabbing.

One of things that I have always understood is that if you are intimidated, threatened or whatever else one would like to call it, if you want to walk away you put the agresssor down in such a manner he is not likely to get up. Nail the ringleader and all else will fall apart. Now not many people have th skills to do that and I doubt very much that 'chummy' could have done it with his bare hands. So he used his knife. From all accounts he did not hesitate which suggests to me he knew what would happen if he did no take immediate action.

Bottom line on this Hitch is that 'chummy' walked away and his aggressor did not. There is no morale to this. The ganger got clobbered and rightly so.

If he had kept his mouth shut he would not have got himself stabbed. Period.

Skyryder

Biff

9th August 2007, 19:13

Where do you draw the line as far as what these little shitheads can get away with?

The law is quite clear as to what everyone, irrespective of their ethnicity or social economic background, can and cannot get away with. Catching shitheads at it is another matter entirely.

One rule for all.

Goblin

9th August 2007, 19:20

Goblin

9th August 2007, 19:28

The law is quite clear as to what everyone, irrespective of their ethnicity or social economic background, can and cannot get away with. Catching shitheads at it is another matter entirely.

One rule for all.Well it's not clear to me anymore. Seems that hoodie losers can intimidate, abuse, assault whoever they want and the law will defend them if they end up getting hurt. It's just bloody wrong!

rwh

9th August 2007, 20:47

One of things that I have always understood is that if you are intimidated, threatened or whatever else one would like to call it, if you want to walk away you put the agresssor down in such a manner he is not likely to get up.

My understanding - they were on their way off the bus when they punched him. There was no question of the chef not walking away. Just serious overkill - and too close to being literally.

Richard

Skyryder

9th August 2007, 20:51

The law is quite clear as to what everyone, irrespective of their ethnicity or social economic background, can and cannot get away with.
One rule for all.

Actualy Biff it's not. A few years back a farmer shot some guy who was caught stealing his farm bike. The guy was shot in the back and the farmer was found not guilty. I recall other instances the most recent was that I remember was the gun dealer who shot the machette?? weilding robber. The police used their powers of discretion on this one. Self defence can be used but it is not always a succesful legal defence. If 'chummy' is as street wise as I think he is he should not have sat down the back of the bus and even if he was being hassled he had the option to move to the front of the bus and closer to the driver who may have been able to call for some kind of help etc.

The real problem is the word 'reasonable' and what constitutes reasonable force as against unreasonable force.

However having said all this I am in no way advocating that all and sundry should take the law into their own hands far from it. I think our chef had a 'history' and this may have been one of factors that led his solicitor to advising a guilty plea. As I said in an earlier post I think there is more to this than meets the eye.

Skyryder

Goblin

9th August 2007, 21:07

Skyryder, you are right on the money!
There is more to it than what we've seen in the media but I truely believe the little shit got what he deserved. I hope he and his mates think twice about abusing and punching someone for the colour of their clothing.

Biff

9th August 2007, 21:09

Actualy Biff it's not. A few years back a farmer shot some guy who was caught stealing his farm bike. The guy was shot in the back and the farmer was found not guilty.

I recall other instances the most recent was that I remember was the gun dealer who shot the machette?? weilding robber.
Skyryder

Yeah - ok, in those examples the jury/police/CPS at some stage decided that the force used during the act of self defence was in proportion to the perceived threat. Common sense decisions.

In the bus n chef instance though, from what very limited information I have available to me, the chef's response in stabbing this bum was deemed to be excessive in proportion to the threat he himself faced. So by one law for all I meant that even victims of crime are subject to the same laws as everyone else in the country, and as such if they break that law they should be subject to the same legal recourse as the real scum. Sentencing is another story though.

scrivy

9th August 2007, 21:27

We are constantly hearing reports of more and more 'gangsta' kids involved in crime around NZ. What are we doing about the problem?? How many murders did you hear about in NZ when you were way back at school?? (20-30 years ago). A few a year? Now we have a few a week!! How many murders are being done by young or underage c@nts that don't give a shit about our societies rules or co-habitants? At what point do we stand up and say 'Enoughs enough!!'
I'm sick of feeling unsafe in my own home. What good is an alarm system, deadbolts or floodlights if the f@ckers can still break in and cause a home invasion?? Lets face it, they don't give a rats arse about anyone other than themselves!
I heard of a case of 10-12 year olds walking the streets in Taupo at 2 in the morning with offensive weapons. If they'd been used on someone - they would have killed them!! Geezuz f@cken C@rist!!
I sometimes leave my place of work in the wee hours after a long day at work. I have to go into a dark carpark area with no lights etc at the back of some buildings. Do I feel safe? F@CK NO!!
Why should I (or infact all other NZers) feel scared to do the normal day to day operations of any hard working Kiwis? Why are we being backed into a corner? I can see why people lash out at the little punks. They deserve all that they get.
Imagine if Mr Chef was pushed to the ground and the punks saw his knives in his belt. Imagine then if he had tried to go for his knives. Do you think that Mr Chef would have been left unscathed? The pieces of shit would have done as per the baseball bat scenario, and Mr Chef would just be another statistic in NZs shameful history!!
If only the tables were turned, and the braindead f@cks were scared of us!!
We've turned so PC, and as it currently stands, it will only get worse!:nono:

Skyryder

9th August 2007, 21:30

Yeah - ok, in those examples the jury/police/CPS at some stage decided that the force used during the act of self defence was in proportion to the perceived threat. Common sense decisions.

In the bus n chef instance though, from what very limited information I have available to me, the chef's response in stabbing this bum was deemed to be excessive in proportion to the threat he himself faced. So by one law for all I meant that even victims of crime are subject to the same laws as everyone else in the country, and as such if they break that law they should be subject to the same legal recourse as the real scum. Sentencing is another story though.

In the case of the stolen farm bike self defence was not the issue. The Police rightly charged the farmer with murder. I do not recall the details of the case other than self defence was not an issue. It's bit hard to claim this when you have shot someone in the back. The jury bought in a not guilty verdict.

The better half of me agrees with the rest of your post.

Skyryder

scrivy

9th August 2007, 21:37

It shouldn't be a persons right to exist in our society.
People should earn the right and be a valuable contributing member of our society. We will all live better then. :yes::yes:

Goblin

9th August 2007, 21:45

So by one law for all I meant that even victims of crime are subject to the same laws as everyone else in the country, and as such if they break that law they should be subject to the same legal recourse as the real scum. By this reasoning the three shitheads should be up for aggravated assault?

Mr Merde

9th August 2007, 22:26

Unfortunately some of us DO live in the wild west. These gangs of hoodies are only out there looking for trouble. Im not talking about the Christchurch case alone here....it's in every town and city. Not all of us are priveleged enough to be brought up in snobsville and we have to live with these little aresewipes wandering the streets looking for anything to steal or anyone to beat up. We cant rely on the law as they are too busy filling their quotas.

I have had two female family members beaten black and blue by gangs of teenage GIRLS! All for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. If the law cant protect us then we MUST be able to protect ourselves without fear of prosecution!

In support of this statement I can only respond with an experience of my own.

Been back from the Uk 4 years now. About 6 months after getting back I spent a very pleasant evening in the pub til about 2 am. I had about three quarter of an hour walk home and headed off. Soon after leaving the pub I noticed that someone had fallen in behind me and I kept taking quick glances to see if he was still there. he was and he was keeping pace.

After a short while the effects of the beer took its toll and I needed to take a pee. There is a piece of bush on my way and as I got there I stepped into
the bush to relieve myself. As I did this the person following suddenly quickened his pace and came rushing into the bush after me. I didnt even hesitate. I smacked him before he even had time to think and kept on smacking him till he went down on the ground. I left him there and went home to my house.

Found out the next day that there had been a lowlife hanging around town pestering people and he had suddenly shown up with all the signs of having received a beating.

Should I have thrown those punches? Should I have not put the boot in to keep him on the ground? Should i have waited until he had made his intentions known to me? He may have only been asking for directions. At the time I felt extremely threatened and i reacted in a manner I felt appropriate at the time. I felt and still do that if i hadnt reacted the way i did it would have been me lying there on the ground. Did I report the incident, like hell I did. I would have been letting myself be open for prosecution for assault. If i had a club I would have used that and if he had of come at me with a skiv and i were able to get it off of him i would have used it on him. I am normally a very mild person, I prefer to walk away from trouble rather than stand there and get involved. This particular night I didnt run I protected myself by preemptive violence and felt good about doing so.

If it were me and these people were having a go at and i couldnt get away I would react in a very similar way. I would seriously hurt as many of them as possible before they could do it to me.

If this offends others I make no appologies. Prior to this I have only told one other person of the incedent. I'm not proud of violence but I am pleased that, that night I WASNT A VICTIM

Mr :shit:

Biff

9th August 2007, 23:30

By this reasoning the three shitheads should be up for aggravated assault?

At least one of them from what I hear.

sAsLEX

10th August 2007, 00:24

The chef did little to help himself in this case. Carrying an offensive weapon is a criminal act, as is using it. So too is running from a crime scene.

And it's his word against those of his alleged assailants, one of whom was stabbed.

Let's let the criminal justice system sort this out.

So how does he get his work tools to and from work. I mean a hammer is a weapon, as is a screwdriver should builders be arrested?

And he ran from the scene instead of staying and taking responsibility for his actions. It's all very sad, but the bottom line is, an unarmed guy got stabbed.

Wonder why he ran now that he is in court for defending himself....... with todays justice system sometimes it is not wise to stay and see how the Judge will view things.

shafty

10th August 2007, 05:27

If this offends others I make no appologies. Prior to this I have only told one other person of the incedent. I'm not proud of violence but I am pleased that, that night I WASNT A VICTIM

Mr :shit:

No offence taken - bloody good on you!:yes:

jazbug5

10th August 2007, 06:26

Mr. Merde- that's a good story, and it seems to me that you did exactly the right thing there.
Different situation though- and you didn't stab anyone.

Just to re-iterate what rwh said- the 'gang' was leaving the bus at the time. It *seems* as though they were indulging in a spot of macho posturing... and there's a few examples of something kind of similar in this very thread.
Think, people.

idb

10th August 2007, 12:26

........Just to re-iterate what rwh said- the 'gang' was leaving the bus at the time. It *seems* as though they were indulging in a spot of macho posturing... and there's a few examples of something kind of similar in this very thread.
Think, people.

But......he punched the guy!
A clear and progressive escalation of the intimidation.
If there had been no reaction maybe he would have been encouraged to go even further?

Delerium

10th August 2007, 12:27

Maybe they were getting off at the same stop, or the chef got off and they followed?

imdying

11th August 2007, 09:29

This thread needs more laughs, more laughs as presented to you by the Porirua Eastsidaz yo yo black black! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDHZPnEz7ZY

And another retard for god measure: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhlAWpJHqio

Don't blame me if you want the 5 minutes of your life back though :rofl:

Goblin

11th August 2007, 10:25

Slightly off topic, when I was young, my brother, friends and I were in town one evening and one of the tyres on the car was flat. There was no spare so we phoned our friend's mum to bring us one. While we were waiting for her a group of teenage girls came up to us and started to harrass me for my leather jacket. Now they weren't to know I was actually a motorcyclist because we were in a car, not on our bikes. They kept telling me I thought I was tough or something. I tried to ignore them but they then followed us down the road and started pushing me from behind. I turned around and kicked the biggest one in the stomach and she dropped like a stone. Her mates all gathered around her so we carried on as we were. Next thing we go into Cob an Co foyer to use the phone again and the little bitches came running in and had another go at me. Well this ended up a full on fistycuff fight :girlfight: in the middle of the Cob foyer. I had the upper hand and got this little bitch down on the ground and was kicking her in the guts when the bouncers dragged me off her and split the fight up. I thought my brother and friends(all male) would have helped me but they said they knew they weren't allowed to hit girls and I was doing ok on my own.
During all this my boyfriend lost his keys to his car. We went to the police station to see if they had been handed in and who happened to be there? The little bitch and her mates were bailing their bro out after he had been fighting. These little crims had been taught to go cause as much trouble as they can and their parents think its ok. We were taught to NOT fight but i wasn't going to stand by and let these scumbags steal my jacket.

scrivy

12th August 2007, 20:00

Did you watch Sunday tonight?
The farmer that detained the hoodie who was stealing his property on his farm? Now he's facing kidnapping charges, and other offences, and may do jail time!!
What the fuck has happened to NZ??
We can't be safe on our own property, and we can't take any measures to protect our hard earned property from these little hooded shits!!

Fuck the lot of them!!

shafty

12th August 2007, 20:04

scrivy

12th August 2007, 20:14

If more people did this to them, then they might think twice before they commit a crime?:yes:

Patrick

12th August 2007, 20:17

Not if I'm on the jury... I don't care if you throttle, stab, shoot or push the bad guy off a bridge.. I won't send you to jail, all I'd do is buy you a beer after the hearing!

I'd shout ya another in return...!!!

So how does he get his work tools to and from work. I mean a hammer is a weapon, as is a screwdriver should builders be arrested?

It is a tool for the trade, but it can be "converted" by you, or anyone else, into a weapon...

Wonder why he ran now that he is in court for defending himself....... with todays justice system sometimes it is not wise to stay and see how the Judge will view things.

He ran, but got caught running by the cops... Wonder what would have happened if he hung around instead...?

Street Gerbil

12th August 2007, 22:36

Guys, the problem you are trying to comprehend is called "moral equivalence". An armed guy hurt an unarmed guy. Let's protect *THE UNDERDOG*!!! An unarmed guy is always good, an armed guy is always bad, right? What is lost in translation is that the poor underdog is a bandit, a criminal, simply by the virtue of participating in a criminal gang. If the laws choose to ignore this distinction, then, yes, WE HAVE BAD LAWS that need to be changed (and enforced too).

Mekk

13th August 2007, 01:57

jrandom

13th August 2007, 09:37

I really like the look of that blade. How much (roughly) do those things go for?

I couldn't find anyone in NZ or Oz selling them, so I ordered mine direct from Spyderco in Colorado via their website. US$180 for the knife plus US$50 shipping.

You could almost certainly get one cheaper if you shopped around the various online knife and tool retailers, but I was in lust and couldn't be bothered.

:)

ghost

13th August 2007, 10:00

"And he ran from the scene instead of staying and taking responsibility for his actions. It's all very sad, but the bottom line is, an unarmed guy got stabbed."

This whole story sickens me. Where did the common sense go in this country. Reading the story, and the papers never get it wrong:gob: The young guy was attacked, out numbered, and using what the had at the time to what level he felt he needed, he defended himself. Then he ran for his life: what? you stupid enough to hang around afterwards with all his mates to see if they will beat you to death??

Where has the common sense gone?

Seriously people, do you really feel bad for the victim? If you do take a good long look at your selfs and see which kid you would like to live next to....

Hitcher

13th August 2007, 10:52

Where has the common sense gone?

Seriously people, do you really feel bad for the victim? If you do take a good long look at your selfs and see which kid you would like to live next to....

"Common sense"? You cannot be serious. So it's OK then to bury a 25cm chef's knife into people who are troubling you? And people who do this would make great neighbours? Get real.

And it should be yourselves.

imdying

13th August 2007, 10:56

When u say 'troubuling u' u attempt 2 make it out 2 b somethin far less sinistar than it rly is.

Goblin

13th August 2007, 11:05

"Common sense"? You cannot be serious. So it's OK then to bury a 25cm chef's knife into people who are troubling you? And people who do this would make great neighbours? Get real.
Would you prefer these little shits just be allowed to roam the streets intimidating, harrassing and assaulting anyone they choose?
I think you are the one who needs to get real here. These gangs of hoodies are a real problem! Mr Chef deserves a medal for the courage it takes to stand up to these little dropkicks.
I know who I'd rather have as a neighbor.

ghost

13th August 2007, 11:12

"Common sense"? You cannot be serious. So it's OK then to bury a 25cm chef's knife into people who are troubling you? And people who do this would make great neighbours? Get real.

And it should be yourselves.

Hitcher, I know what kind of "pinko" view you hold on these matters, but I wonder if you have stopped to remember how many people are lying in the ground now because they were "troubled". If I have to pick a side here, it would be with the vicious knife wielding maniac looking to stab someone, and not with the nice young boys riding home on a bus after chior practice, because somehow I dont think I happened quite like that.........

Thanks for the speelink leasson tooooooo .... I feal likke a much beeter persun fo it

Hitcher

13th August 2007, 12:51

Would you prefer these little shits just be allowed to roam the streets intimidating, harrassing and assaulting anyone they choose?
I think you are the one who needs to get real here. These gangs of hoodies are a real problem! Mr Chef deserves a medal for the courage it takes to stand up to these little dropkicks.
I know who I'd rather have as a neighbor.

I guess in that case our chef was well prepared. If he had been lightly jostled, then a small paring knife may have been preferred. Sarcasm may have resulted in him using a melon baller.

I he were my neighbour I would be unlikely to complain or appear threatening, that's for sure.

And don't be a twat. Just because I am opposed to excessive and unnecessary force doesn't mean I am a fan of harrassment of the kind to which you allude. Mr Chef wasn't striken with Batman-like altruism here either. His deification by some is pitiable.

dino3310

13th August 2007, 13:13

many years ago i was jumped by 3 young clowns in an alley outside the spacies,one of them had a bat.long story short ,i ended up with the bat and broke on of there jaws he was 14,i was only 17.cops arrested me the little fuckers told the cops i attacked them, lucky for me a witness came forward and the charges where dropped,they got of cause of there age. if it ever happens again i'll probably run like a girl but not from fear of the hoods but more fear of the fucked up system, kinda feel sorry for the chef, no where to run in the back of the bus, guess ya gotta do what ya instinks tell you to do.
hope he dosent get to harsh a punishment

Mekk

13th August 2007, 14:23

I couldn't find anyone in NZ or Oz selling them, so I ordered mine direct from Spyderco in Colorado via their website. US$180 for the knife plus US$50 shipping.

You could almost certainly get one cheaper if you shopped around the various online knife and tool retailers, but I was in lust and couldn't be bothered.

:)

Cheers, I'll look into it.

idb

13th August 2007, 14:31

............ Just because I am opposed to excessive and unnecessary force doesn't mean I am a fan of harrassment of the kind to which you allude. Mr Chef wasn't striken with Batman-like altruism here either. His deification by some is pitiable.

Agreed, but the young thugs had already used excessive and un-necessary force themselves.
I don't think you can expect a measured response from a terrified victim who has no experience or training in confrontational situations.
Even curling up into a ball on the floor until the little pricks had left could be an excessively passive and therefore inappropriate response.

Paul in NZ

13th August 2007, 14:46

Chefs regularly carry their work knifes with them - sometimes just wrapped up in a tea towel or some such... A bad choice but one most of us would make if we felt threatened.

The little prick got mouthy and then threw a punch. He ended up with a knife in the guts - a bit rough but ya shouldn't bite off more than you can chew.

Goblin

13th August 2007, 15:59

I guess in that case our chef was well prepared. If he had been lightly jostled, then a small paring knife may have been preferred. Sarcasm may have resulted in him using a melon baller.

I he were my neighbour I would be unlikely to complain or appear threatening, that's for sure.

And don't be a twat. Just because I am opposed to excessive and unnecessary force doesn't mean I am a fan of harrassment of the kind to which you allude. Mr Chef wasn't striken with Batman-like altruism here either. His deification by some is pitiable.Yeah I'd have to agree that a paring knife would have been more appropriate. The carving knife may indeed have been excessive but by no means unnecessary.

Mr Chef was minding his own business on a bus. If the little shitheads had done the same thing, one wouldn't have got a knife in the guts and Mr Chef would still be going about his business without a possible prison sentence hanging over him. Im sorry if I cant find any sympathy for the shitheads. It's just not there. They brought it all on themselves. I really feel sorry for Mr Chef though. Good luck to him in court. I hope the judge on the day isnt one of those ancient fossils so far removed from reality they think paedophiles should do community service instead of prison time.

Delerium

13th August 2007, 16:49

In a pressure situation like this I dont think the guy would be too worried about being all picky and choosy about which knife he grabbed. Id grab the first one that came to hand.

Guitana

13th August 2007, 17:33

I'm all for self defence but sticking some prick with a knife can be a pretty final decision to make on someones life!
It seems too easy for wankers these days to carry a knife and use it maybe they're all too weak and soft to sort their problems out the manly way!!
All public transport tickets should come with free martial arts lessons it seems it's always the place people get dealt to!!
I got mugged on the train by six tough guys who held a knife to my throat for twenty bucks and a jacket!
The funny thing was the train gaurd saw what was goin on and locked the carriage off until the rozzers arrived!
When we were taken off the cops asked me what happened I told them those fuckers stole my money and jacket!
The cops made them give back my jacket and empty their pockets the fucker that took my money had a roll of notes $240.00 to be exact! The copper made him give me the lot hahahahahahahaha all the way to the bank fuck you very much!!!!:Punk::Punk::Punk::Punk: Who says the NZ police are pricks they rock!!!!!! Mind you have'nt rode the trains since!

Mr Merde

13th August 2007, 23:05

I have been reading this thread with interest.

Some very valid points have been made on both sides of the argument.

With regards to the young chef running away after using the knife, I would like to point out that actually using a knife on another human is a harrowing experience and I can understand the young man running.

Even trained soldiers have a lot of trouble resorting to a weapon such as this.

This is why in bayonet training the soldiers are encouraged to scream and shout whilst sticking the dummy. So that they dont actually think about what they are doing and just do it.

From persons in the army i have met that have actually had to resort to using a blade and talking to them I have had the impression that they are trying hard to forget the experience.

It is a very emotional thing to stab someone. I dont know about here in NZ but friends of mine in the police force in the UK have told me that most murders are domestic and a lot of those involve very passionate emotions and a source of handy knives (ie the kitchen).

This kid must have been under severe emotional turmoil to do what he did, I think i understand his situation but without actually bring there how can we pass judgement upon his emotional state of mind. Fear is a powerful motivator. Adrenilin is a very powerful drug. We are still basically cavemen and the fight or flee reaction is still hardwired into our brains. I can only be thankful that so far in my life i havent been faced with such a decision. I know how I would like to react but can any of us actually be certain.

The "gang" of youths who deliberately set out to terrorise an innocent member of the public because they thought he wore the wrong colour shirt deserve everything they get. They should be prosecuted to the maximun extent that the law can allow or are we all so PC and afraid of our own shadows that we will pander to their hurt bodies and frrlings.

Dont forget that the young chef was released on bail and his name suppressed beacause the courts feared that the "gang' was trying to hunt him down for what he did to their member.

I disagree with some of the expletives used to describe those initially responsible for the situation but I also realise that emotions run strong when faced with this sort of thing and the apparent inability of those we elect or appoint, to do anything about it.

Again fear is a very strong emotion and incidents such as this bring a touch of it to all of us. I bet every one of you has wondered what you would have done if it were you in that situation and every one of you will have come up with a different answer.

We cannot look to the police, the polititians or the courts to protect us. They cant. By their very nature they are reactive not proactive. ultimately it will be down to every individuual to make a decision. I hope in making that decision I never get invited to visit any of you in hospital or hear your eulogies. I also never hope to hear of any of you upon acting upon your decision being vilified for your choice. Self defence is just that. Every persons decision and basic right of self.

I preach, and not too coherantly. For this I appologise but I feel very strongly about such situations.

Mr :shit:

Fatjim

14th August 2007, 17:36

And don't forget - the chef pleaded guilty to the charge of injuring with intent to cause grevious bodily harm. That means that he doesn't think he has a reasonable chance of convincing a jury that his actions met the simple definition of self defence in NZ law.

I hear a lot of ranting and beating of chests, here, about the wrong done to a guy who's already admitted in Court that he fucked up. Get some perspective, guys.

Since when has pleading guilty meant you did it??? FFS, Get some real life experience. :dodge:

jrandom

14th August 2007, 17:46

Since when has pleading guilty meant you did it???

I don't think there's any doubt about what actually happened.

And if pleading guilty doesn't mean you 'did it', what the fuck else does it mean?

If he and his lawyer thought that he had any real argument against a conviction for injuring with intent, he would have fought the charge.

The only real question, now, is what his sentence will be.

FFS, Get some real life experience.

I'm quite happy to miss out on ever having to consider whether to plead guilty or not...

Guitana

14th August 2007, 17:56

Pleading guilty was probably the best option and the judge will definitely take into account the circumstances surrounding the stabbing and meter out a weak sentence like a two hundred dollar fine!!!:gob:
As we all know in kiwiland crime does pay and very well if you are well organised!!!!:whocares:

davereid

14th August 2007, 20:10

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Mr Merde again.

Mr Merde

14th August 2007, 23:08

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Mr Merde again.

Thanks for the thought. I like to follow the rep as it gives me an indication as to how people are feeling. A lot of people dont come out and make statements in threads but do when giving bling. Good or bad.

I am a very opinionated person. After 50 years I have managed to form many opinions of my own and I quite often just blurt them out. What I do like about this board is that sometimes there are some very lively and heated debates. Its in these situations that i sometimes just like to stir the pot and see what bubbles up.

I admit that once or twice I have expressed an opinion that i personally dont really agree with or am only doing to take the "Michael' and have done this in an attempt to continue the debate. If this is considered Trolling then yes I plead guilty.

With respect to this thread i have been as honest as I am capable of. I actually feel empathy towards the young man who was placed in a situation where he felt that a violent reaction was the only way out. We have all been in situations where things have just gotten out of control and I feel that this has been one of those times for the chef. As to the youths who deliberately set out to intimidate, humiliate and frighten a person for their own self grandiosment, I feel nothing but contempt and sadness. Contempt because by doing this is the only way they can feel good about themselves and prove their self worth, sadness because I can see this sort of behaviour happening more and more often.

I tend to write thes little interludes of mine in a sudden burst. They always feel disjointed and very much like preaching, to me.

I feel the words in my head and have trouble verbalising what i am feeling.

Anyway BTT. And Thanks.

Mr :shit:

Street Gerbil

15th August 2007, 09:27

Sorry folks, I *HAD* to do this:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article2253751.ece

"A devastated young daughter has paid tribute to the father she lost after he was beaten to death by a gang of youths.
The family of Garry Newlove, 47, released a letter from his daughter Amy, who is believed to be 12, which was written as he was dying in hospital.
She wrote: “I can’t get across how much I will miss you and I don’t know what I would do without you. You have always been there for me when I am down and you always put a smile on my face (even if it is a rubbish joke)."

davereid

21st September 2007, 09:14

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.

Lias

21st September 2007, 09:22

Foreigners look at me funny when I tell them you have no right to defend yourself in NZ.

If it had been me I would have stabbed all 6 of the fuckers, not just one, and I'd have made sure I killed em!

caesius

21st September 2007, 09:24

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

As long as that is true, its a crime that he's been charged.

Swoop

21st September 2007, 09:27

A thread about this was started a while back. (this might appear as a single post, but the thread is 14 pages)
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showpost.php?p=1160107&postcount=1

The Pastor

21st September 2007, 09:48

hey dude man you gotta lax out man those poor troubled young gang members don't know any better dude you got to cut them some slack man, your beatin on them for no reason dude, think of the social concequences of actually punishing those guys for attacking that guy. I mean he did wear a red shirt in a crips town maaaan.

idb

21st September 2007, 10:26

..........he did wear a red shirt in a crips town.........
Yeah, what an idiot...he was clearly asking for it...

Hitcher

21st September 2007, 10:57

Foreigners look at me funny when I tell them you have no right to defend yourself in NZ.

That's hardly surprising when an extremely liberal interpretation of the truth is used.

All New Zealanders have a right to defend themselves. The issue is what constitutes "reasonable force". And, as has been discussed to death in this thread previously, burying a 25cm chef's knife into somebody's chest cannot be rationalised as "reasonable force", hence why said chef has been convicted.

Skyryder

21st September 2007, 11:14

That's hardly surprising when an extremely liberal interpretation of the truth is used.

All New Zealanders have a right to defend themselves. The issue is what constitutes "reasonable force". And, as has been discussed to death in this thread previously, burying a 25cm chef's knife into somebody's chest cannot be rationalised as "reasonable force", hence why said chef has been convicted.

Bottom line on this is that you have to wait until you are killed before you can use reasonable force. That's bout the message this conviction and impending imprisonment is saying. This killing was not the result of the chef but a response to a previous assault by a gang member surounded by his mates. The chef was not carrying knives for his self defenc but they were on his person as a result of his trade. When one considers that there is on record the case of a farmer that shot a thief in the back and was found not guilty of murder, then the injustace of this conviction become apparent to all but the most one eyed.

Personly I think the young man's solicitor should be struck off for imcompatence .

Skyryder

PS and I should be be binned for my spelling. Ha ha

PuppetMaster

21st September 2007, 11:32

All New Zealanders have a right to defend themselves. The issue is what constitutes "reasonable force". And, as has been discussed to death in this thread previously, burying a 25cm chef's knife into somebody's chest cannot be rationalised as "reasonable force", hence why said chef has been convicted.

Why not. Regardless of the 6 v 1, he feared for his life, and his life was in danger, sounds like a reasonable defence to me. It was purely self defence, regardles of force.

Lias

21st September 2007, 11:33

Hitcher

21st September 2007, 11:45

You missed this one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-defense_%28theory%29

davereid

21st September 2007, 13:14

Why not. Regardless of the 6 v 1, he feared for his life, and his life was in danger, sounds like a reasonable defence to me. It was purely self defence, regardles of force.

Thats possibly why the police plea bargined it - they were not sure they would be able to get a jury to convict on an attempted murder charge.

It seems that if you are two police officers, armed with batons, handcuffs, pepper spray, firearms and with backup on the way, that you are protected by the law when using lethal force against a nut breaking windows with a golf club.

Yet if you are a normal person, sitting on the bus minding your own business, that the law works completely differently.

peasea

21st September 2007, 13:39

Thats possibly why the police plea bargined it - they were not sure they would be able to get a jury to convict on an attempted murder charge.

It seems that if you are two police officers, armed with batons, handcuffs, pepper spray, firearms and with backup on the way, that you are protected by the law when using lethal force against a nut breaking windows with a golf club.

Yet if you are a normal person, sitting on the bus minding your own business, that the law works completely differently.

Weird that.

I've often wondered about that Waitara case. How come a reknowned marksman couldn't pop a knee cap, or at least a thigh? I guess we'll never know.

As for defending yourself; I think if you fear for your life then it's 'him or me' deal. I'd rather be tried by twelve than carried by six.

Patrick

21st September 2007, 13:40

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

I sense a Tui moment here.... this is the first time this has been mentioned.

, burying a 25cm chef's knife into somebody's chest cannot be rationalised as "reasonable force", hence why said chef has been convicted.

But if they were armed as claimed above, while assaulting him, that should make a difference?

Personly I think the young man's solicitor should be struck off for imcompatence .

Couldn't agree more.

It seems that if you are two police officers, armed with batons, handcuffs, pepper spray, firearms and with backup on the way, that you are protected by the law when using lethal force against a nut breaking windows with a golf club.

Yeah.... he was shot for breaking windows......... Riiiiiiiggggghhhht...

Head still in the sand, is it???

Patrick

21st September 2007, 13:42

Weird that.

I've often wondered about that Waitara case. How come a reknowned marksman couldn't pop a knee cap, or at least a thigh? I guess we'll never know.

As for defending yourself; I think if you fear for your life then it's 'him or me' deal. I'd rather be tried by twelve than carried by six.

Got it in one, as highlighted. Popping a cap in a knee isn't going to stop him from caving in your head with a golf club.

Lias

21st September 2007, 14:42

You missed this one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-defense_%28theory%29

The problem is that unless you implement the castle theory to its fullest self defence law is just watered down. Under the diluted version you can only apply castle theory to your house, and even then onyl with limitations sometimes.

The law SHOULD be applied in the way that some states implement it, which is anywhere you are legally occupying (home, work, footpath, bus or whatever). If someone attempts or threatens unlawful force against you whilst you are legally "minding your own business" you can use deadly force to protect yourself.

But it will never happen under Comrade Clark, or John Key. Only when we get a party in power that truly believes in the rights of law abiding citizens over criminals will we ever see a law like this.

Viva La Revolucion!

Mr Merde

21st September 2007, 15:10

.... Only when we get a party in power that truly believes in the rights of law abiding citizens over criminals will we ever see a law like this.

Viva La Revolucion!

As has happened in Italy in the past few years where they have accepted the self defence plea as a valid reason for lethal response.

Havent seen a dramatic rise in violent deaths reported in that countryu.

davereid

21st September 2007, 15:21

I sense a Tui moment here.... this is the first time this has been mentioned.

Yes they were armed, but did not use the weapons ..

Quote from this mornings DOM

"When you use a knife like this, you are literally millimetres away from causing a death," Justice Panckhurst said.

"Had you struck a vital organ or an artery, death could well have resulted."

But he accepted the provocation, and said he was willing to accept an element of "excessive self-defence".

Mr Hall told the court that group of about six drunk gang members – "teenage thugs looking for trouble" – had been armed although no weapons were used when they taunted and assaulted Hill.

They had hammers, spanners, a flick knife, and metal bars.

Justice Panckhurst criticised the gang.

I don't have any problem with police using force to protect themselves or others, and I don't want this to spin into an anti police thread.

I just think that there appear to be two standards applied here.

jrandom

21st September 2007, 15:30

How come a reknowned marksman couldn't pop a knee cap, or at least a thigh? I guess we'll never know.

You are trolling, right?

If not, google 'Tueller drill' before responding further.

Patrick

21st September 2007, 16:40

Yes they were armed, but did not use the weapons ..

Quote from this mornings DOM.................

I don't have any problem with police using force to protect themselves or others, and I don't want this to spin into an anti police thread.

I just think that there appear to be two standards applied here.

First I heard of them being armed... can't see why he was charged either. I wouldn't have, but it wouldn't have been my call, it was a C.I.B. issue. Any word on whether these oxygen thieving sacks were charged for possession of their offensive weapons? They were not tools of their trade, unemployed at a guess, and they only had them for one reason..... unlike Mr Chef.

Nice troll, WALLACE was not shot for breaking windows, he was shot for trying to stove in the head of the cop.

Can now see why you think two standards though. Free Mr Chef, I say.....

Goblin

21st September 2007, 16:59

First I heard of them being armed... can't see why he was charged either. I wouldn't have, but it wouldn't have been my call, it was a C.I.B. issue. Any word on whether these oxygen thieving sacks were charged for possession of their offensive weapons? They were not tools of their trade, unemployed at a guess, and they only had them for one reason..... unlike Mr Chef.

Can now see why you think two standards though. Free Mr Chef, I say.....
Whats the bet these oxygen thieves are still roaming the streets, armed with whatever they can get their filthy thieving hands on, causing more grief to law abiding working people....while laughing at Mr Chef's sentence.:argh:

In the words of Cali Miro...."It's an injustice!"

peasea

21st September 2007, 18:37

Got it in one, as highlighted. Popping a cap in a knee isn't going to stop him from caving in your head with a golf club.

But after a slug in the knee to the perp could the shooter not run faster?

peasea

21st September 2007, 18:43

You are trolling, right?

If not, google 'Tueller drill' before responding further.

Trolling, me?
Ok, I had a quick read, I get the point. (Glad it wasn't a hollow one.)

Winter

21st September 2007, 20:18

Whatever way you take the "It was / wasn't an appropriate response" (I think it was), I am furious about the way the 15 year old scum is labeled the victim.

Furious.

If anyone knows what I / we can do about it, please let me know.

Finn

21st September 2007, 20:43

scumdog

21st September 2007, 21:16

Weird that.

I've often wondered about that Waitara case. How come a reknowned marksman couldn't pop a knee cap, or at least a thigh? I guess we'll never know.

As for defending yourself; I think if you fear for your life then it's 'him or me' deal. I'd rather be tried by twelve than carried by six.

You retard trollin' 'effing dreamer--WHAT 'reknowned marksman' was at Waitara?????

Do you REALLY think a pistol shooter can 'pop a knee cap' of a moving leg in darkness?????

It's as easy as you doing a 180 degree stoppie on your H-D

Sheesh, some people.

Have a nice day!!

peasea

21st September 2007, 23:38

Got it in one, as highlighted. Popping a cap in a knee isn't going to stop him from caving in your head with a golf club.

Probably right actually, you could still swing a club on one leg. Tiger does it all the time.

Seriously? I wouldn't want someone coming at me with a golf club and they'd be more of a threat at six feet than face to face; a wee way out and they have swinging room.

FORE!

peasea

21st September 2007, 23:42

HTFU

21st September 2007, 23:44

This country rocks that is for sure :banana:

Patrick

22nd September 2007, 08:00

Probably right actually, you could still swing a club on one leg. Tiger does it all the time.

Seriously? I wouldn't want someone coming at me with a golf club and they'd be more of a threat at six feet than face to face; a wee way out and they have swinging room.

FORE!

Which is why the baton was no use (at least in the hands of someone who probably hadn't held one for the last year or so...), the spray was at its outer limit and may not even work anyhow, but by the time you realise it isn't working, he has advanced and swung in a split second (how far can you move in a split second at these close ranges?)... Too late then for you to react, thats for sure...!!!

Grahameeboy

22nd September 2007, 08:19

Words fail me. People get upset with me when I label NZ as a fucken joke. This is why.

Ladies and gentlemen (and Skidmark), we've just got to get rid of this Government. I don't care who gets in next election, even Tamaki's fucked up brothers, just as long as they apply common fucken sense. But seriously, if you were Prime Minister tomorrow, where would you fucken start? The place is a shithole.

So this makes NZ a 'Fucken Joke'...........and a 'Shit Hole'.......well guess you are entitled to see things that way but a shame that this beautiful Country is tainted by those you wobble at life.

Finn

22nd September 2007, 10:50

So this makes NZ a 'Fucken Joke'...........and a 'Shit Hole'.......well guess you are entitled to see things that way but a shame that this beautiful Country is tainted by those you wobble at life.

I also find it amusing that the only quality people associate NZ with is "beautiful". That it is, but it's pretty damn ugly underneath.

peasea

22nd September 2007, 12:52

I also find it amusing that the only quality people associate NZ with is "beautiful". That it is, but it's pretty damn ugly underneath.

A lot of it is, ask kb cops, they'll tell you. I've come across some dirtbags in my time and it's not hard to see where the problems are germinated but overall I still think it's a great place to bring up a family, the food is brilliant and if you're prepared to get up in the morning you can earn a buck or two.

All with some magnificent scenery as a backdrop.

I refer to Auckland as a shithole but scenically it's quite cool, it's just too congested and I find it incredibly frustrating when I need to go places. Plus, if you're on a one-way ticket out (which we are) there's a win to be had in the real estate market. This place is grossly overpriced.

Yes, some of it's ugly but where in the world isn't? I haven't travelled overseas that much but I'm sure there's better as well as much worse.

Grahameeboy

22nd September 2007, 16:35

I also find it amusing that the only quality people associate NZ with is "beautiful". That it is, but it's pretty damn ugly underneath.

I guess you see what you want to see and decide whether to take the good with the bad.what is more important.

There is good and bad everywhere, has been for thousands of years.

Shame you feel that it is amusing that people associate NZ with 'beautiful'......always look on the bright side I say which does not mean that you ignore the bad..........have travelled a fair bit and NZ is a paradise.

Remember when I was doing volunteer work in Kenya, a couple of theives were caught by the local villagers. Now this will probably be right up your street, but they set fire to them...not a nice sight.....does that happen in the NZ?

You go to say Downtown Orlando and you are told to stay where there are people. Does that happen in NZ?

Tower blocks of hard to rent places in Bow, London. The lifts were used as urinals. Does that happen in NZ.....well probably not as there are no tower blocks.

St Pauls Bristol, 20 years ago the Police never went into the area. Now I have been told only non-white cops are allowed to enter. Does that happen in NZ?

Harlem 20 years ago. You were told to keep your doors locked when driving thru. Risk of being dragged out of car and robbed. Does that happen in NZ?

You have a choice in life.

Grahameeboy

22nd September 2007, 16:37

A lot of it is, ask kb cops, they'll tell you. I've come across some dirtbags in my time and it's not hard to see where the problems are germinated but overall I still think it's a great place to bring up a family, the food is brilliant and if you're prepared to get up in the morning you can earn a buck or two.

All with some magnificent scenery as a backdrop.

I refer to Auckland as a shithole but scenically it's quite cool, it's just too congested and I find it incredibly frustrating when I need to go places. Plus, if you're on a one-way ticket out (which we are) there's a win to be had in the real estate market. This place is grossly overpriced.

Yes, some of it's ugly but where in the world isn't? I haven't travelled overseas that much but I'm sure there's better as well as much worse.

Congestion in Auckland?.................

scumdog

24th September 2007, 08:57

Yes, some of it's ugly but where in the world isn't? .

Wot 'e sed.

Have you any other country that in all aspects is waay better than NZ?:wait:

peasea

25th September 2007, 13:43

You retard trollin' 'effing dreamer--WHAT 'reknowned marksman' was at Waitara?????

Do you REALLY think a pistol shooter can 'pop a knee cap' of a moving leg in darkness?????

It's as easy as you doing a 180 degree stoppie on your H-D

Sheesh, some people.

Have a nice day!!

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

"Keith Abbot is a gun freak who knew - before, during, and after he'd killed Stephen Wallace - of the lethality of a handgun at close range - and still he made no attempt to restrain or otherwise incapacitate Stephen. In Abbot's mind, there was no option but to shoot (ie. kill) Stephen.

Keith Abbot is a good enough marksman to have injured/incapacitated Stephen with one shot. He shot 5 times."

Source: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0106/S00054.htm

Maybe the word 'reknowned' was a bit OTT but there's evidence to suggest that he was a marksman. My apologies for overstating his fame with a shooter. Also, it's only mass media stuff, so who can guarantee its accuracy?

Yours truly, the "retard trollin' 'effing dreamer".

BOT.

peasea

25th September 2007, 13:49

Congestion in Auckland?.................

Yup. Sure it might not compare to Tokyo, London or LA when it comes to traffic mayhem, I can't remember London and haven't been to the other two cities but I don't want to either. Especially if they're more congested than this place.

I'm one of those crazies who likes to get up to pace and stay there; crawling in choking traffic does nothing for me, regardless of which vehicle I'm operating.

Now, about that chef....

scumdog

25th September 2007, 15:40

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

"Keith Abbot is a gun freak who knew - before, during, and after he'd killed Stephen Wallace - of the lethality of a handgun at close range - and still he made no attempt to restrain or otherwise incapacitate Stephen. In Abbot's mind, there was no option but to shoot (ie. kill) Stephen.

Keith Abbot is a good enough marksman to have injured/incapacitated Stephen with one shot. He shot 5 times."

Source: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0106/S00054.htm

Yours truly, the "retard trollin' 'effing dreamer".

BOT.

Police only shoot to 'incapacitate' and/or until the subject complies.

If it takes more than one shot and the subject dies due to his lack of compliance then bad effing luck.

They should have picked a better hobby than being a non-compliant agro dickhead.

Or having the stupidity of fronting up to somebody the know will very likely use the real gun they are holding if they don't pull their head in.

Darwin rocks.

peasea

25th September 2007, 15:58

scumdog

25th September 2007, 16:02

Oooh-kaaay.
Cop shoots as he's in fear of his life, has a reputation as a capable 'gun freak' etc etc, shoots and kills his (potential) attacker from many metres away.

Chef gets attacked, takes random plunge with a knife, coz he too is in fear of losing his life from an attacker who's right in his face.

Now, who's in the can again?

I'm not stirring the pot, just raising my eyebrows and weighing it up.

Can't speak for either case with 100% accuracy as I wasn't there BUT I beleive in the chef incident that the dick-heads were about to leave.

Not so with Mr Wallace who also had been warned. - I gather the chef acted without the same courtesy.

mstriumph

25th September 2007, 16:48

Thats possibly why the police plea bargined it - they were not sure they would be able to get a jury to convict on an attempted murder charge.

It seems that if you are two police officers, armed with batons, handcuffs, pepper spray, firearms and with backup on the way, that you are protected by the law when using lethal force against a nut breaking windows with a golf club.

Yet if you are a normal person, sitting on the bus minding your own business, that the law works completely differently.

oh bling, bling, blingy bling bling :wari:

yes - most definately ---- here in Aus. too -----
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

while a dear little white-haired shopkeeper, frail, fragile and elderly, is just expected to stand there and take a beating because the law does not permit them a firearm.

:blink: madness

mstriumph

25th September 2007, 16:54

I also find it amusing that the only quality people associate NZ with is "beautiful". That it is, but it's pretty damn ugly underneath.

the one that frightens me is the one that goes 'people generally get the government they deserve' ........:(

Indoo

25th September 2007, 17:00

oh bling, bling, blingy bling bling :wari:

yes - most definately ---- here in Aus. too -----
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

while a dear little white-haired shopkeeper, frail, fragile and elderly, is just expected to stand there and take a beating because the law does not permit them a firearm.

:blink: madness

You are taking the piss right?

peasea

25th September 2007, 17:28

"Japanese nose holds", wish I'd thought of that.
:rofl:

Delerium

25th September 2007, 19:37

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.

scumdog

25th September 2007, 23:07

It seems that if you are two police officers, armed with batons, handcuffs, pepper spray, firearms and with backup on the way, that you are protected by the law when using lethal force against a nut breaking windows with a golf club.

True.

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?.

And if they had to shoot him please fall over nicely after the first shot.

But I guess he didn't hear them..

Now if only some members of the public had been there to talk to him things might have turned out different..like say if his family had been there...

But the unthinking buggers were to scared to go near him and he got shot.

mstriumph

26th September 2007, 01:40

You are taking the piss right?

of the system - yes

of you? i don't even know you ---- but speak to me, put your viewpoint - we can debate the issue

you - i take it - on the side of testosterone-rich, rugged, firearm-enhanced constabulary and the politicians that support them

me on the side of the frail, elderly and defenceless who the politicians are determined will remain that way

hmmmmm? http://www.schmaili.com/smileys/-39.gif

idb

26th September 2007, 09:09

Can't speak for either case with 100% accuracy as I wasn't there BUT I beleive in the chef incident that the dick-heads were about to leave.

Not so with Mr Wallace who also had been warned. - I gather the chef acted without the same courtesy.

I have trouble sympathising at all with the bus bullies SD.
Taking the report at face value (that's all you can do here) one of them took the time and trouble to stop, or come back and punch the chef.
If the chef had issued a warning it would have given the little tossers a chance to even the odds somehow.
Surprise is as important as carrying a bigger weapon.

As for Mr Wallace, it's just dumb to bring a golf club to a gun fight.

Skyryder

26th September 2007, 10:14

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 but have not heard of anything about the officer being trapped. If he was not and he could have retreated why did he not do so?

On issue of following instructions this is not as simple as it sounds. By the time these guys get to the state where they are threating armed officer it would appear to me that any rational that they may have had no longer exists. On that basis if an officer can retreat without endangering his or the public safety then he has a duty to do so. Unless some kind of evidence can be produced that would be in conflict of this then the officer has the right to take the appropiate action that he deems necessary. 'Bout my take on this issue.

Skyryder

davereid

26th September 2007, 12:10

..me on the side of the frail, elderly and defenceless who the politicians are determined will remain that way...
http://www.schmaili.com/smileys/-39.gif

I think this is getting to the heart of the matter.

You can argue all you like that the Police didn't need to shoot Wallace, all they needed to do was retreat... its a good question but in this case it's not relevant, it just buries the real question.

We arm Police for their self defence only. The arguement is that Police are at risk because of their job, and the kind of people they have to deal with. Its true, police do need the tools of self defence.

But, the first person at the scene of a home invasion is the home owner.
The first person at the scene of a bank robbery is the teller.
The first person at the scene of a rape is the victim.
The first person at a burglary is the victim or his security company.

The first person at virtually all crimes is an innocent member of the public. Yet your dairy owner is not allowed a baton or pepper spray.

The real question is what are police trying to gain by prosecuting people who defend themselves ?

The Police have a product - the reduction of crime.

That means they also should have a "target customer", the person or group of people that they see as being the beneficiary of their work, in the end the paying customer.

If I was in the police I would be wondering why middle class, middle aged New Zealanders with good incomes (like many of the posters on this site) no longer have confidence in the system or its enforcers.

Because that would be a signal to me, that if I can't get support from those kinds of Kiwis exactly who am I working for ?

Hitcher

26th September 2007, 12:25

The real question is what are police trying to gain by prosecuting people who defend themselves?

You're missing the point. The issue here is what the Courts determine in relation to the prosecution. If the Police believe that a law has been broken, then they have an obligation to prosecute. To do anything less would be a huge dereliction of their duty. After examining all of the circumstances relating to that prosecution, the Court may let people walk away without conviction or sanction, or it may decide to impose a lesser sentence than the full extent available. Or it may determine that a real crime has been committed, despite what may be alleged by the defendant, and rightfully bust their arses.

New Zealand doesn't yet allow "citizen justice". And thank god, based on the recent experience of TVNZ trying to give away a wedding.

davereid

26th September 2007, 12:57

If the Police believe that a law has been broken, then they have an obligation to prosecute.

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.