Taranaki farmer aquitted

[soundbeltfarm]

sorry mate but that is a whole lot of 100% pure bollocks

Farms that employ people are presumably subject to Health and Safety regulations so your other point about there being no law against allowing a 4 year old to ride a quad seems to be wrong......I think that that breaches of regulations can be punishable...

farms that employ are subject to health and safety but his child wasn't employed.

employed = provide work for in return for money

[Hitcher]

So you're saying, all other things being equal, if his child had been on the payroll it would have been OK to convict him?

[kro]

As much as I support the police, I can not understand charges being laid
Has the father not suffered enough?, has the whole family not been thru enough?. You would have to be a fool to not believe that a lesson had been learnt. The idea of injury and accident prevention is fantastic, but you cannot save everyone, and these things will happen, but punishing those, whose lives have been ravaged already teaches nothing imo. This is legalistic nonsense.

Thankfully the case went the right way.

[hunt]

If any of my kids or anyones were killed as a result of my failure to ensure their safety thru poor decision making or misjudgement or whatever, I would plead guilty to any charges bought upon me, I certainly wouldnt say it "was a stupid bloody dumb mistake" as Vanner is quoted Waikato Times March 8
its far more serious than labelling it a mistake, the guy gets no sympathy from me, I do have sympathy for the family and if there are siblings I hope they are being well cared for.

[Hitcher]

This is legalistic nonsense.

You come home late from work. You find your wife in bed with another man. Incensed, you lash out and hit her. She falls to the floor, bangs her head and dies.

"I didn't mean to hit her, Your Honour."

"Fair enough, son. I see you're remorseful and racked with grief. Don't do it again. Run along now."

I don't think so, somehow.

[FROSTY:Me]

This is a bit too close to home for me.Most of you guys know of baby Bikies antics on his bike and his quad.
On one hand the guy is suffering the ultimate punishment.No jail time,fine or conviction is ever going to override that.
I really feel for him and his familly
On the other hand theres a bunch of other 4 year old kids whos lives might be saved if the guy gets convicted.-The whole put a message out there thing.

To the farmers on here I gotta ask How could anyone let their kids ride without propper gear?
Correct me please if Im wrong--If the lil gal had a helmet and armour on she would have survived.

[kro]

You come home late from work. You find your wife in bed with another man. Incensed, you lash out and hit her. She falls to the floor, bangs her head and dies.

"I didn't mean to hit her, Your Honour."

"Fair enough, son. I see you're remorseful and racked with grief. Don't do it again. Run along now."

I don't think so, somehow.

Out of context, so it doesn't quite run with my intended point, but I see what you are saying.

[Timber020]

I was brought up and worked on farms through much of my life. My family had one of the first quads to be available (when everyone else had trikes, now THEY were dangerous).

Farmers take more responsibility for there kids than most people, as they have to do all the things that most parents do and do it in a dangerous environment and run a business thats both mentally and physically taxing at the same time. There isnt a shop just down to road to get nappys, food or a medicine from. Child care, playcentres etc can be a very very long way away. Many farmers have caravans or rooms set up so theres a place to put the kids to play during milking at 5 am.

Farming kids, because they are exposed to dangerous things early on are alot more safer later in life. I can spot an ex farm kid on a worksite, they are the only ones that really know how to look after there own safety, where as most city kids are accidents waiting to bump into other accidents.

I'd say that Mr Vanner had done his best and made a mistake he has to live with. I have no problem with the police but it would have been ACC and OSH pushing them through govt influence that would have had some weighting on this. (you know ACC, they ones that keeping upping our rego costs and through the LTNZ keep those speeding tickets flowing).

A four year old on a quad is much safer than a four year old on a horse, we wouldnt have heard anything about it if it had been a horseriding accident.

[Krusti]

As a farmer who has had kids grow up with farm gear I believe young kids or casual farm visitors etc should not be allowed to ride farm quads.

The simple fact is that Mr Vanner was still in charge of the quad even tho he was not actually riding it at the time and therefore the fault is his if anything goes wrong. It is his farm, his quad, his daughter, his choice to let her ride it.

That said I feel for the man as a father. What a thing to live with!

Manslaughter ...I think not. Stupid...yes.

He knows that now but what a way to find out!

An accident...NO. A choice was made, turned out to be a bad one. He has to live with that.

[Krusti]

One final point...... Farm quads do not tip over on their own. They have be either ridden too fast, on too steeper contour or turned sharply at too higher speed.

[spudchucka]

As a farmer who has had kids grow up with farm gear I believe young kids or casual farm visitors etc should not be allowed to ride farm quads.

A common sense approach from somebody with the experience to know the inherent dangers of allowing children to take control of these machines.

The simple fact is that Mr Vanner was still in charge of the quad even tho he was not actually riding it at the time and therefore the fault is his if anything goes wrong. It is his farm, his quad, his daughter, his choice to let her ride it.

God damn, am I on kiwibiker, surely not with this level of common sense and reason.

A 4 year old is utterly incapable of controlling a farm quad. What happened should have been a totally foreseeable consequence.

Manslaughter ...I think not. Stupid...yes.

If as you say he is in charge of the quad despite his 4 year old daughter taking the controls of the quad, why then is he not culpable for the death of the child?

160.Culpable homicide—

(1)Homicide may be either culpable or not culpable.

(2)Homicide is culpable when it consists in the killing of any person—

(a)By an unlawful act; or

(b)By an omission without lawful excuse to perform or observe any legal duty; or

(c)By both combined; or

(d)By causing that person by threats or fear of violence, or by deception, to do an act which causes his death; or

(e)By wilfully frightening a child under the age of 16 years or a sick person.

(3)Except as provided in section 178 of this Act, culpable homicide is either murder or manslaughter.

(4)Homicide that is not culpable is not an offence.

Perhaps the question of law is whether allowing the child to take control of the quad bike was an "Unlawful act" or whether it amounted to "an ommission without reasonable excuse" to observe a parents duty of care for their child in circumstances that clearly endangered the childs life.

If not manslaughter then the alternative charge of criminal nuisance absolutely applies.

145.Criminal nuisance—

(1)Every one commits criminal nuisance who does any unlawful act or omits to discharge any legal duty, such act or omission being one which he knew would endanger the lives, safety, or health of the public, or the life, safety, or health of any individual.

(2)Every one who commits criminal nuisance is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year.

Any reasonably intelligent adult should have been able to predict the inevitable outcome of allowing a 4 year old to take control of a farm quad.

I'd say that if he had been tried before a judge and not a jury he would have been found guilty. He was acquited simply because the jury felt sorry for him. A judge would have removed himself / herself from the emotional aspect of the case and considered only the facts, something those speaking out against the decision to charge are incapable of doing.

This case and what people are saying about it reminds me of the same outcry following the charging of a father in Nelson who killed his brain damaged infant daughter. He was clearly responsible for the death of that child. He was charged and a jury acquited him despite admissions that he had killed the child.

The police have little choice whether or not to charge a person who is clearly responsible for the death of another person. Police have to investigate all sudden deaths and when evidence suggests that another person has casued the death then it is totally appropriate that the responsible person is put before the courts.

That said I feel for the man as a father. What a thing to live with.

So do I. I can't think of anything that would be harder to live with than causing the death of your own child.

I also don't really have any problem the the jury's decision. They heard all the evidence and saw first hand the people involved, (something that none of us have had access to but that doesn't stop us from ranting on and beating your chests).

However the decision to charge is the correct decision and I'm sure that any future deaths of a similar nature will also result in prosecution.

[cowpoos]

Yes I did. I was particularly galled by Federated Farmers' official stance on the matter. But note that farmers are about as averse to change as you get ("Grandad did it that way, so that's good enough for me!" "We provide the backbone of this economy, so you soft-cock townies can go fuck yourselves.").

Some of them still pine for the days of "one farm, one vote". They need to recognise that they are part of a wider community that has views on a whole bunch of stuff that may differ widely from their narrow world view and feudal interests (dog control, walking access to land, climate change, water allocation, clean streams, fertiliser run-off, fuel taxes, dehorning cattle, etc).

narrow world veiw!!!....I beg you pardon mr hitcher

farmers are not in anyway living in decades gone by...maybe you might want to open your eyes to what goes on in mordern farming...how bussiness orientated it is....and how much of a minority voice we have....and look at the bullshit policies and laws and red tape brought about by urban lobby and law makers that makes rural bussiness so farkin hard these days...we pay huge volumes in $$$$ unproportionally [yeah I can't spell...just sound the word out and take a guess] when compared to town and city based "equals" [equal meaning a person...as in one vote]...urban law makers have no fuckin idea about what goes on of farms when they pass laws...or set up compliance regimes...for the supposed comon good...for us to pay for...abide by...for no reason alot of the time...alot of its based on total lack of thought of consequences and understanding...why do farmers get pissed...because some how dispite being the largest exporters,largest business type,largest earners for this country,supplying more employment directly and indirectly to the nation than any other business,putting more money in to the economy than any other part of society....do we get asked or consulted about or needs,opinions? or any such problems we are having,problems we could have with potential laws....no....no we don't.....so you wonder why us farmers get pissed off with shit.....take a flying fuckin guess...and if people think farmers are just gunna stand by while more shit gets thrown our way...no no...not gunna happen matey...what gets taken off farmers by councils and goverment agencies is day light fuckin robbery....who on this site pays more than 5k in rates....every farm owner I know pays more than that...and most pay 10-15k in rates...my ACC bill for last year [personal...not what I have to pay for my workers aswell] was $4553 my income tax was $27505....take that away from what I actually made in profit..[PM me I will tell certain people].. I grossed 234k and spent 183k in business costs....and I live off fuck all of anything....I have every right to whinge....especially if you knew how we are treated by government nazis and councils and wanker tree hugging lobby groups [who base there arguments of shouting and emotion rather than hard facts...its no wonder people give in to these groups because they are so fuckin irritating and irrational]

I'm not saying townies piss me off...just some of the concepts and whinging I hear directed at us so called grumpy whinging farmers piss me off because because they don't know what the hell they're talking about...

[Ixion]

...
A four year old on a quad is much safer than a four year old on a horse, we wouldnt have heard anything about it if it had been a horseriding accident.

Good point. A 4 year old riding a horse would have been "oh, how cute, starting at a young age, eh", not "irresponsible, dangerous".

Had Mr Vanner indeed been Old Farmer Fogey still sticking to horses, and his 4 year old daughter accompanied him on her pony - and was tragically thrown and killed - who would be arguing for manslaughter ? (And bear in mind, I can certainly remember 5 year olds riding horseback to school)

I'll argue that a horse is more dangerous than a quad.

[Ixion]

narrow world veiw!!!....I beg you pardon mr hitcher



I'm not saying townies piss me off...just some of the concepts and whinging I hear directed at us so called grumpy whinging farmers piss me off because because they don't know what the hell they're talking about...

I have nothing to do with farms farmers or farming, but I do have some sympathy for them. They are , in NZ, and even more so in the UK, caught between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand governments insist of rigourous economic efficiency - farms must be run as businesses. But in the next breath governments want to regard the countryside as a great big adventure playground for townies.

It affects bikers directly sometimes. I remember when bikes had free access to all the forested areas at Riverhead and Woodhill. Miles and miles of tracks that are now closed off on the grounds of "economic necessity". If forests are businesses, they're not going to let us burble through them for free.

Don't notice too many farmers short of a quid , but.

[cowpoos]

To the farmers on here I gotta ask How could anyone let their kids ride without propper gear?
Correct me please if Im wrong--If the lil gal had a helmet and armour on she would have survived.

sorry mate....the lil girl was on a 350-400kg machine....a helmet might have helped and body armor is not gunna do shit....it landed on top of her... its different if she was on a 40kg kids bike...

I don't allow anyone under 16 [in many cases depending on maturity that age limit greatly rises] to ride any of my quads...young people just don't have the power to control a large quad if something happens fast...I hav a mate who can't use his left arm because a quad rolled on him at slow speed....he was riding it on a trailer for transporting and one of the ramps moved and fell...blammmo...broken neck...no left arm use....less than 2kmph...a kid or even a teenager has no chance...they ain't toys really...quads are very dangerous....I'm glad he didn't go to jail...but I would be pleased if the judge gave him a 200-300 thousand dollar fine....he was irrisponsable...no question...he already has a life time sentance for losing his kid...and his wife probally secretly if not openly blames him for it anyway...

quad really arn't the go fast and hoon toys people think they are...they have very limited abilities and very low stability...