Assault

[ManDownUnder]

Should we do away with "Assault on a child" too?

Its simply an specific charge to be used when there are aggravating circumstances to the point that a common assault charge wouldn't be appropriate. A male that pushed or shoved a female would be liable for common assault. A male that punches a female in the head would be liable for MAF.

Is there an equivalent Female Assaults Male? (just a q - I really don't know)

[The_Dover]

Should we do away with "Assault on a child" too?

Its simply an specific charge to be used when there are aggravating circumstances to the point that a common assault charge wouldn't be appropriate. A male that pushed or shoved a female would be liable for common assault. A male that punches a female in the head would be liable for MAF.

The fact that there is a specific MAF offence recognises that women are more vulnerable to assaults by men and are less capable of defending themselves, (generally), which are aggravating factors to the what might be simply common assault if it were male vs male.

There is a difference in the legal rights of a minor and an adult. There should be no difference in legal rights between a man and a woman.

I think the argument that women are more vulnerable to assaults by men is bullshit. Men just would not generally report being assaulted by a female.

Equality is either all or nothing I'm afraid and if you want special treatment then you are fooling yourself, whether you are man, woman, black, white, maori or from the wairarapa.

What is the technical difference between MAF and common assault then? Other than the penis/no penis issue?

[buellbabe]

Dover you are just splitting hairs... so bloody what ? Assault is assault and the facts are that more women are victims of assault than men. There is NOTHING stopping a male from reporting an assault by a female, egos don't come into it.

[spudchucka]

Is there an equivalent Female Assaults Male? (just a q - I really don't know)

Nope. It would be common assault or if a serious assault it would fall into the aggravated assault categories, Assault with Intent to Injure etc.

[ManDownUnder]

Nope. It would be common assault or if a serious assault it would fall into the aggravated assault categories, Assault with Intent to Injure etc.

Ta..

BB - I think the point Dover is making is that there is a law on the books specifying Male Assault Female, which in turn will carry a statutory sentencing requirement etc. It is a discreet statute, in addition to the Common Assault (implying or stating that it's not common, or "special" in some manner)

Dover - it's an historical artifact (and yeah - I agree with you - why have it??). The same hoary old chestnut as so many other historical gender imbalances.

[ManDownUnder]

egos don't come into it.

Unfortunately they do, in a manner of speaking. I don't think it's egos per se, more like "feelings" (be it pride on the case of a guy, or love in the case of a woman).

How many assaults, rapes etc go unreported because they feel ashamed of being a victim - male or female...

It's wrong for sure, but it happens.

[The_Dover]

Dover you are just splitting hairs... so bloody what ? Assault is assault and the facts are that more women are victims of assault than men. There is NOTHING stopping a male from reporting an assault by a female, egos don't come into it.

I am not splitting hairs. I am highlighting that there is an inequality that disadvantages males, just for being male.

You said it yourself. Assault is assault.

[cowpoos]

Equality is either all or nothing I'm afraid and if you want special treatment then you are fooling yourself, whether you are man, woman, black, white, maori or from the wairarapa.

what you trying to say MOFO

[buellbabe]

BB - I think the point Dover is making is that there is a law on the books specifying Male Assault Female, which in turn will carry a statutory sentencing requirement etc. It is a discreet statute, in addition to the Common Assault (implying or stating that it's not common, or "special" in some manner)
.

OK yeah I see what you and Dover saying... I just get a tad hot under the collar on this subject cos I've been there. You both make a valid point.

How many assaults, rapes etc go unreported because they feel ashamed of being a victim - male or female...

It's wrong for sure, but it happens.

I agree its more a state of mind and in my case I was ashamed to tell my friends and family letalone the cops. I couldn't believe that I'd become a victim. I made so many excuses cos for quite awhile the violence was only directed at my property but when he finally crossed the line and punched me, threatened my dogs etc.. i didn't hesitate to end it. I finally talked to a cop AFTER he had already left.

[spudchucka]

There is a difference in the legal rights of a minor and an adult. There should be no difference in legal rights between a man and a woman.

I think the argument that women are more vulnerable to assaults by men is bullshit. Men just would not generally report being assaulted by a female.

Equality is either all or nothing I'm afraid and if you want special treatment then you are fooling yourself, whether you are man, woman, black, white, maori or from the wairarapa.

What is the technical difference between MAF and common assault then? Other than the penis/no penis issue?

I'm not going to get into an arguement over the rights or wrongs of having a MAF offence in the crimes act. Its there and get used when appropriate.

There are two statutes that make common assault an offence, the Summary Offences Act 1981 and the Crimes Act 1961.

SOF assault could be as minor as a bit of pushing or shoving but could also include punching. Generally injuries haven't occurred or are very minor.

Crimes Act assault is appropriate when the assault is more vicious and injuries result. A punch to the face that breaks the victims tooth for instance.

Then you get into assaults where there are aggravating factors;
Assaulting a child & Male Assaults female are both covered under section 194 of the crimes act. Sections 188 - 204 are the other relevant sections if you want to have a read.

To me MAF is the appropriate charge whenever the assault is beyond SOF assault in terms of severity and the circumstances of the assault amount to doemstic violence in accordance with the definitions within the Domestic Violence Act 1995.

Domestic violence isn't the only environment where MAF would be appropriate but it is the obvious application.

[ManDownUnder]

I'm not going to get into an arguement over the rights or wrongs of having a MAF offence in the crimes act. Its there and get used when appropriate.

Is there is a difference in severity of punishment for MAF vs Common Assault?

Take two situations with the same outcome person 1 smacks person 2 and causes some damage - let's say they knock out 6 teeth - and it's serious enough to come under the Crimes Act.

If person 1 is male and person 2 is female (MAF) - what's the max penalty?

And likewise what if person 1 is female, and p2 is male (Common Assalt)?

I don't want to make a biggie of this, but I do have a personal interest in gender roles in society... and this is obviously an area where they get highlighted

[spudchucka]

Is there is a difference in severity of punishment for MAF vs Common Assault?

Take two situations with the same outcome person 1 smacks person 2 and causes some damage - let's say they knock out 6 teeth - and it's serious enough to come under the Crimes Act.

If person 1 is male and person 2 is female (MAF) - what's the max penalty?

And likewise what if person 1 is female, and p2 is male (Common Assalt)?

I don't want to make a biggie of this, but I do have a personal interest in gender roles in society... and this is obviously an area where they get highlighted

SOF assault = 6 months imprisonment or $4000 fine.
Crimes Act common assault = 1 year imprisonment.
MAF or assaulting a child = 2 years imprisonment.

These are the maximum penalties under the legislation but you have to remember that under the sentencing act judges have a lot of option available to them. The reality is you wont get 2 years for MAF unless you have a fairly lengthy history of bashing women.

The fact that there is a specific offence (MAF) and that the penalties are higher recognises that NZ has a historical problem with domestic violence and that there are aggravating factors of a male assaulting a female that make the offence more serious than common assault.

[Hitcher]

SOF? Soldier of Fortune?

[Squeak the Rat]

Completely agree with the "leave him now" advice, but can't help but wonder if the views here are a little biased. There are a lot of people offering their opinion based on their [considerable] experience - but these seem to be representative of emergency workers and past sufferers of abuse who's dealings with offenders is probably leaning towards the more serious side of the spectrum.

There are instances of such events where, though not justifiable, the actions can be understood, and even forgiven. The previous poster who had the guts to put his side of the story up for example - the fact that he told this to help others understand the situation shows to me that he's not a scumbag who deserves a criminal record, but some one who let his emotions get the better of him, did something wrong and then did something about it.

Of course there are others who do need "sorting out", but each situation has it's own variables, circumstances and degrees. I don't know enough of this backgound of case to offer advice on whether to charge the guy - but again, I agree it's better to move on at the very least.

As for the MAF laws, if it only applies to serious reoffenders why does it still have to be gender specific?
STR.

[spudchucka]

SOF? Soldier of Fortune?

"Silly old fart"?