Another two-year-old toddler beaten to death

[Drew]

glad all the KB keyboard heros are fully appraised of the facts of the matter and thus able to deem the man guilty. shit. maybe you should all sign up to be cops...

The alternative to having faith in a guilty verdict in court, doesn't bare thinking about. So. He's fuckin guilty in my book!

[Edbear]

The alternative to having faith in a guilty verdict in court, doesn't bare thinking about. So. He's fuckin guilty in my book!

Maybe he missed the bit about a trial by jury, you know, where they got to hear all the facts and chewed them over for seven hours before unanimously agreeing he did it...

[Akzle]

The alternative to having faith in a guilty verdict in court, doesn't bare thinking about. So. He's fuckin guilty in my book!

sorry. i borrowed the Ministry Of Justice decision making apparatus for a really intense warhammer session.

Maybe he missed the bit about a trial by jury, you know, where they got to hear all the facts and chewed them over for seven hours before unanimously agreeing he did it...

no, jackass. i heard that. my problems with it are many.
first, i do not believe we have 12 omnipresent citizens, who have "all the facts" and if they had "all the facts" surely it would take them all of 30 seconds to make a decision as to whether those "facts" represent an infringement of crown legislation.

secondly, i trust the police and rate their competency at a level less than, or equal to zero, depending on the day. did they have enough "facts", where did they get them? did they make some up? are they going to sell them on trademe after the hearing?

thirdly, i can only assume the folk responsible for this now-dead child viewed the police in a similar, if more ignorant, fashion to me, and thus may not have appraised them of all the facts, again, assuming that them folk are omnipresent and do indeed have, all the facts.

fourthly, the entire fucking system is a joke.


your turn.
saved any kids lately, ed?

[Edbear]

[COLOR="#139922"]
sorry. i borrowed the Ministry Of Justice decision making apparatus for a really intense warhammer session.

no, jackass. i heard that. my problems with it are many.
first, i do not believe we have 12 omnipresent citizens, who have "all the facts" and if they had "all the facts" surely it would take them all of 30 seconds to make a decision as to whether those "facts" represent an infringement of crown legislation.

secondly, i trust the police and rate their competency at a level less than, or equal to zero, depending on the day. did they have enough "facts", where did they get them? did they make some up? are they going to sell them on trademe after the hearing?

thirdly, i can only assume the folk responsible for this now-dead child viewed the police in a similar, if more ignorant, fashion to me, and thus may not have appraised them of all the facts, again, assuming that them folk are omnipresent and do indeed have, all the facts.

fourthly, the entire fucking system is a joke.


your turn.
saved any kids lately, ed?

Short answer is go and sit in court and follow the case personally then you don't have to make negative assumptions. Nothing like being there to get the full story.

[Drew]

Crown law my fuckin arse man. He killed a kid, pick a belief in which that isn't evil.

The police and your faith in their ability is no longer relevant. Once it gets to court the defence needs to provide little enough for reasonable doubt. That's not much compared to what the fuzz have to provide.

12 omnipresent? No. It only takes one to not believe the prosecution.

[Akzle]

Crown law my fuckin arse man. He killed a kid, pick a belief in which that isn't evil.

The police and your faith in their ability is no longer relevant. Once it gets to court the defence needs to provide little enough for reasonable doubt. That's not much compared to what the fuzz have to provide.

12 omnipresent? No. It only takes one to not believe the prosecution.

you assume he killed a kid.

i haven't seen any evidence either way. i assume, since y'all are on here banging on about it, neither have you.
further, i assume you have all bought a big slice of main-stream-media-pie.

i am not condoning beating children to death.

my faith in the police to gather enough, sufficient, relevant evidence is entirely applicable, since if they don't do a good job of it, the crown prosecution case is flawed from the get go, one way or the other. and we could end up with Bain II. type scenario. ie.

the 12 would need to be omnipresent to have "all the facts"

11/12 is a majority, 12/12 is unanimous, <10 is a hung jury.

sit in court ed? you are fucking deluded, or thick. i'm not sure if you've noticed, but i don't believe in the crown courts, why would i waste my time with that crap???

[Akzle]

12 omnipresent? No. It only takes one to not believe the prosecution.

and here's the other zing.
if i can convince a room full of people i can make an elephant disappear, can i make an elephant disappear?

that really is just fucking stupid. it's all about which clown can deliver the snazziest lines from the various acts. the only thing missing is big shoes, air horns and small tricycles. it's a GAME.

but since WE can deal with the FACT that he has been fond guilty, shall we take bets as to what his sentencing will be?

...i actually still have a stack of dice, so i can tell you with about as much certainty as they have...

[madandy]

Akzle, do you think the mother killed the boy withthe blunt force trauma to the abdomen during the 45 minutes the accused is said to have been absent from the victim?

It was one of two people...if the whanau know any different and dont speak up they're all culpable...so being mistrustful ofthe system aint helping anything anymore than buying into it lock, stock and all...

If the man is innocent he's bound to appeal right?

[scissorhands]

Appears to me, just viewing available photos, maybe the poor kid had a touch of aspergers syndrome.

[caseye]

Funnily enough Akzle, I don't disagree with your comments about our Police in this day and age, seems everywhere we look, they've fucked up big time and guilty barstards are walking free.
But, if it wasn't the mother who inflicted a blow so devastating that it killed a two year old child in less than 4 hours, who was it?
I've read and or heard little about this case, but given that it was one or the other and that as has been spoken of here recently if the mother didn't do it and if this devil didn't do it, then who the bloody hell did?
I'd be saying it was him.

You can opt out if you like, but having done so,you don't qualify to then be having an opinion either way.

Whats more if you truely believe that it was neither the mother or this prick, then instead of ranting at those here, perhaps you should be pointing out who it really was and making sure that those of us who do let the system do it's thing are appraised of the correct situation and let us deal with it by reporting the so far unknown assailant to the authorities.

I'm neither confused or disturbed by what you have to say and as per my opening statement I sometimes agree with you, but come on, if you think that simply calling everyone else names and saying you don't think that so an so did it, is going to cut it, you are sadly mistaken.
Come on Akzle, who did it?
Should they rot in hell?
I think so, don't you?

[RDJ]

Come on Akzle, who did it?
Should they rot in hell?
I think so, don't you?

I believe our fellow rider Akzle neither wishes to fish nor to cut bait.

[Drew]

and here's the other zing.
if i can convince a room full of people i can make an elephant disappear, can i make an elephant disappear?

that really is just fucking stupid. it's all about which clown can deliver the snazziest lines from the various acts. the only thing missing is big shoes, air horns and small tricycles. it's a GAME.

but since WE can deal with the FACT that he has been fond guilty, shall we take bets as to what his sentencing will be?

...i actually still have a stack of dice, so i can tell you with about as much certainty as they have...

I believe 'innocent until proven quilty'. I'm quite passionate about it when any court case comes up in conversation.

I choose to be that way, for if I were to come up in court because the fuzz got overzealous and arrested me for something I didn't do, (it happens a lot I know, and when they get the bit between their teeth they can act like a pack of wolves), I want to think the system is on my side.

Appears to me, just viewing available photos, maybe the poor kid had a touch of aspergers syndrome.

Really? I know two or three people with that particular affliction, and they look like anyone else wandering the streets, this might not be the norm of course, I only know the three.

Please elaborate as to how you can diagnose a mental disorder by looking at a still photo.

[scumdog]

---Quote (Originally by Akzle)---
"that really is just fucking stupid. it's all about which clown can deliver the snazziest lines from the various acts. the only thing missing is big shoes, air horns and small tricycles. it's a GAME."



C'mon man, quit messin' with th' establishment - you ain't part of it.

(Or are you actually doing something to rectify the problem you see?)

[Akzle]

Akzle, do you think the mother killed the boy

It was one of two people...

If the man is innocent he's bound to appeal right?

I DON'T KNOW who killed the kid. i've heard exactly beggar all about the case, and i'm keeping it that way. i have NO FAITH in the system to find and prove who the guilty party is. having been in our over-feminised court system, i know that being a male of a large stature instantly puts you on the back foot, because you're "intimidating" - you're guilty.
(how's the kahui case? how about nia glassie? (i know women DID get charged in that.. and walked with home D, if i recall))
the "justice system" was designed by men, for men, to specify dealings with men (which included the marriage / legal transfer of women). then some dump prick let women vote, and muck up politics. now it's a mess and we get shit like this going on.

if it was one of the two, surely the mother should at least be charged with failing in care of duty or something? maybe they should both be charged with murder one. maybe the entire whanau should be lined up against the wall and shot? would that appease your sense of justice?

karma is a bitch, and it's gonna get whodunnit. even if yer society doesn't

he will appeal anyway (although wasn't he charged at the highest level of court? giving no-one to appeal to. no recourse...)
not appealing would make him seem guiltier, which hurts his case. it also may find a technical flaw in the prosecution case, so he can walk entirely. or at least get a lesser sentence, bt again. sentencing is a game of dice.

(ps, he'll be on legal aid, the courts are all paid, the jurors, the prosecution, the police etc are all being paid tax money for this media spectacle. enjoy it, it aint coming cheap.)

But, if it wasn't the mother who inflicted a blow so devastating that it killed a two year old child in less than 4 hours, who was it?

You can opt out if you like, but having done so,you don't qualify to then be having an opinion either way.

Should they rot in hell?
I think so, don't you?

as above.

as for a man (judge) deciding how best to administer "justice" - that relies on guilt. which, instead relying on the presumption of innocence (or an admission), is automatically assumed, and reinforced by the court process (and the public media hype), rightly or wrongly. (bain, again) and that will affect everyone involved's life (except the judge and courts.. that machine will keep ticking over...) the guy in prison, his family outside, kids, friends, partners, whatever.

i don't really believe in prison, i don't believe in a punitive punishment system. (asides from ts he fact that it. just. doesn't. work) (("oh but it's the best system we've got"))
i'd like to see the pillory and gallows back, but again, the one there should be guilty.

as for who-ever's soul. i'd say it's a pretty dark place already, you may think i'm wimping out in calling karma, but don't get me wrong, if i knew who did it, i'd execute them. (but then I'm guilty, by crown law, ehh...). there's no excuse, and society and the gene pool would be best served by their death.

opting out gives me MORE of an opinion, because i'm not pretending to endorse the BS that is the system, i have no vested interest in it.

and i didn't quite mean to be so offensive/desparaging personally. i was thinking about appologising to ed. we'll see how it goes.

I believe our fellow rider Akzle neither wishes to fish nor to cut bait.

i love fishing.

I believe 'innocent until proven quilty'.

I choose to be that way, for if I were to come up in court because the fuzz got overzealous and arrested me for something I didn't do, I want to think the system is on my side.

so, what proof is there, or have you heard? that this guy is guilty.... being in court doesn't make you guilty, being charged doesn't make you guilty, being found guilty doesn't even make you guilty.

the system is not on your side. the system is 11 thousand pieces of legislation, some up to 3000 pages long, designed to confuse, misdirect, annoy and demoralise. that's why you need a law-yer (at 600$ an hour) to play the game for you. that's why you are the little guy dressed nicely and the judge sits up at the bank with a hammer, robes and a wig. (seriously folks, what's that shit about?!?! if it's not a game of dress ups...)
good deal huh?
the law society is a money generating machine (for those registered with it), unaccountable to the publicly elected government. run by this bullshit fictitious entity "the crown"


scum puppy. tits or GTFO my thread. homo.

[GTRMAN]

Since when has this been YOUR thread Akzle?

The offender was found GUILTY beyond a reasonable doubt, all your posturing about your perceived flaws in the legal system change nothing. Denial is pretty much endemic in our corrections system. strangely it is the admission of what has been done that is the beginning of turning their lives around.

You talk like someone who has spent some time in the dock and not gotten the desired outcome. Bitter, paranoid and delusional.