Lawyer advocating 10% less jail sentence for Maori

[Banditbandit]

He could start with their own scholarships and national sports teams.

yes - he could - but he won't because he's running on myths and supposition .. as far as I know there are only three scholarships available to Māori that aere not available to non-Māori ...

Sure there are lots of hapu and iwi scholarships - those are the same as family trusts that pay for education ... they do not come from the pblic purse ..

[Banditbandit]

]why Maori are involved in such higher levels of crime than non Maori.

See .. there is no evidence of that - there is evidence of a disproportinate representation in prison populations .. that is not the same thing ...

I was merely pointing out the fact that statistically, Maoris are imprisoned at an exponentially higher rate than non Maori per capita.

Yes, that's it in a nutshell ...

With no other evidence you make the jump that Māori are more likely to be criminals .. I suggest that the studies show Māori are more likely to be imprisoned if they are caught ...

They could go out and get an education to make something of themselves, in the same way that non Maori in NZ frequently do. I do also understand that the poverty cycle can be extremely hard to break out of, but I don't see why that should be any more difficult for a Maori than a non Maori being brought up in a similarly financially disadvanted background.

Go here ... http://socialreport.msd.govt.nz/know...education.html

It's not hard to see that Māori have a higher participation rate in tertiary education are higher than Pākehā, except in the 20-24 years old age group ... and in the older age group the participation rate is even higher than Asians - traditionally a high user group of education .. and in three of the five groups Māori participation rates are above the national average

We are getting our people educated .. that is part of the long term solution - and we are currently getting a higher percentage of our people educated than of the Pākehā population ..

You're running on suppositions and myths that are easily dispelled.

I'm looking at all relevant factors I can think of, then looking at what's different between Maori and non Maori. The only difference I can find so far is genetic/racial.

And yet you refuse to accept factors which show the court system is biased against Māori and you have not looked at the participation in education stats?

[rustyrobot]

I'm looking at all relevant factors I can think of, then looking at what's different between Maori and non Maori. The only difference I can find so far is genetic/racial.

Does it not make sense to you that when one group colonises another, the colonising force will put in place laws and structures which support their people? Take New Zealand out of the argument and I'm sure it'll be a similar situation in any colonised country. What's the bet native Britons were over-represented in the courts of the invading Romans. Surely then it makes sense that the effect of this compounds over the generations. It entrenches the cycle of poverty you have mentioned, and also creates the sort of stigma around genetic predisposition that you have invoked.

I believe that this is the cause of higher rates of incarceration for colonised peoples, not some mystical genetic propensity for 'crime'*.


* It also 'helps' when the invading force ciminalises native customs/traditions/behaviours - then they are all automatically criminals.

[RDJ]

fuckin dumb fuckin cunt. hope the prick gets shanked and we dont have to deal with this gang-bitch dumb-fuck piece of shit.

I don't think that will happen but it is one option for dealing with the lawyer. What do you propose should happen to the offender?

[Zedder]

This is very interesting, you state that the Maori female is incarcerated and the European female not. Both of whom had previous convictions and were given different sentences based on race.

Well I ask what previous convictions. To use this statement you must be aware of the number of previous convictions. Did both females have the same conviction history? How do you know, as a reporter I would be surprised if you were given a copy of previous convictions.

If I go against the norm and surmise that the European female had 10 previous convictions and the Maori female three previous and the outcome is as you put it then the sentencing is disproportionate to the offending and grounds for an appeal. Remember that was an example.

Then I move onto IF both females were the same in every respect, why wasnt a fine considered? Maybe both females had been given fines for their last offending, they both earn the same and have the same outgoings. The Maori female (for example) CHOOSES not to pay her fine but the European female CHOOSES to pay hers. If this example were true should they both be given the opportunity for a fine?

Also were the females also currently charged with other offences? It just intrigues me that you have chosen this example. The charge simpliciter carries a MAXIMUM of three months imprisonment.

If you want to throw accusations around I know of a Youth Court judge who is disproportionately softer to young Maori offenders. No I cant offer examples as my work life and my keyboard warrior life need to remain in two different plains.

As for who I think that the law favours, well I think its the peeps that are in court everyday (not the offenders) who win in the Justice system.

He's probably busy calming down at present and might get back to you later...

[Zedder]

Does it not make sense to you that when one group colonises another, the colonising force will put in place laws and structures which support their people? Take New Zealand out of the argument and I'm sure it'll be a similar situation in any colonised country. What's the bet native Britons were over-represented in the courts of the invading Romans. Surely then it makes sense that the effect of this compounds over the generations. It entrenches the cycle of poverty you have mentioned, and also creates the sort of stigma around genetic predisposition that you have invoked.

I believe that this is the cause of higher rates of incarceration for colonised peoples, not some mystical genetic propensity for 'crime'*.


* It also 'helps' when the invading force ciminalises native customs/traditions/behaviours - then they are all automatically criminals.

It's not like Maori are forced to accept the Pakeha ways though. They have full control on whether they accept and involve themselves in their traditional culture or whatever else is available.

[rustyrobot]

It's not like Maori are forced to accept the Pakeha ways though. They have full control on whether they accept and involve themselves in their traditional culture or whatever else is available.

Well that's not actually true now, and it certainly wasn't true immediately after initial colonisation. That is the myth of multi-culturalism. Yes, we are a country that has many cultures living within it, but our significant social structures (tax system, justice system, land ownership, schooling, etc.) are solidly mono-cultural and built on the British, Anglican, Capitalist model. I cannot fathom how multiple cultures with often conflicting systems could truly live together, bit I do know that pretending they can or do doesn't work.

[SMOKEU]

See .. there is no evidence of that - there is evidence of a disproportinate representation in prison populations .. that is not the same thing ...

Yes, that's it in a nutshell ...

With no other evidence you make the jump that Māori are more likely to be criminals .. I suggest that the studies show Māori are more likely to be imprisoned if they are caught ...

Go here ... http://socialreport.msd.govt.nz/know...education.html

It's not hard to see that Māori have a higher participation rate in tertiary education are higher than Pākehā, except in the 20-24 years old age group ... and in the older age group the participation rate is even higher than Asians - traditionally a high user group of education .. and in three of the five groups Māori participation rates are above the national average

We are getting our people educated .. that is part of the long term solution - and we are currently getting a higher percentage of our people educated than of the Pākehā population ..

You're running on suppositions and myths that are easily dispelled.



And yet you refuse to accept factors which show the court system is biased against Māori and you have not looked at the participation in education stats?

If Maori people are more likely to be in education compared to non Maori, then I accept that fact and won't argue with it. I still don't believe the courts in NZ are racist enough to be several times more likely to sentence a Maori to a term of imprisonment compared to a non Maori, assuming all other facts remain equal in relation to criminal history, perceived level of remorse, victim impact statements and whatever goes into the sentencing considerations. If that's not the case, then we do have a very big issue of racism in NZ that is beyond the scope of my knowledge.

Why is it that Maori children are more likely to be abused than non Maori? " Māori children, especially those living in urban areas, were disproportionately represented in suspected and reported cases – nearly 12 per 1,000 Māori children aged below 16 compared with nearly 6 per 1,000 non-Māori"

"Across the country, Maori children were abused at a rate far higher than expected, given their proportion in the population of children."

"Whanau Violence Statistics
Half of all children killed by caregivers are Maori.
Seven times more young Maori women and four times more Maori children are
hospitalised from an assault compared to Pakeha women and children.
49% of Maori women experienced partner abuse at some time in their life, compared
with 24% of Pakeha and 23% of Pacifica women."

"It was concluded that Maori, and in particular those of sole Maori cultural identity, were at higher risk of exposure to physical punishment and inter-parental violence, and that the associations could not be fully explained by either socio-economic deprivation or exposure to family dysfunction in childhood."

Does it not make sense to you that when one group colonises another, the colonising force will put in place laws and structures which support their people? Take New Zealand out of the argument and I'm sure it'll be a similar situation in any colonised country. What's the bet native Britons were over-represented in the courts of the invading Romans. Surely then it makes sense that the effect of this compounds over the generations. It entrenches the cycle of poverty you have mentioned, and also creates the sort of stigma around genetic predisposition that you have invoked.

I believe that this is the cause of higher rates of incarceration for colonised peoples, not some mystical genetic propensity for 'crime'*.

* It also 'helps' when the invading force ciminalises native customs/traditions/behaviours - then they are all automatically criminals.

So you'd rather have Maori running around killing and eating one another like they did before European colonization?

They're welcome to go and live in the bush away from modern society.

It's not like Maori are forced to accept the Pakeha ways though. They have full control on whether they accept and involve themselves in their traditional culture or whatever else is available.

Exactly.

[rustyrobot]

So you'd rather have Maori running around killing and eating one another like they did before European colonization?

They're welcome to go and live in the bush away from modern society.

I'm not sure how you inferred that from what I wrote.

Just out of interest though: what's the moral differentiation between killing someone with your hands and eating them in a cultural rite, and the sort of colonisation and mass murders carried out by the British Empire? How about the hundreds of millions killed during the slave trade? How about your heroes the Nazis and the way that they rounded up men, women, children and baked them in ovens. Is this the modern society you are talking about?

The point I was making in the quote you referred to is simply: those who make the rules, make them to suit themselves (and their children).

[SMOKEU]

I'm not sure how you inferred that from what I wrote.

Just out of interest though: what's the moral differentiation between killing someone with your hands and eating them in a cultural rite, and the sort of colonisation and mass murders carried out by the British Empire? How about the hundreds of millions killed during the slave trade? How about your heroes the Nazis and the way that they rounded up men, women, children and baked them in ovens. Is this the modern society you are talking about?

The point I was making in the quote you referred to is simply: those who make the rules, make them to suit themselves (and their children).

I'm against murder in general, and as a reasonably advanced society (in comparison to others, such as the ragheads), we have come up with better, peaceful solutions to out problems, negating the need for excessive violence. I am in no doubt that the European settlers did kill many "natives", both in NZ and other colonial empires, and I'm not condoning this behaviour. I don't think there was any race in history that doesn't have an incredibly brutal, bloody past.

What the Nazis did to the Jews wasn't really any different from what the Japanese and Russians did in WW2 to both their own people and their enemies. The African blacks were also exploited during the slave trade, and it's something that should never have happened. I hope that we have learned from this so such atrocities never happen again.

For any society to function in a relatively peaceful manner, we certainly need rules in place which everyone must abide by, unless you want to live in a total state of anarchy. Now these rules might not suit everyone, but without them we will be in a war zone, not too different from what is happening in parts of Africa and the Middle East at the moment.

[Akzle]

much the same as "women have smaller brains than men and therefore should not be involved in politics and should not vote - they should stay home and look after the kids "
≠
Just bullshit ..

All other things remaining equal, this is proof that Maori are more genetically predisposed to crime than non Maori in NZ. If it's not genetic, then what is it, a mere coincidence?

come on... you're usually the first to bring out "correlation≠ causation"...

I don't believe the justice system in NZ is racist enough to treat Maori worse than other racial groups based purely on their race

how much involvement have you had with it? cos i've had a fair bit. it helps that i'm a light skinned ho, despite my 10 inch cock, but i've seen the workings of it...
tell me smokey, are you "allowed" to speak te reo in a crackeroo court?
does nz "law" line up with tikaanga? will a crackeroo court hear a case under any jurisdiction but crackeroo?

If the only difference between the races was skin colour and minor variations in body size and shape, and if people really are all the same regardless of race,

actually. you're melanin deficient.
sorry smokey, the test results are back.... it's vitaligo...turns out you're 80% coon.

then there wouldn't be any noticeable difference in the rate of criminal offending between the races since Maori have been living under "our" system for many generations and are well accustomed to living in "our" society with "our" rules.

there probably is no difference in rates of offending. that's not shown, what's shown is what's processed. which is, unquestionably, more maori than non-.

I was merely pointing out the fact that statistically, Maoris are imprisoned at an exponentially higher rate than non Maori per capita.

i dont think anyone's questioning that.

For example: I do not know why Jews all have big noses, but for me to decide that it must be because they have too much money, just isn't illogical.

it's to sniff out money...

It's not like Maori are forced to accept the Pakeha ways though. They have full control on whether they accept and involve themselves in their traditional culture or whatever else is available.

yes. yes it is like that. that's what the blue gang are for. to ensure as far as possible that everyone is complying with crackeroo "law"

Well that's not actually true now, and it certainly wasn't true immediately after initial colonisation. That is the myth of multi-culturalism. Yes, we are a country that has many cultures living within it, but our significant social structures (tax system, justice system, land ownership, schooling, etc.) are solidly mono-cultural and built on the British, Anglican, Capitalist model. I cannot fathom how multiple cultures with often conflicting systems could truly live together, bit I do know that pretending they can or do doesn't work.

basically this^

Why is it that Maori children are more likely to be abused than non Maori? " Māori children, especially those living in urban areas, were disproportionately represented in suspected and reported cases – nearly 12 per 1,000 Māori children aged below 16 compared with nearly 6 per 1,000 non-Māori"


They're welcome to go and live in the bush away from modern society.

2) no, they're not. yes, it's possible, but someone always comes around looking for a slice of the pie.
the "crown" has "claimed" all "land" in "new zealand" (and all the animals, fish, resources, air and anything else that may turn a profit) and if you want to exist on it or use it, you gotta pay. with moeny. jew money.
you could bust out the "fly under the radar" which many people hope to, many people even achieve, but that's not free-ay-dom.

1) this "urban"" thing. doesn't quite line up with traditional values, certainly not traditional lifestyles. a fairly similar thing happened with the abos in oz. give them a white mans house, white mans car, all the modern trappings, but there's no community. the need for money drives people further away from the marae, and it ends up drifiting apart. the need for money has people working >40 hours a week (50% of that is for the government, to perpetuate the system, tptb thanks you) instead of a subsistence lifestyle, which is about 10 hours a week,(white science has confirmed this) and working close to home with close friends/family (and some people you dont like. like dicks).
so, yeah, nah.

[Zedder]

Well that's not actually true now, and it certainly wasn't true immediately after initial colonisation. That is the myth of multi-culturalism. Yes, we are a country that has many cultures living within it, but our significant social structures (tax system, justice system, land ownership, schooling, etc.) are solidly mono-cultural and built on the British, Anglican, Capitalist model. I cannot fathom how multiple cultures with often conflicting systems could truly live together, bit I do know that pretending they can or do doesn't work.

So, this isn't true then:http://www.tpk.govt.nz/en/about/mpa/

Incidently, Britain didn't want to rule NZ. There was actually a treaty of Independance originally but 13 Maori chiefs begged the Queen for help and protection for their trading etc, hence the Treaty of Waitangi and drama ever since...

[Banditbandit]

This is very interesting, you state that the Maori female is incarcerated and the European female not. Both of whom had previous convictions and were given different sentences based on race.

Well I ask what previous convictions. To use this statement you must be aware of the number of previous convictions. Did both females have the same conviction history? How do you know, as a reporter I would be surprised if you were given a copy of previous convictions.

If I go against the norm and surmise that the European female had 10 previous convictions and the Maori female three previous and the outcome is as you put it then the sentencing is disproportionate to the offending and grounds for an appeal. Remember that was an example.

Then I move onto IF both females were the same in every respect, why wasnt a fine considered? Maybe both females had been given fines for their last offending, they both earn the same and have the same outgoings. The Maori female (for example) CHOOSES not to pay her fine but the European female CHOOSES to pay hers. If this example were true should they both be given the opportunity for a fine?

Also were the females also currently charged with other offences? It just intrigues me that you have chosen this example. The charge simpliciter carries a MAXIMUM of three months imprisonment.

If you want to throw accusations around I know of a Youth Court judge who is disproportionately softer to young Maori offenders. No I cant offer examples as my work life and my keyboard warrior life need to remain in two different plains.

As for who I think that the law favours, well I think its the peeps that are in court everyday (not the offenders) who win in the Justice system.

I am completely unsure .. I do know I was the court reporter and witnesses this happen first hand. It has also been commented on elsewhere, but I am unsure how to find that.

At the time, from what the judge said, both cases were pretty similar .. both had taken around $10-$11 from Countdown ... both had previous convictions ... both had children at home. At the time it seemed racist to me . and the comment elsewhere points this out too.

Look .. there are good judges and bad judges (and I don't mean good judges let people off - I mean good judges dispense justice as it should be .. and I've some bloody tough ones I though were great) .. the figures and studies suggest a racist system.

[SMOKEU]

come on... you're usually the first to bring out "correlation≠ causation"...

how much involvement have you had with it? cos i've had a fair bit. it helps that i'm a light skinned ho, despite my 10 inch cock, but i've seen the workings of it...
tell me smokey, are you "allowed" to speak te reo in a crackeroo court?
does nz "law" line up with tikaanga? will a crackeroo court hear a case under any jurisdiction but crackeroo?

actually. you're melanin deficient.
sorry smokey, the test results are back.... it's vitaligo...turns out you're 80% coon.


there probably is no difference in rates of offending. that's not shown, what's shown is what's processed. which is, unquestionably, more maori than non-.


i dont think anyone's questioning that.

it's to sniff out money...

yes. yes it is like that. that's what the blue gang are for. to ensure as far as possible that everyone is complying with crackeroo "law"


basically this^



2) no, they're not. yes, it's possible, but someone always comes around looking for a slice of the pie.
the "crown" has "claimed" all "land" in "new zealand" (and all the animals, fish, resources, air and anything else that may turn a profit) and if you want to exist on it or use it, you gotta pay. with moeny. jew money.
you could bust out the "fly under the radar" which many people hope to, many people even achieve, but that's not free-ay-dom.

1) this "urban"" thing. doesn't quite line up with traditional values, certainly not traditional lifestyles. a fairly similar thing happened with the abos in oz. give them a white mans house, white mans car, all the modern trappings, but there's no community. the need for money drives people further away from the marae, and it ends up drifiting apart. the need for money has people working >40 hours a week (50% of that is for the government, to perpetuate the system, tptb thanks you) instead of a subsistence lifestyle, which is about 10 hours a week,(white science has confirmed this) and working close to home with close friends/family (and some people you dont like. like dicks).
so, yeah, nah.

OK, I admit that I don't know much about the courts as I've never been a defendant before, and I hope to keep things that way and "below the radar" of the corrupt system that frequently makes criminals out of ordinary people, and criminals into "someone who isn't really accountable because they're a victim of their circumstances". From what I understand, Te Reo is accepted in some courts (maybe not enough courts?, but since Maori are generally more proficient at English than their own language, is this really a bad thing?).

There's more to different races than just skin colour alone. Animals (and humans) are known to develop physical changes to their body in response to environmental conditions over many generations. Ever noticed how black Africans are generally bigger than Asians, and how white people are generally about in the middle? Or how Inuits are generally quite short in order to preserve body heat more efficiently?

Maybe we do need separate courts to deal specifically with Maori vs. Maori disputes, provided both parties agree to this system prior to commencement of proceedings if it makes you lot feel any better. I agree that the white mans way of capitalism has serious flaws, and I can understand why it can have extremely negative effects on the Maori and general community. I also don't like the fact that I will have to live to work, not the other way around. It's the Jews.

[Banditbandit]

If Maori people are more likely to be in education compared to non Maori, then I accept that fact and won't argue with it. I still don't believe the courts in NZ are racist enough to be several times more likely to sentence a Maori to a term of imprisonment compared to a non Maori, assuming all other facts remain equal in relation to criminal history, perceived level of remorse, victim impact statements and whatever goes into the sentencing considerations. If that's not the case, then we do have a very big issue of racism in NZ that is beyond the scope of my knowledge.

Clearly - and thank you for that admission ... and yes, we do have a big problem ...

Why is it that Maori children are more likely to be abused than non Maori?

Even bigger answer ... and a major issue ...

Essentially and the short answer .. anger and frustration .. anger and frustration about the position of Māori in this country ... this is one of the long term and intergenerational effects of colonization .. it's the same in all colonized groups ...

And the (irrational) need to hit out at something ... so they hit out at the nearest thing ... (For a very full answer read Franz Fanon's Wretched of the Earth ...)

The same reason as pissed off blacks in America, angry and annoyed and just pissed off at the powers that be, burnt their own homes (Watts riots etc) instead of burning the homes of the white arseholes they were actually angry at.

Hit out in anger and frustration at anything near to them ...