Comments on: yayyyyy!!!!

By: DavidM

DavidM — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 06:43:48 +0000

I would say if you live by the sword-you die by the sword.
My view on this is that there is more -no -much more than just a court case and an accused and a victim and an accuser.Oh yes brothers.
How about this!!
What say you and I clean up our acts..thats right you and me brother.
You see the world view is that if you break the law then you come under the law. If you simply decide not to even create a situation that leaves doubt as to your innocense and your integrity then you dont leave hooks for the darker sides of humanity to leave its ugly hats on. Make sense? How can we as men be unified when we see that kind of behaviour being publicly displayed in our homes , our wives our girl friends and daughters.
Taking a side in this case is asking for division as men of integrity and truth.
Come on men!! True men. Rise up out of the gutter.Honour our women- take responsibility for our faults and lead our families-then and only then will we see the changes we so desire.
Can we say ourselves that we are worthy to judge?

By: miss mug

miss mug — Tue, 18 Apr 2006 19:04:14 +0000

justice4, the “fact” that [suppressed info removed by webmaster] is irrelevant to the nicholas case. those matters were suppressed so that the jury were able to consider the facts of the nichols vs. schollum, shipton and rickards case based solely upon the evidence presented. the jury plainly found that there was sufficient reasonable doubt to acquit the defendants.
you’re saying if it waddles and quacks it has to be a duck. maybe.
consider, i was arrested for a cannabis offence when i was 16.

Today, i am a hard-working, law-abiding business owner and employer, 50 years old now, long since grown out of the drug scene and getting on with a productive life. but i am charged with possession of cannabis for supply because a disgruntled employee chose to set me up to get back at me (none of it so actually but for the sake of argument).

The prosecution are able to admit the evidence of my previous offending, the jury feel sorry for the aggrieved employee, how do you think my case will go?

By: Justice4

Justice4 — Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:12:41 +0000

Men who use this forum need to keep in mind that is not a male against female issue. Does the FACT that [suppressed info deleted by webmaster] not a huge indication that Ms Nicholas was in fact telling the truth?? This is an issue about justice for all - don’t let your own life experiences tarnish your world view!!!

By: miss mug

miss mug — Sun, 09 Apr 2006 04:59:41 +0000

you also need to record telephone conversations, conversations with cyfs etc. you can’t get too paranoid when dealing with this rather grubby culture. i record all conversations at this point, even with police although i have to say that they have been downright reasonable in my dealings with this particular vindictive woman since they can plainly see what she is. good on them in this case for blocking her moves.
didn’t half take a long time for cyfs to get the point though.

By: Al D Rado

Al D Rado — Sun, 09 Apr 2006 04:41:51 +0000

Triassic
As Miss Mug said - wire yourself when you do changeovers.
A cheap double density tape recorder that is easily concealed in a pocket costs under $100 at Dick Smith Electronics.
To bring charges against the ex’s boyfriend for harrassing you in anyway, means you must not antagonise him.
let the recordings speak for themselves.
You are also free to record your dealings with the police.
Label your recordings ‘confidential, legally priviledged, for my lawyer’.
Technically the police cannot take them, as it is legal material for your lawyer’s benefit.
In reality, police can take anything they want, because they’ll just say they didn’t see the sign.
Duplicate the recording at the earliest opportunity, and leave a copy with a trusted friend, or your lawyer.
Protect yourself; gather evidence any legal means you can, and take no prisoners.

Imagine if you had played a tape recording of your wife, after she had denied it!

By: Bevan Berg

Bevan Berg — Wed, 05 Apr 2006 00:39:02 +0000

Its not about Ricketts from Auckland and Powell from Hamilton, its about the first female commissioner.

By: miss mug

miss mug — Sun, 02 Apr 2006 20:01:26 +0000

what’s that about bevan?

By: Bevan Berg

Bevan Berg — Sun, 02 Apr 2006 02:56:18 +0000

I would be more concerned that the dirty little game of feminist politics, pursued historic complaints against two serving police officers, both who hold superior positions to the most senior police women.

By: miss mug

miss mug — Sat, 01 Apr 2006 06:17:48 +0000

triassic, i missed the bit where you say that male officers working with that particular female cop report that she is a problem to them.
how about asking them to do their bit in making their disapproval of her tactics known to their superiors.
it seems to me that the monster has to die the death of a thousand cuts.
whether we are fathers, sisters, judges, mp’s, neighbours, coppers, social workers or whatever, we all have a razor blade each.

By: miss mug

miss mug — Sat, 01 Apr 2006 06:00:51 +0000

Triassic, I hope that you have the resources to wire yourself when you are dealing with these people. It is hopeless to find yourself in a tit-for-tat confrontation where it is your word against theirs.
Is it too late for you now? I hope not – but for any father facing such a situation with the newbie boyfriend (who no doubt is suckered into the role of the chivalrous rescuer) you can’t achieve anything productive for yourself or your kids if all you have left is whispered anger.
Of course the police are a microcosm of society, they are made up of ‘ordinary’ men and women, some of whom wear their own scars.
You must stack the cards in your own favour when you are dealing with a society that treats men as pariahs and at the same time treats ALL women, irrespective, as Earth Mother.