NZ Herald – Mallet attack sparked by car sale
By Edward Gay
Thanks to Bruce S for drawing this to our attention
Lance Bain loved Ferraris, but after an argument with his partner over a car he was attacked with a mallet and left with a leg wound that became infested with maggots.
He went to hospital 11 days later where he eventually died of a bacterial infection.
Mr Bain’s partner Natalie van Breugel, also known as Natalie Reader, had originally been charged with manslaughter which carries a maximum penalty of life in prison.
However, at her brief appearance at the High Court at Auckland today, the Crown downgraded the charge to injuring with intent to injure which has a maximum of seven years in prison.
By downgrading this attack to assault with intention to injure, this clear manslaughter case is covered in official statistics as assault and the illegal death perpetrated by a woman aspect is hidden from public view in Government statistics.
The victim’s refusal to get hospital treatment seems to fit into the DV victim refusing help, in other words the same dynamic in a man, that is much talked about in women. Also the police gently pressured him to get treatment, but he refused. The police could have saved this man’s life, if they had had him detained under Mental Health Act and thus his physical injuries could have received medically competent treatment. I am not accusing the police of manslaughter, they just weren’t competent at handling the dynamics of this situation.
I do consider that the police hierarchy should be called to account, as this incident shows that their mindset of woman victim / man perpetrator is sometimes so out of touch with the real world reality, that it is costing too many lives. Men’s lives lost as DV victims and men’s lives lost when they are maltreated by police misled by their own dangerous misunderstanding of their own unreliable statistics.
Or, are the police telling us that letting off lightly, women victims of DV who murder, was wrong all the time?
I suggest that in each individual case, the response should be proportionate to the facts of the case.
I know a man who was prosecuted for male assaults female. The police photos showed bruises so mild that they were laughable. The accused lost his temper in district caught, in frustration at police perjury. Although this perjury was obvious from the caught file, it was ignored by the “judge” who convicted him. What a hero! (apology for the $350,000 a year of sarcasm). The policeman obviously had no fear of being prosecuted for perjury. Anyway, the Limitations Act hasn’t run out yet.
If he had known the Evidence Act, previous judgements on this point and possibly Evidence Regulations (if they exist), then he could have handled this challenge with a better outcome. (Sorry that I am ambiguous about “he”, it could be the accused or the “judge”.)
MurrayBacon – axe murderer frustrated a little