MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Judge treats rapist with leniency

Filed under: Law & Courts — nickcoop @ 10:12 am Tue 29th May 2012

In Hamilton a 45 year old has been convicted of sexual conduct with a person under 16. The inebriated 45 year old undressed the protesting child and had sex with them. Although the sex was non-consensual the charge of sexual violation wasn’t laid. The offender was sentenced to 22 months imprisonment converted to 11 months home detention. Also the offender was convicted of assaulting their 14 year old daughter after grabbing the girl by the throat and throwing her to the floor.

Why such leniency? The offender is a woman and the victim is male.


  1. home detention in a retirement village..amazing..if i ever appear in court for anything i hope i get a similar sentence to what women get..what a joke

    Comment by Ford — Tue 29th May 2012 @ 11:13 am

  2. Why such leniency? Because the “shock horror” brigade are composed entirely of one eyed, hysterical feminists. Female victim? nope; male perpetrator? nope; then no fuss necessary. Welcome to NZ; where human rights and justice are only bestowed upon that privileged group that sport mammary glands and a vagina. In the popular vernacular – you just have to “man up” and live with it!

    Comment by Bruce S — Tue 29th May 2012 @ 11:23 am

  3. ‘the heavy set woman’ wonder the poor kid is traumatised..scare the shit out of anyone

    Comment by Ford — Tue 29th May 2012 @ 11:34 am

  4. Reply to nickcoop and Ford

    That sentence is so disgusting…

    Another classic case of a ‘pussy pass’ for a Kiwi women,in the feminist state of N.Z….

    If a ‘Kiwi Man’ would done exactly the same crime as this kiwi woman did …
    He would have received a sentence of prison,for a term of between 4 years to 7 years at least…..Grrrrrrr…My blood is boiling…!!!!!

    Come on you western European women Kiwi Gestapo feminists…Justify this type of sentence that you as Feminists define as ‘Equality’

    Kind regards…… John Dutchie…Free at long last

    Comment by John Dutchie — Tue 29th May 2012 @ 11:36 am

  5. i tried to post a link yesterday but it didnt work for some reason but a woman in america spread rumours she was dying of cancer and wanted to get married and have a honeymoon before she died..well people evidently donated 1000’s and the bridal company donated her dress etc..she got a free honeymoon in some exotic place and when the truth came out her hubby divorced her and she spent less than 3 months in prison

    Comment by Ford — Tue 29th May 2012 @ 11:46 am

  6. less than 2 moths i meant

    Comment by Ford — Tue 29th May 2012 @ 11:47 am

  7. Reply to Ford

    Ford you know that website I use to belong too.????..Guess what I rejoined and I posting how amazing Asian women are…And the ‘flak’ I getting from Kiwi women is damn awesome….L.O.L….

    Kind regards”¦”¦ John Dutchie”¦Free at long last

    Comment by John Dutchie — Tue 29th May 2012 @ 11:55 am

  8. this 45 yr old sexual feind might be 1 of them

    Comment by Ford — Tue 29th May 2012 @ 11:57 am

  9. Reply to Ford#8

    …L.O.L…My Asian lady partner is on the floor laughing her head off on that statement you have just made there Ford …Plus she is so ‘gob smacked’ on how Kiwi women don’t like Asian women..I did warn her …

    As I said to her…The real reason is so… ‘Kiwi women feel so threaten by the wonderful and strong femininity of Asian women’

    Kind regards”¦”¦ John Dutchie”¦Free at long last

    Comment by John Dutchie — Tue 29th May 2012 @ 12:58 pm

  10. Anyone read a book called The Second Sexism – discrimination against men and boys, by David Benetar? I haven’t; that is why I am asking and is it any good?

    Comment by Down Under — Wed 30th May 2012 @ 1:51 pm

  11. Hi Down Under check my last post – stuff just published a ‘review’ of it by some feminist fruitcake – get in quick if you want to join the fun and comment on her thoughts, or what passes for thought in femville.

    Comment by Dan — Wed 30th May 2012 @ 3:15 pm

  12. this about the poor hard done by feminist crybabies

    Comment by Ford — Wed 30th May 2012 @ 3:26 pm

  13. ‘Review’ she was so busy blabbering on about her own opinion she forgot to review the book – that’s what you get from feminist media these days. Was hoping someone who had read it might have a constructive opinion.

    Comment by Down Under — Wed 30th May 2012 @ 3:27 pm

  14. If you want to understand what’s going here, read the following written by Lord Chesterfield to his son over 250 years ago. Nothing has changed with regard to the sexes in all that time, other than that the “women’s sphere” – ie that space where men must watch what they say because there may not be masculine sense predominating – has greatly expanded:

    LONDON, September 5, O.S. 1748.

    …. As women are a considerable, or at least a pretty numerous part of company; and as their suffrages go a great way toward establishing a man’s character in the fashionable part of the world (which is of great importance to the fortune and figure he proposes to make in it), it is necessary to please them. I will therefore, upon this subject, let you into certain Arcana that will be very useful for you to know, but which you must, with the utmost care, conceal and never seem to know.

    Women, then, are only children of a larger growth; they have an entertaining tattle, and sometimes wit; but for solid reasoning, good sense, I never knew in my life one that had it, or who reasoned or acted consequentially for four-and-twenty hours together.

    Some little passion or humor always breaks upon their best resolutions. Their beauty neglected or controverted, their age increased, or their supposed understandings depreciated, instantly kindles their little passions, and overturns any system of consequential conduct, that in their most reasonable moments they might have been capable of forming.

    A man of sense only trifles with them, plays with them, humors and flatters them, as he does with a sprightly forward child; but he neither consults them about, nor trusts them with serious matters; though he often makes them believe that he does both; which is the thing in the world that they are proud of; for they love mightily to be dabbling in business (which by the way they always spoil); and being justly distrustful that men in general look upon them in a trifling light, they almost adore that man who talks more seriously to them, and who seems to consult and trust them; I say, who seems; for weak men really do, but wise ones only seem to do it.

    No flattery is either too high or too low for them. They will greedily swallow the highest, and gratefully accept of the lowest; and you may safely flatter any woman from her understanding down to the exquisite taste of her fan. Women who are either indisputably beautiful, or indisputably ugly, are best flattered upon the score of their understandings; but those who are in a state of mediocrity, are best flattered upon their beauty, or at least their graces; for every woman who is not absolutely ugly thinks herself handsome; but not hearing often that she is so, is the more grateful and the more obliged to the few who tell her so; whereas a decided end conscious beauty looks upon every tribute paid to her beauty only as her due; but wants to shine, and to be considered on the side of her understanding; and a woman who is ugly enough to know that she is so, knows that she has nothing left for it but her understanding, which is consequently and probably (in more senses than one) her weak side.

    But these are secrets which you must keep inviolably, if you would not, like Orpheus, be torn to pieces by the whole sex; on the contrary, a man who thinks of living in the great world, must be gallant, polite, and attentive to please the women. They have, from the weakness of men, more or less influence in all courts; they absolutely stamp every man’s character in the beau monde, and make it either current, or cry it down, and stop it in payments.

    It is, therefore, absolutely necessary to manage, please, and flatter them: and never to discover the less marks of contempt, which is what they never forgive; but in this they are not singular, for it is the same with men; who will much sooner forgive an injustice than an insult. Every man is not ambitious, or courteous, or passionate; but every man has pride enough in his composition to feel and resent the least slight and contempt. Remember, therefore, most carefully to conceal your contempt, however just, wherever you would not make an implacable enemy. Men are much more unwilling to have their weaknesses and their imperfections known than their crimes; and if you hint to a man that you think him silly, ignorant, or even ill-bred, or awkward, he will hate you more and longer, than if you tell him plainly, that you think him a rogue. Never yield to that temptation, which to most young men is very strong, of exposing other people’s weaknesses and infirmities, for the sake of either of diverting the company, or showing your own superiority. You may get the laugh on your side by it for the present; but you will make enemies by it forever; and those who laugh with you then, will, upon reflection, fear, and consequently hate you; besides that it is ill-natured, and a good heart desires rather to conceal than expose other people’s weaknesses or misfortunes. If you have wit, use it to please, and not to hurt: you may shine, like the sun in the temperate zones, without scorching. Here it is wished for; under the Line it is dreaded.

    These are some of the hints which my long experience in the great world enables me to give you; and which, if you attend to them, may prove useful to you in your journey through it. I wish it may be a prosperous one; at least, I am sure that it must be your own fault if it is not.

    Make my compliments to Mr. Harte, who, I am very sorry to hear, is not well. I hope by this time he is recovered. Adieu!

    Comment by rc — Wed 30th May 2012 @ 3:53 pm


    The bottom line

    He agreed to convict the pair and discharge them without further penalty as long as they made a donation of $200 to the city’s Maori Women’s Refuge over the next three weeks.

    Comment by Down Under — Thu 31st May 2012 @ 5:57 pm

  16. And Stephen, the first five Bachop, made a donation of $500 to Women’s refuge as well. Our courts should be part of the charities commission.

    Comment by Down Under — Thu 31st May 2012 @ 6:51 pm

  17. #15..16..everytime the courts make an order to a charity its always a womens charity..ive never seen an order made to a mens group

    Comment by Ford — Thu 31st May 2012 @ 8:28 pm

  18. #16 Imagine if he’d been found not guilty ? Would Women’s Refuge have been ordered by the Court to give the money back ? hahaha, yeah right !

    Comment by golfa — Fri 1st June 2012 @ 10:02 am

  19. I am surprised that the person was even charged – there guys weren’t:

    Comment by Steve Taylor — Mon 4th June 2012 @ 9:47 am

  20. Steve (#19); thanks for posting this. As we all know; CYFS are above the law. They can do as they please to wreck havoc and administer unimaginable distress and evil into the lives of seemingly responsible, well adjusted families.

    No news here; just a continuation of the litany of lawlessness we’ve come to expect from these creeps. You have to wonder what “hold” CYFS have over certain political figures that allows them to charge on in the relentless pursuit of family destruction and yet never be held to account. Are we to infer from this latest side show, that CYFS might indeed be involved in the pimping of kids for certain public figures at the tax payers expense? Surely not!

    Comment by Bruce S — Mon 4th June 2012 @ 11:28 am

  21. #20..perhaps the hold they have is “Feminist Attack”?

    Comment by Ford — Mon 4th June 2012 @ 12:08 pm

  22. Steve (#19): I have just been reading the account told by the parents of this child. While nothing would surprise me in the secret courts of NZ, and I have no doubt that CYFS and many other NZ agencies have been captured by anti-family and father-blaming philosophies and a confused type of femaleism, I note that the information I have come across has all emanated from the aggrieved parents who use pejorative, extreme language in describing events. Apart from what those parents have reported, I have no understanding of the reasoning of the many authorities whom the parents accuse of corruption, conspiracy and cover-up. It seems unlikely that so many individuals and representatives of various organisations would have adopted similar critical attitudes towards those parents if there were not some basis for this. Nevertheless, if organisations have behaved unethically, dishonestly or inconsistently with their duties then they should be held accountable.

    Comment by Hans Laven — Mon 4th June 2012 @ 12:54 pm

  23. Hi Hans, I would invite you to listen to the Leighton Smith & Danny Watson shows on Newstalk ZB archives at the above link, and / or contact the parents at [email protected]

    I am now on very, very public record as saying that everything the parents have said, and the way they have said it, is true, and can be evidentially proved as true, evidence which includes affidavits of response from the daughter.

    This case has all the hallmarks of qualifying for a Royal Commission of Enquiry into corrupt Social Service and Legal practice, and goes the very highest levels of Government.

    Comment by Steve Taylor — Mon 4th June 2012 @ 1:12 pm

  24. The parents were simply holding reasonable boundaries with thier child, and seeking redress for a crime – and the State deeply resented them for doing both.

    Comment by Steve Taylor — Mon 4th June 2012 @ 1:14 pm

  25. #23..just because someone says its true its not necessarliy true is it?..and as far as affa davits are concerned..they not worth the paper they are written on..especially by a minor and a female at that..and no doubt coached through that process

    Comment by Ford — Mon 4th June 2012 @ 2:27 pm

  26. #23 Steve, I was listening to the interview live on the radio (I’ve since downloaded it for posterity !) and I loved the Father’s last comments. He said something to the effect, “The New Zealand Authorities have 2 options. Either I’m telling the truth, in which case something should be done about these things, or I’m not telling the truth, in which case something should be done about me !”

    Comment by golfa — Mon 4th June 2012 @ 4:13 pm

  27. Ford: Then as Leighton Smith said after I was interviewed, one has to decide who they are going to trust, and whose story they are going to believe – kind of what Golfa has pointed out.

    Comment by Steve Taylor — Mon 4th June 2012 @ 5:02 pm

  28. #27..and an unfortunate reality is most people wish to beleive a bunch of lies

    Comment by Ford — Mon 4th June 2012 @ 5:52 pm

  29. Ford: Which is why it took us 7 years to get this story into the mainstream media – it was our word against the State – I am still almost incredulous that we were able to finally be believed.

    Comment by Steve Taylor — Mon 4th June 2012 @ 7:34 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar