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

Calling out abuse and seeking to resolve conflict

Filed under: General — WayneBurrows @ 10:00 am Tue 14th March 2017

This is a warning to the lengths that police are willing to go to prosecute a man (me). I am not sure how much I should say as the matter is before the court. However I will just state the reasons that I was arrested on Friday which I think many will find concerning.

I was arrested for Criminal Harassment based on a chance meeting with a person that I am in dispute with. I called her “an abusive liar”. The charging document says “HARASSED *********** BY CALLING OUT TO HER …”.

Similarly there is a second charging document that claims “HARASSED ********** BY SENDING NUMEROUS UNSOLICITED EMAILS …”

All except one of the emails were in dialogue with the other party’s lawyer and copied to the other party. That first email included a letter that began

I am writing because I do not think it is too late to resolve our differences amicably.

and concluded with

I hope that you can find a way to deal with these issues with me in an amicable way and that you can take some real responsibility for how you have treated me.

Essentially it seems that the police believe that calling a woman out on her bad behaviour and asking for a resolution is harassment.

Be warned.


  1. Hi Wayne,
    I do feel ashamed to live in a country that criminalizes men for defending themselves or as your experiencing- attempts to resolve a conflict without violence or agression.
    So much so that when I hear our national anthem, I bow my head in shame at the way our men are treated.
    Police do love to charge nz men with anything they can.

    They do this because they are lied to by victims advocates about female victim statistics.

    It’s considered best practise to bring increasingly staggering numbers of men to the dock to keep the numbers of men prosecuted increasing each year.
    Don’t be surprised if you don’t get a fair hearing.
    You may not be able to face your accuser in court. She may be in a room behind the judge with a court appointed puppy on her lap giving evidence via intercom.
    The courts believe it’s easier to have a victim speak truthfully- when it’s predetermined that she IS a victim and speaks without eye to eye contact with a judge who may be able to tell she is not a truthful witness by the shifting of her eyes during testimony.
    Consider this:
    How many less sick days would be taken in NZ each year if we all had to turn up and look the boss in the eye and claim diminished health rather than give testimony by phone?

    I have a strong respect for you Wayne, as I’m aware of your determination to see men’s issues considered.

    I wish you courage through the process your being dragged.

    Comment by Voices back from the bush — Tue 14th March 2017 @ 12:34 pm

  2. Wayne – the deck is stacked against us – the system WANTS conflict and wants as many options available in LAW – to target you. This is a Business – a RACKET – to create conflict, destroy kids – creating more VICTIMS who need more HELP and SOCIAL SERVICES………..and destroying parents and rolling them of their finances is also part of the scam.

    So as we suspected the new Criminal Harassment charges will be used to take out those interfering in BUSINESS.

    Wayne – I had a child deliberately harmed – the lawyer for child was in on the game – caught lying to the courts, manipulating witnesses, withholding evidence and perverting the course of justice = and surprise surprise the POLICE WILL NOT prosecute this player in the game…….the MOTHER was identified as having mental problems and was the cause of the harm to the child – but NO consequence.

    These corrupted psychopaths also removed the defence of PROVOCATION from the law – allowing this to run rampant in the SECRETIVE Family Courts – deliberate of course since it escalates CONFLICT. If the public had any idea what is going on their would be a national outcry = but its all SECRET to protect BUSINESS.

    The family court is no longer looking after the best interest of child – so it is NOT fulfilling its CORE function any longer – rather it is creating more problems – and more destroyed parents.

    The police informant who tried to entrap me – is similarly being protected and will not be prosecuted by our Police – this is the reality we now live in.

    Our Police are NO LONGER there to protect our HUMAN RIGHTS = Common laws, defined by land and Culture – its taken 20 years to change the Culture of the NZ Police – they are only there now to protect the Corporate Business – Debt slavery and incarceration if you do not pay, or if you interfere in this Business.

    This is why only some of us will be ARRESTED – while others will now be PROTECTED………..

    to LIE is now part of the accepted role of engaging in this business – and those who do LIE will never be held to account – I had ten years of LIES and FALSE ACCUSATIONS levelled at me without consequence or punishment – breaches of parenting orders without consequence – the police refuse to arrest a mother …….

    THE LAW – We all Consent to be governed on the basis that our safety and security will be protected for all law abiding citizens. And that the LAW will be applied EQUALLY to ALL.

    We are moving into a time when this is NOT the case – we are NOT being protected and neither are our kids, and the law is no longer being applied EQUALLY…………

    The Police are now acting as the Justice system – determining guilt or innocence – when this is NOT their FUNCTION.

    Comment by hornet — Tue 14th March 2017 @ 2:44 pm

  3. From my experience (30 odd years) it does not pay to get emotionally invested in the fight, they always use that against you! It is vital that you make sure that your objections and experience are recorded, but there is basically a snowball’s chance you will win :-(. You are male, you are in the wrong, it is your fault: her lies carry more weight than your evidence, sorry, but that is just a fact. The tide is turning, and I have to admit that things have got a little better generally, but unfortunately that has meant that the coal-face where you are actually gets tougher as the fear-men-ists try to create false narratives. I wish I could provide some glimmer of hope for you, but these days I just think about trying to make sure my son does not face the same shit that most men have (always have done by the way, but we had a choice back then, lol)

    Comment by bjrodger — Tue 14th March 2017 @ 2:52 pm

  4. Hopefully the judge understands the terms.
    Reasonable person.

    Intent meaning you did not intend to meet her.
    Intent meaning your emails were legitimate.

    Reasonable person would call a person a derogatory term if confronted by thier abuser.
    Reasonable person would email the other persons lawyer on relevant matters without fear of consequence.

    Hope things work out.

    A close friend got the crap beaten out of him, items stolen, and left on the side of a country road at night.
    Police went oh we’ll never mind.
    No witnesses, can’t prove anything.
    Friend went and got his stuff.
    Wrecked offenders car.
    Police came round and asked.
    Are we all even now.
    Friend said yes.
    End of story.
    Police view of male vs male offending I guess.

    If however a women is involved.
    Even trivial things are like the world is ending.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Tue 14th March 2017 @ 3:13 pm

  5. “All except one of the emails were in dialogue with the other party’s lawyer and copied to the other party.”
    There’s your first mistake. If she’s “copied” in, they she can quite rightly claim that you are harassing her with unsolicited emails. You should ONLY write to her Lawyer because if her Lawyer passes on your emails, they are not from you AND the Lawyer will charge her every time she forwards an email to her. Learn how to play the “game”.

    Comment by golfa — Tue 14th March 2017 @ 6:53 pm

  6. So, as far as police are concerned if you are male in NZ you no longer have a right to free speech if some woman claims to feel ‘harassed’ by it, or to communicate with any female with criticism in non-threatening ways even when there is no so-called ‘protection’ order. Interesting development.

    Wayne, I encourage you to see this through and if you are willing to invite media to the hearing. There is a good chance if you get a sensible judge (s)he will see the implications of these ridiculous charges and you will win the case. However, you will suffer without compensation the time, stress and expense you will have been put through.

    Comment by Man X Norton — Tue 14th March 2017 @ 7:15 pm

  7. Man 44 in custody after package blown up at police station.

    Comment by downunder — Tue 14th March 2017 @ 7:41 pm

  8. The current Criminal [IN]justice System is ruled over by feminist politicians and serviced by corrupt judiciary who operate under the “never let truth get in the way of a conviction” banner and if you are male in receipt of allegations made by a female you are basically screwed. Our prisons are full of the casualties of sexual allegations (COSA) and the system shows them no sympathy. If they protest their innocence whilst in prison they are punished twice. Once for being found guilty in Court and twice for bucking the system by not accepting their guilt.

    Comment by JONO — Tue 14th March 2017 @ 8:39 pm

  9. I can provide a GLIMMER OF HOPE

    Fight it ! Period. Just don’t have any contact in any form or your an IDIOT.

    Next you can show the judge there is no malice in your emails, and whatever the fuck you are trying to reconcile, Don’t Leave it the hell alone. Then next, go to a camera shop or JB HiFi and buy an Olympus digital voice recorder WS 110. Then go to the police and ask to speak to someone about the charges ( the officer in charge of file) then record your questioning about the case. These come with 2 microphones, one of them you can tape to your body, or hide inside the case of your spectacles if you wear them. Don’t give a shit about legal, what you want to find out is if there is bias toward you and no justification for charge then you can You Tube it! But first make sure you ask all the right questions and SLOW down your speech and BOOM! you got em. I did it against the Police commander of Auckland Central nailed his ass about my file. Make sure you catch em red handed then wait till they deny any and all and then youtube it and send to everyone at the same time. Good Luck and stay the FUCK away from her.

    Comment by brent — Wed 15th March 2017 @ 5:17 am

  10. Yeah and GUYS

    If I wanted negativity about what’s wrong with the system, it seems you get more sympathy from women’s refuge SO, please try and be PRO – ACTIVE instead of RE-ACTIVE, that is why people come here for “support” yeah, HELLO.

    Comment by brent — Wed 15th March 2017 @ 5:22 am

  11. We all KNOW the system is shit but coming here to confirm it is stating the obvious ya think!

    Comment by brent — Wed 15th March 2017 @ 5:23 am

  12. After a call from my daughter when her mother had pushed out of a door and onto the ground causing her injuries I contacted CYPS, being asssured they would thourghly investigate the allegation. Two days later the young lady called me back and informed me that it was my fault and the could find no wrong doing on my ex-wife behalf. I asked how she could come to this conclusion and whether she had spoken to my daughter. She told me that she didn’t need to speak to my daughter to investigate the incident as this would cause her undue stress and harm and had only spoken to the mother by phone who told her that I was not providing enough support in caring for the children. I thought this somewhat odd as I had care of the children every weekend, paying for all my daughters extra curricular activities and that the ex-wife wouldn’t allow me in her house or any where near it. I asked if the situation was reversed and if my ex-wife had made the allegation would I be given such lattitude, from what I could make of her answer I was being sexist and it was obvious from my attitude I was causing my ex undue stress and that I should be more supportive and understanding of my ex-wife situation.

    Comment by John — Mon 20th March 2017 @ 11:51 am

  13. How the hell is it your fault.
    You were not present when the incident took place.
    Even if you provided no support that does not justify bad behaviour by the mother.

    What happens next depends on if you wish to rock the boat or not.

    You could make a compliant to CYPS.
    Ask how it was your fault as you were not there.
    Ask at what level of support by you no longer justifies the mother being abusive.
    Did the CYPS worker physically check the child for injuries! Why not?
    Did the CYPS worker check the level of support you were providing?
    To see if the mother was lying.
    Ask how you were being sexist as clearly it is the CYPS worker that is sexist.
    Exposed by her response.

    At least your daughter knows what happened and she won’t blame you.
    It’s just the adults that are bigots.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Mon 20th March 2017 @ 2:56 pm

  14. I’ll try to answer some of your questions and clarify other issues. Firstly I spent over 10 years being physically and emotionally abused by my ex-wife and before I left which I did only after she started hitting me in front of the children I witnessed her using force on the children at least twice, this was before the anti-smacking laws.
    Now you ask why didn’t I do something, the answer is simple she is a primary school teacher, the only persona anyone saw was the wonderful caring sensitve woman who adored children, only I saw the woman who called our children the little shits (it was quite hilarious when let this slip during a meeting with both our lawyers and a court arbritrator.)
    When my daughter called me after the above incident I was at this time trying to settle custody issues, after this call I rang my lawyer who advised me to ring CYPS which of course I did, following the CYPS investigation I sought further advice from my lawyer who told me to be wary and step carefully based on the way she had manipulated the situation and could most likely lay sexual-physical abuse allegations against me which I would most likely have very little or no chance of defending myself against.
    My daughter was not questioned or examined for any injuries as according to the CYPS worker would cause the child emotional harm.
    As I said the only investigation done was a call to the ex-wife, at no time was I consulted or questioned about this incident or other incidents. The case worker was dismisive of anything I said. She never quite explained how it was my fault other than the fact I was not giving her enough support.
    During the Stalin era in Russia they had a law called Article 52 of the Russian Penal Code quite simply put you are guilty, if you neighbour was dealing on the black market and you didn’t know about it you were guilty of being complicit of the crime because as a good citizen you should have known about it and reported it, it was a great law everyone was guilty unless you could prove yourself not guilty which only a guilty person would try to do so therefore you must be guilty.

    Comment by John — Mon 20th March 2017 @ 6:25 pm

  15. John @ 12: Incredible. Assuming your account is accurate, this would deserve a complaint to the Social Workers Registration Board. You will need the name of the social worker. The social workers Code of Conduct and information about making complaints is here. It’s important to use the available processes to hold CYF staff to account, and even if the Board finds a way of excusing or justifying this social worker’s unbalanced and inadequate investigation and sexist behaviour, making the complaint lets them know they’re under scrutiny.

    Our state has chosen a system to force ‘separated’ (usually discarded) fathers to contribute to their children by paying the mother or paying the state to reimburse it for paying the mother. That extortion leaves many men impoverished. The system doesn’t care about fathers’ suicides or economic destruction, only that women are able to keep exploiting men they have thrown out of family units or never started a family unit with. The system doesn’t care about children’s needs in that that it isn’t at all interested in promoting fathers’ contact with children but instead provides incentives for mothers to keep the children most of the time, because that will entitle mothers to maximum government and/or so-called ‘child support’ money.

    It’s ridiculous then for women including CYF feminazis to complain about the support that men provide regarding children.

    Comment by Man X Norton — Mon 20th March 2017 @ 6:46 pm

  16. Unfortunately the incident occured in 2011 so probaly a little late to lay a complaint and also at that stage was coping with a custody dispute, some major earthquakes and the advice of the lawyer not to persue it and with reflection would agree with his advice as my ex-wife could make Santa look like a child abusing sexual deviant.
    As for that invidious system called child support I do everything I can not to pay it and now owe over $20 000.00
    I am not a deliquent father who has abandoned his children.
    I do this for the reason that my children should get the money not my ex-wife.
    When I left my wife she imediately had a guy move in with her, as a school teacher she earns $50 000, her boyfriend earns about $40 000, a combined income of $90 000. I was struggling to earn $30 000 and as my ex refuses to support the children in anything but the basics I took upon myself to support my eldest daughter’s pursuit of a career as a ballerina $100 per week $1000.00 per term $4000.00 a year plus exam fee’s, leotards, ballet slippers etc., on top of this untill 2011 I had care of my daughters every weekend.
    After the custody hearing in 2011 I reliquinsed 1 weekend a month because she claimed she had no quality time with the girls.
    At one stage in 2010 after berating IRD about unfairness of the system they advised me seek an admin review which I did. I received a letter some time latter stating I had good grounds for a review and a hearing had been scheduled. On the Friday before the hearing IRD rang me to say that my wife’s response to the review had been held up and would not be available to me for the hearing. When I arrived at the hearing the first thing I was told was that I had no grounds for a review, nobody had ever been granted a review and I certainly would not be the first one, and spent the next hour being grilled about a tax return a few years previous. Later I received letter on the outcome of the reveiw and that I on no grounds could appeal this decision.
    This morning I had my latest clash with IRD. I am currently on unemployment benefit getting $210 a week and up to this week have been paying $52 child support, I put in income assesment about 10 days ago, on Friday I received a deduction notice increasing the payment to $75 a week. My simple guestion to IRD this morning was how come my income can be reduced by 66% and my payments increase 50%. What’s even more irksome is the fact is I am 2 days short of 104 days per year and am assesed as having no dependant children, I guess the two ghosts who turn up 3 out 4 weekends are figments of a deluded mind.

    Comment by John — Mon 20th March 2017 @ 9:25 pm

  17. I don’t think there is any time limit to lay a complaint.

    Your nightmare with the IRD is one that many others share but that may not make it easier to cope with.

    Hang in there. You sound like a good dad.

    Comment by Man X Norton — Mon 20th March 2017 @ 10:18 pm

  18. #16 is an interesting situation.

    You’re not on an umemployment benefit, you are on a job seekers allowance $75.00 of which is assigned to the IRD.

    First this discriminates against you as it reduces your capacity to graze at the supermarket, and seek employment, alongside others seeking work. (Leave the children out of the equation)

    What’s more important is the one off effect. The first week $75.00 goes to the IRD who then give it to the government, who give it back to WINZ, who give it to you next week.

    The next week the IRD says, we’ve collected $150.00 child support and adds that to their supposed productivity, but it’s the same $75.00 in a money spin.

    In reality after the first payment they are neither collecting tax or reducing child support. It’s the sort of non compliance IRD look out for in tax evasion, but here they are doing exactly that.

    What the IRD is doing is reducing government expenditure, not their role, not their reason for existence.

    It’s just another way men are butchered in a feminist society.

    This is not the first time I’ve heard this story, but in other cases the behavior appears to be related to the big stick mentality of the special collection unit.

    It made me wonder whether this unit still reports to the IRD, or directly to the Minister.

    I know some men have taken this up with their case managers but the standard line is, we can’t do anything about it, these decisions are made upstairs, go to a community law office, it’s free.

    You can see how WINZ is being manipulated to allow financial attacks on individual men, and I would also suspect that there is an unhealthy relationship between the Family Court and the Special Child Support Unit.

    Comment by Downunder — Thu 30th March 2017 @ 10:49 am

  19. It made me wonder whether this unit still reports to the IRD or directly to the Minister.

    Even the bunnies at the IRD would be able to see the accounting nightmere this would create for them. I’m guessing this is why we had a special child support unit set up, prior to the new legislation.

    It’s a win win for the Minister of Revenue, in terms of reducing imaginary penalties, and reducing government expenditure by almost the same amount.

    There also appears to be a problem in such cases getting child support statements.

    I’m wondering #16 if you are still receiving yours?

    This is important in analysing partial slavery, and how this might develop, so there’s every reason to avoid documentary evidence.

    But there’s also a point at which any prudent IRD Commissioner would say “this is beyond just doing your job”,

    If that is the case, and what is happening here, is a direct consequence of the instructions of the Minister and not the activity of ‘Inland Revenue’ Department, well that could be pivotal in getting some traction on this Child Support Sham.

    Comment by Downunder — Thu 30th March 2017 @ 11:25 am

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