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

Miscariage of justice? My story.

Filed under: Domestic Violence,Gender Politics,Law & Courts — TKnudsen @ 3:21 pm Tue 2nd January 2018

Hi there. My name is Thomas Francis Knudsen. I took a plea deal after 13 months of maintaining a not guilty plea.

The straw that broke the camels back was that I ended up in Wellington prison among some unsavory characters where I was threatened with getting beaten up almost immediately upon arrival from a transfer from prison in Christchurch (it was OK in Christchurch). The cruelest irony of this was that I was imprisoned for calling the police after my accuser said she was sorry and was going to kill herself.

My appearance in court for which I was remanded, the crown prosecutor painted a picture of me that was nonsense and also claimed someone called the police, rather than me. I don’t get why they do things like this. I barely got time to talk with my lawyer beforehand and he didn’t know to rebut what was said, I didn’t get an opportunity to put forward my side to the judge. I was remanded abruptly.

The media upon sentencing reported the claims of the police as fact even though the judge had acknowledged problems with the claims, not one mention of that made it in the report. I have tried to get them to amend the report and requested they look at the transcript for themselves. They refused, even saying it’s not their job to verify the police claims…

To put it blunt. I was assaulted on the night of my arrest, told to kill myself and prevented from leaving. My accuser embellished the truth with numerous lies, for which I sadly believe her motive was to create a scenario in which her previous ex would be there for her. There’s multiple things that suggest that was the case.

The police made matters much worse by asserting things to be true which they could have easily proven false, making me think they were incompetent or complicit in doing everything they could to increase likelihood of conviction, in order for them to make the claims they did, something majorly wrong has occurred. They put out a number of documents, one comically titled “summary of facts” which was almost entirely nonfactual. Some of which is easily provable so and I know if it was further investigated, there would be a lot of questions to be asked of my accuser and the police. It appears police jumped to the conclusion of guilt and tried to make things fit even though they didn’t. Rather than admit things don’t add up and question my accuser, they doubled down.

If you Google my name to see the reports made about me, you’ll understand my frustration at what has occurred. Knowing it’s not true has not helped me, it’s arguably made it much worse. I don’t know what to do, I’m broken and disheartened that this could happen. It has opened my eyes up to a justice system that has been failing so many.

Had my lawyer informed me what might happen in regards to the media reporting inaccurate police claims as fact. I’d have never taken a plea deal, even if it meant getting beaten by the two gangs I was put in prison with in Wellington.

Also my lawyer said that a stopping violence intiative started the day before my arrest, whether that affected the police to get this wrong, I don’t know.

I’d appreciate anything constructive. Questions, criticisms, advice, the works.

Thank you for your time


  1. It is interesting that the media is very busy with the Scott Watson case but won’t look at your transcript?

    Comment by Downunder — Wed 3rd January 2018 @ 2:32 pm

  2. Hi Thomas, Yes the media sure painted you up as a monster, they are not concerned with facts, just selling stories as click bait for advertisements. You have also realised once police have lined up an offender,(male) all evidence that leads them away from their original hypothesis is ignored or supressed.
    I’ve been through this too and discovered why they don’t call them courts of justice, just courts of law.
    There is so much money to be made by lawyers prosecutors and judges, victims advocates, social workers and counsellors by repeating the “woman victim v man perpetrator’ mantra , you were just another man to go through the mince grinder.

    I have been through similar but was not convicted, I am one of the few “lucky” ones.

    I have spent almost four years dealing with anger and resentment as a result of being falsely accused, so I feel compelled to offer you some suggestions.

    What you are feeling is more difficulty than I had to deal with so I’d suggest you are a man at risk of further problems arising from understandable resentment.

    Most people assume the convicted are guilty beyond doubt especially the media. Its brave of you to come to these pages and tell of what happened regardless of that.
    If you have compelling evidence that you have been falsely convicted go through the appeals process.
    If you have evidence police acted wrongly take it to the IPCA, but don’t take it personally when they also ignore facts and deny your appeals.

    Stay right away from relationships until you can be sure that your not being led into another similar situation, you may not be guilty of what you were charged with but I’m sure you have made mistakes that you regret. join the MGTOW movement and realise your just fine by yourself and that its not someone else that will complete you, especially now you know where it will stick when shit hits the fan.
    Buy a boat and do it up, find a Datsun 120y motor and drop it into a Honda civic, make your own furnature, – anything that takes your mind away from the resentment and the anger of being falsely accused.
    Write out the full story of what happened from start to finish, your still a young man, let it go, if you can. if not, keep talking about it, these pages are free, and so is advice from those of us that wish you strength and courage, many end up back in prison through some resentment crime. Don’t be that guy.

    Comment by voices back from the bush. — Wed 3rd January 2018 @ 2:59 pm

  3. TK unfortunately you like many others “did a plea deal” be cause our “justice” system is so slow and inflexible. As part of that deal you pleaded guilty to the allegations and by default accept the “summary of facts” as described by the Police to assist their prosecution. From the newspaper accounts your lawyer did you no favours in your defense but the outcome you got was pretty extraordinary light given the level of allegations against you.

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Thu 4th January 2018 @ 11:55 am

  4. Good advice from Voices #2
    Write your version of the story and the process and the learnings you gained. Then let it go, maybe ceremonially burn it. Keep the lessons learnt close, leave the event(s) and the hurt behind.

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Thu 4th January 2018 @ 11:59 am

  5. @3 I totally disagree with that Allan.

    The plea bargain is a mechanism to obtain a guilty plea in exchange for the prosecution NOT perusing more serious charges.

    The summary of facts is presented after the event, and unless the defendant has seen and agreed to that he hasn’t accepted it.

    It is possible that there was never sufficient evidence to prosecute the higher degree of charge and the summary of facts was manufacturered to give the illusion that this situation existed.

    In reality this is the interference of Feminist Civil Law in Criminal proceedings, and the opportunity to present a statement of defence has transitioned into a hole where corruption can persecute by a statement of accusation, rather than a summary of facts.

    Comment by Downunder — Thu 4th January 2018 @ 2:12 pm

  6. Happy New Year Downunder
    The summary of allegations (aka facts to Police prosecutions seeking to intimidate for a plea bargain) is part of the discovery process early on in the court process. Unless you object strongly, and using legal aid or crown defender that isn’t easy, it becomes “truth” by repetition. But if you enter into the plea bargain game and do a deal it then becomes “truth”. I have a much less charitable view of our boys and girls in blue than you carry downunder.

    Police Prosecutions perceive their job as to get convictions. Notions of truth and justice are naive. Prosecutions also try to save money and are very open to over charging, offering a deal, quick guilty plea, lets not bother testing the evidence and get matters handled quickly. When contact with children, ability to return to a job, avoiding dead time on remand are used as tactics to extort acceptance of unfair, unreasonable and often unethical deals accused people crumble.

    With fixed fees for legal aid, the Public Defenders office acting as a loosely supervised finishing school for junior lawyers and the delay delay delay nature of court proceedings it take a strong willed person to hold out for notions of fairness, right, and testing of evidence before a group of ones peers.

    Comment by allan harvey — Thu 4th January 2018 @ 4:24 pm

  7. totally agree with this Allan, lots of dads on remand with or without bail, unable to get their evidence together or right because the blues are not confirming exactly what the charges are, many taking quick exit guilty pleas but then not allowed to see their children by cyfs or other reasons…… there are a few really good public defender lawyers in Auckland, but only a few. 🙁

    Comment by realkiwi — Mon 8th January 2018 @ 1:06 pm

  8. Father and Child has a free Anger Management Correspondence Course – we are only just keeping up at the moment so we don’t sing about it, but it can be started asap and done in 8 weeks, possibly over the email/phone….
    it may not well known, but it is done and we get great feedback from many guys who do this while on remand or inside…
    some of our guys get a better sentence cause they prove they found, enrolled and completed a dad or anger course, take the certs to the lawyer and get into the family court asap to get kids contact again…


    Comment by realkiwi — Mon 8th January 2018 @ 1:16 pm

  9. Allan Harvey”comments suggestions are good and accurate.
    Thee is a further consideration: is your Ex banging a cop?
    We see this kind of behavior from the Police, just ask Louise Nicholas. Read about the cops in City Under Siege.

    Comment by Bradley Petherick — Mon 22nd January 2018 @ 12:17 am

  10. I have a few problems with the OP’s story as outlined above.
    First off is this “The police made matters much worse by asserting things to be true which they could have easily proven false”.
    Why did you not instruct your lawyer to shoot down these “false” stories if they were so easily disproved?

    Next would be this “I barely got time to talk with my lawyer beforehand and he didn’t know to rebut what was said, I didn’t get an opportunity to put forward my side to the judge. I was remanded abruptly.”
    Did you in fact spend the entire 13 months on remand or did you go in front of judge again a few days later after talking to your appointed lawyer and get bail?
    I know this is a menz focused site ,but i am having trouble seeing any sort of miscarriage of justice here with what you have posted and the media reports being very similar.
    If you could perhaps find your way clear to clearing up my 2 issues above it would go a long way to making this picture clearer.

    Comment by Jack Williams — Mon 29th January 2018 @ 10:38 am

  11. #10 Jack
    I think you need to read a little deeper into this case.
    He faced very serous and bizarre accusations and bail was not given.
    This case made the news globally.

    A closer look will expose the accusations for what they could only be.
    Pure fantasy.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Mon 29th January 2018 @ 11:14 am

  12. DJ i appreciate your view but i have had a reasonable amount of experience in both family and criminals courts and the OP is making out like he was locked up on the word of the police and the judge had no say in the matter.
    Police do not lock people up long term , JUDGES do.
    Just because a story seems strange and far fetched does not make it false.
    Now having read the OP at the top and judge Bouchiers summing up i would have to ask myself why he pleaded guilty .
    I know the stock answer seems to be for ease , but i have found this to be incorrect in real life.
    If the OP was in fact remanded into custody for the whole 13 months (i can not see that anywhere though) and he still came out with home D and community work then the judge clearly saw this as a very serious incident.
    I suspect though we have only part of the story from the OP as i believe he was in fact BAILED some days after the original arrest.

    Comment by Jack Williams — Mon 29th January 2018 @ 6:17 pm

  13. Just one more thing to add and i hope the OP comes to clear the air.
    I would suggest that the OP was given bail and then went on to breach said bail conditions and this was what caused his visit to Wellington prison.
    Please OP can you come and clear some of this up.

    Comment by Jack Williams — Mon 29th January 2018 @ 6:21 pm

  14. He did say what happened.
    He was arrested due to the event he was accused of.
    He rang the police and was re-arrested for doing that. Indicating she contacted him, said she was sorry (what for?) and said she was suicidle. He was arrested for breaching bail for contacting her? This is a common tactic especially in FC cases an example being Sid who set fire to himself at parliament.
    Your correct in that bail is often arranged at first appearance but sometimes it’s not, based on the severity or expectation of imprisonment for the offence, 3 1/2 years prison asked for. Bail can also be denied if no housing available or psychological examination is required and that also seems to be done as the cliam of a mental health issue is noted.

    How can you present evidence such as social media accounts when they found no evidence regarding them but claimed he did it anyway.
    Why did the Judge make negative comments about the cliams made by police?

    These cases are he said/ she said cases and deserve to be treated as such.
    Endless examples on this site talk about “she said” is concrete evidence while the males comments are ignored. There is no doubt that the domestic violence industry has a very high and very sexually biased record of miscarriages of justice.
    Did you notice the part where he said HE was assaulted.
    How much were her cliams a attempt to shift blame for his injuries.
    No officer, he attacked me, he sat on me for two hours (really long time) except for when he let me go to the toilet, then I returned to the bed and let me sit on me agian. How did he get the cut officer? Well ummm, well he cut himself because he wanted me to drink his blood. Sounds better and far more realistic than me cutting him.
    Why would he post this if everything was fair and balanced.
    Answer he wouldn’t.

    You are correct the some of his comments could be clarified or explained better but he is only human.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Mon 29th January 2018 @ 10:02 pm

  15. The post title is also important.

    Regardless of what it means in a legal sense, it also reflects what the man feels about his situation, and what it means in a male sense.

    My experience is men regard justice more in a sense of right or wrong where as women (as Jim would say operate on the revenge scale) lean toward achieving their desired outcome to right what they have decided was wrong.

    Comment by Downunder — Tue 30th January 2018 @ 3:20 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