Written By: - Date published: 4:20 pm, February 13th, 2009 - 108 comments
Categories: crime, racism -
Tags: bruce emery, garth mcvicar, pihema cameron, sensible sentencing trust
Bruce Emery’s sentence of just four years and three months on a reduced charge of manslaughter for chasing 15 year old Pihema Cameron 300 metres down the street and stabbing him to death with a knife is a stark reminder of the institutional racism that still exists in this country.
Let’s not pretend for a second that Emery would have got off so lightly if he was an unemployed Maori and his victim a middle class Pakeha child, tagger or not.
And he certainly would not have gained the enthusiastic support of the so-called Sensible Sentencing Trust, whose spokesman Garth McVicar defended Emery as “a decent hard working citizen [who] is facing a murder charge because of his frustration over this issue” and argued he shouldn’t have to serve any time at all.
Some will no doubt baulk at the use of the term ‘racism’, New Zealanders don’t like to believe that such a thing exists in this country. But really, there’s no other way to describe what happened in the Emery case.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
Brett,
Please show an example of someone speaking against long sentences. If what you say is true, it won’t be a problem for you to find a couple of comments to demonstrate it.
Felix:
Im not about to do your homework for you, you have been on this blog for a long time, you know that whenever someone calls for tougher sentences here, they get jumped on and its explained that tougher sentences don’t work.
Also look at the abuse that the sensible sentencing trust has gotten here.
But now all of a sudden four years is not long enough, its racism, if you ask me.
Siaosi
That is in no way the same, except for the use of a weapon.
Tane
Stats and Hard Data are needed, how about some? instead of emotion.
Yet no comment on the four years that Curtis senior received for his part in the death of Nia Glassie or on his total refusal to admit he did anything wrong.
So lets see if I have this right…White man kills brown boy..racist murder
Brown man kills brown baby……….no mention of it.
I guess nothing is sacred when you lot are our to score cheap (and nasty) political points.
Brett,
How can I prove a negative? You made the claim, not me. I can’t recall reading any opposition to long sentences here, especially not for killing people.
Twice now you’ve claimed that this happens here frequently. I think you’re confused.
Now stop being a child and back up your statement.
Felix:
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So you cant recall any post that is against longer jail sentences?????
Can you recall any posts against the sensible sentences trust??
handmirror seems to agree with the racist interpretation
http://thehandmirror.blogspot.com/2009/02/im-hearing-white-privilege-all-over.html
Brett, nice that this topic is giving you so many laughs, but perhaps you should give it a rest now – you’re starting to look like jtf trying to “score cheap (and nasty) political points”.
Felix, Brett may be thinking of me, perhaps? I’ve certainly argued here and elsewhere that longer sentences per se don’t make a difference.
Since a fair proportion of violent crimes are carried out either a) under the influence of drugs, b) while “seeing red” as Emery clearly was, or c) both a & b, the ridiculous nonsense that judges spout at sentencing about there needing to be “a message of deterrence” over and above what the particular individual deserves is frankly laughable.
Do these learned adjudicators really believe that someone so off balance as to be tipped into a murderous rage by something as physically unthreatening as graffiti; or someone high on P and desperate for money for their next fix, truly stops for one second and says “Oh, hang on, Judge Beak handed down a nine year sentence last week for what I’m about to do. I’d better just go home and have a lie down”?
I don’t think any judge does, so they are effectively colluding with our politicians to delude the pubic into thinking the way the system presently functions has the answers to keep them safe.
As an aside, I spend a good deal of my life trying to make people re-think their gut reactions to crime and the fact that Brett did so in this instance is something for which he should be commended, not damned (that’s not directed at you, Felix).
Meanwhile Billy posits:
Have I missed something? (which is quite possible, being out of the country). Isn’t Emery what might broadly be termed “middle class”? Certainly his attitude to property suggests so.
Brett,
“Can you recall any posts against the sensible sentences trust??”
Yes of course, but not over the length of sentences. I think you’re confused.
You seem to have completely missed that the outrage expressed at Emery’s sentence is due to a perception of inconsistency in sentencing.
Rex,
“Brett may be thinking of me, perhaps?”
It’s possible, but I think Brett is mistaking an argument against knee-jerk “tough on crime” rhetoric for an argument about actual practicalities of sentencing. If he’d been referring to you I’m sure he would’ve said so.
Btw I do enjoy your perspectives on these justice and crime issues Rex, always interesting and insightful.
It depends on the crime. I think you would find a great deal of support for increased sentences for white collar crime.
Otherwise, the arguments for increased sentences as they occur in New Zealand are usually stupid. Either people thinking that New Zealand should bring back the death penalty or adopt American style sentencing. In general, if we are talking about violent crimes and someone is proposing more than a 30% increase or decrease in average sentence, you can be sure that its just a kneejerk reaction.
But the majority of arguments from the left for decreased sentences are for crimes caused by economic hardship and a perceived lack of a stake in society. We all know who commits these crimes, and as a society we should find something better for them to do.
Vigilantism is to be discouraged at all costs, and potential vigilantes are usually people with enough of a stake in society to be deterred by a stiff sentence. There are plenty of New Zealanders who are just waiting for the opportunity to wreak state-sanctioned violence on perceived “evildoers”. They’re the kind of idiots that think Texas is a civilized place.
Sorry, I’ve been out having a few quiets. Don’t have time to respond to all of the criticisms right now, will try to later if I have time. Re the class vs race thing, I see class and race as mutually reinforcing – if you’re poor you suffer racism far worse, and if you’re brown and working class you’re also victim to forms of oppression that your working class whites don’t have to deal with.
As for the “why are you arguing for longer sentences?” remark, I’m not. I don’t believe the current prison system, the length of sentences or even the concept of prison as we know it is a good thing. But I think a more fundamental democratic issue of fairness and equality is at stake here. People shouldn’t be getting more lenient treatment for killing someone merely because they are white and rich and their victim is brown and poor.
The lawyer for Emery makes me sick with his attitude. Telling the family to just “get over it” is incredibly heartless. Then moaning about the financial woes of Emery’s family when he owns two properties.
I know his job as a defence lawyer is to represent his client as best he can, but this really takes the cake. My word it makes me angry.
What was the name of the guy in the 80s who came out of prison, did another burglary with a gun and was deemed to have committed murder because he took the gun, so therefore ‘intended to use it’? I dont see how this man can be said to have committed manslaughter – for what purpose other than use did he carry the knife?
Nicely put Rex, all the best in your work. As Tane notes, the issue in this one is not so much sentence length but consistency and the perception of equal treatment.
And I’d chuck into the mix the effect of the unprecedented blossoming of right-wing hatemongering and irresponsible journalism we’ve seen in recent years: I don’t know Emery from a bar of soap, but if he’s a kiwiblog browser, talkback fan or Herald reader, then a portion of that poor kid’s blood is on a lot more hands than just his. Just “fomenting merry mischief” you say Pontious Farrar? Cute, but sorry old son, those stains are indelible.
Sprout: “the sentence needs to be re-visited or the fallout will be particularly nasty.”
Either way no one wins. If the sentence is commuted, Camerons’ family or a street gang will extract their pound of flesh.
If the sentence is held or lengthened, the Sensibles will scream, shout and arangue for Emery’s release – or possibly even break him out by force.
I may have mentioned it before, but is it going to take a major social Chernobyl – ie, Los Angeles 1992 or Greece 2008 – to jolt the warring factions to their senses?
Joshua: it seems symbolic of a wider problem of rank discrimination.
IDS: Dean Wickliffe, maybe?
Oh f@$k I really want to do a come-sky joke but my Mum is a …ska so I won’t.
If not pure racism, then an affiliation by the judge with the accused surely applies? Both are grey and balding with families, scared of youth, taggers (oh how evil they are), the brown, rappers, skate boarders, and of course instant death to Boy Racers (but not once they own a Porche or Merc or BMW).
What would a 20yr old from Sth Auckland get if they did an armed bank robbery?
In Christchurch if you are white (dads a mason?) & went to St Andrews ($10K per year) you would get home detention.
Bruce Emery is a hero.
Emery stood up to the Labour electorate and refused to be intimidated. He protected his family and his property from a welfare-guzzling, violent criminal.
Pihema Cameron is just one less burden on Kiwi taxpayers that we’re thankful to be rid of; one less scumbag committing crime against decent Kiwis while sucking back welfare generation after generation.
[this is, without a doubt, the most disgusting thing I've ever read on this blog. And we regularly get spam from child pornographers. Simon, I'm only letting your comment through so others can see that people like you exist and be aware that we must be vigilant against your type. SP]
Whoops should have said. the “mitigating factor” the judge believed was that the ex-STAC old boy was threatened in the Christchurch Casino. That’s right, the boys set on him, in the only place in Christchurch under 24/7 CCTV and no video was presented to support this.
Deepred: If the sentence is held or lengthened, the Sensibles will scream, shout and arangue for Emery’s release – or possibly even break him out by force.
Force? Garth and the boys storming Paremoreno? You’ve got to be joking Deepo: redneck motivation is pure, scurrilous, momentary, adrenalin rush. Adolf and the KKK may adorn their peeling walls, but history’s eviscerated their tiny balls: I await with dreary anticipation the findings of some future study outlining the inevitable correlation between middle-aged pakeha male embrace of tory ideology and masturbation.
How predictable & pathetic that someone would suggest racism in the sentencing!
He hardly got off lightly given that he was chasing vandals off his property.
Taggers are bullies. They realise that people are too scared of getting bashed to do anything. They prey on communities and destroy other peoples property for their own amusement.
They realise that if caught they will probably get diversion or a minimal sentence of community work.
I’m not convinced at all that if a white kid was stabbed after tagging a Marae the stabber would get a longer sentence than what Emery got. I also suspect the media would emphasise the fact that the guy was engaged in a disrespectful and criminal activity which provoked the angry response.
“Joshua
February 13, 2009 at 10:50 pm
The lawyer for Emery makes me sick with his attitude. Telling the family to just “get over it’ is incredibly heartless. Then moaning about the financial woes of Emery’s family when he owns two properties.
I know his job as a defence lawyer is to represent his client as best he can, but this really takes the cake. My word it makes me angry.”
I thought the lawyer was unbelievably insensitive based on the excerpts on the news.
I do feel sorry for Emery’s family though. Generally defendants qualify for legal aid, but Emery was one of the exceptions who had some assets so wouldn’t have been eligible. The costs of the defence would have been ruinous.
I won’t state an opinion about whether the sentence was racist or not, even though, on the face of it, I thought the sentence was quite light.
Trying to prove an argument with a sample of one case is hard to do.
What is needed is detailed statistics showing for instance:
The race of the offender
The income of the offender
The previous criminal history of the offender
The likely ongoing threat of the offender to the community
Enough cases to be statistically significant would be required. Then there would be a more compelling basis to make an argument for institutional racism. If we are going to argue on the basis of just one case, then as above, others will point to examples of cases that prove the exact opposite so the debate becomes meaningless.
I read this post with a heavy heart, reading the messages I almost despair.
The subject of this post is racism. Implied or real it does exist in this country.
When this crime first occurred how many of us just assumed that the tagger was Polynesian? I did. Racism, or conditioning from the constant barrage of stories about Polynesians and Maoris misbehaving?
I was mildly surprised that the attacker was euro. And my initial thoughts regarding him were “you poor b*stard”. No sentence would have been long enough for some or short enough for others.
How did we get to this point?
Putting aside skin colour I will try and explain what I think the problem is.
As a 43 year old I still remember vividly how the young interacted with the police, teachers and parents 30 years ago.
The police were on foot and if they caught you doing something stupid you got a clip around the ear or you were dragged home for something a bit heavier than a clip. We had boundaries and crossing those boundaries had consequences. The same applied at school.
Removing consequences and discipline has seen the tragic conclusion in this story.
Taking the commodores, speed guns and ticket books of the cops would be a good start, reintroducing corporal punishment in schools would be another.
Using this tragic case to blame whitey for everything is beneath the author of this post and is in a similar vein to the antics of Brendan Sheehan attempting to launch a political career over the corpse of a dead woman.
There is a another way. The further definition of murder in section 168 of the Crimes Act. It couldn’t apply to the Emery case, and it could apply to the Fotu case.
Anyone have the stats of sentences handed out by this judge, what is his history?
it’s blatantly obvious that something is wrong here, how can a middle aged man chase two teenagers 300 metres down the road, stab one to death, then get four years prison?? im sorry, but that sounds like a complete crock to me, especially when hearing that he was emotionless in the dock. he should be held accountable for his actions, and that he is guilty of murder
The debate seems to have missed the most compelling point regarding leniency for Emery. He was described early on as being a “good Christian.” And everyone knows that being so is proof that you are above reproach. Right????
Herald reports Emery could be eligible for home detention in 11 months
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10556726
What’s odd is that the reported comments by judge Justice Williams seem to suggest Emery should have received a much stiffer sentence than he got.
The sentence reeks of inconsistencies.
“Rex Widerstrom
February 13, 2009 at 5:38 pm
I’d argue it’s an issue of class more than race, Tane.”
Indeed, and that’s why Tane’s counterfactual is deceptive. If he wants to isolate race as a factor he needs to hold other factors, like social class, constant.
So instead the comparison would be:
A 53 year old Maori business man Mr Tapsell is at home with his wife of 20 years and young daughters. His wife is preparing food for an indonesian church the next day. He lives in a poor white suburb and is the owner of an upholstery business he runs from home. His garage is regularly tagged.
About 11pm he sees someone tagging his garage door of his home and business.
There are two, identities disguised by hoodies. Mr Tapsell isn’t anonymous. They know his property and therefore who he is. He hurries downstairs, grabs a fishing knife, gives chase. He is dressed in shorts and T-shirt, his feet bare.
There is an altercation. The knife had a 14cm blade but penetrated 5cm, so it’s hard to say it was some frenzied attack. Mr Tapsell claims he was defending himself.
Mr Tapsell is convicted of manslaughter. Mr Tapsell had no prior criminal record.
Judge John Parata sentences Mr Tapsell to 4 years 3 months in jail. Judge Parata notes the danger of using knives.
Mr Tapsell’s lawyer sought a sentence of home detention. He also sought donations to help his family. Mr Tapsell did not qualify for legal aid, his business had to close and he had exhausted his finances on his defence.
Institutional racism – big call.
Lets get some more evidence out there huh.
[what constitutes evidence in this fools' minds? A signed admission of a latent racism in his decision for mthe judge? SP]
hands up who got creeped out listening to Garth McVicar on the radio this morning saying he should not have gone to jail at all
in mcvicars world having no paint on the garage door is necessary and sufficient reason to murder
this is the real face of the tightunderpants anally fixated rightwingers
Justice Williams is an experienced and respected Judge.
His hands were somewhat tied after the Jury threw out the Murder charge and convicted Emery of manslaughter. When that stage was reached personal circumstances became relevant and given that Emery had never been in trouble before and appeared to be “respectable” the Judge had to give substantial discount and 4 years is not out of the range of possible results.
I do not wish to disagree with my leftie mates but the Jury is where the “problem” is and their world view is obviously tainted. The system is colour blind and just gets on with the processing of charges but it would appear pretty obvious that members of the Jury felt some sort of sympathy for the defendant and little if any sympathy for the deceased.
Maybe defence counsel managed to find 12 Act Party supporters and got them all selected.
The presumption of innocence means that some guilty people are acquitted as it is better than innocent people being convicted. This is something that we change at our peril.
expat:
What would count as racism in this case, would be a history of shorter sentences for Pakeha, carried out by this judge.
Since no one has showed this is the case, I don’t see how anyone can call him racist.
i’m not sure the Pakeha/brown kid flip is that relevant. consideration of this crime requires acknowledgement of context. It happened In January 2008, during feverpitch media coverage of South Auckland gang violence. This media coverage — in the herald and allother MSM — had by that time whipped up public fear of gangs, so much that every brown kid in a flat-peaked baseball cap and baggy pants conjured the words ‘gangster’, ‘P-crazed’ and ‘killer’.
This was great for the MSM because fearful people tend to consume more information about the things they fear. But — plainly — it was bad for society. It was also great for the political right-wingers. Consider:
– the frothing rightard bloggers at that time
– John Key’s ‘Underclass’ speech:
The Court heard evidence that Bruce Emery took the knife with him because he feared being attacked. None of what happened excuses his crime, but a fair degree of moral (rather than legal) culpability should be laid at the feet of those who naiively and wilfully whipped up the fears that went some way to motivate the crime.