Dope-growing, cross-dressing BDSM male prostitute police officer convicted of harassment

91 comments on “Dope-growing, cross-dressing BDSM male prostitute police officer convicted of harassment ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Atiawa 1

   25 November 2015 at 9:49 am

   Looks like more crime committed by our police force then the citizens they are charged to protect.
   • Colonial Viper 1.1

     25 November 2015 at 11:17 am

     There is a rot growing in law enforcement agencies throughout the western world, as their power, weaponry, surveillance tools and authoritarianism increases.
     • infused 1.1.1

       25 November 2015 at 11:59 am

       NZ police have been like this for a long time… It’s just spilling over now. The only people they care about are their own.

       I’ve had a few incidents with police… the one I remember the fondest was 17 years ago. I got king hit by a bouncer. I never threw a punch or anything. He hit me from behind. Knocked out cold on the pavement. Police came and locked me up in the cells.

       I went to take them to court. I remember the police calling me saying “Don’t bother taking this to court, you won’t win”.

       So since that day, NZ police can go fuck themselves.

       Any FYI, bouncer got done (lightly in those days). Police tried doing me for assault. The judge basically laughed and threw it out.

       My other experience was a few years earlier. We took a trolly home from The Warehouse. The cops came down the street, for some reason we ran… It was just a trolly. Anyway, cops called the dog squad. Long story short, dogs were set on me.

       Many puncture holes later, we sued the police, guy lost his job (As no justification for setting dogs on me. He had a record of doing this). Police tried jacking up the charges 3 times. It went from trolly theft to something quite bizarre. Can’t remember.
       • tracey 1.1.1.1

         25 November 2015 at 12:16 pm

         Sorry to hear it. This notion that the police have improved… we are always told when something surfaces “oh that was then, we have changed the culture since then” is bollocks.

         There are good cops out there, but when you become a cop your world shrinks. The hours and what you see, and that you begin to spend your down time with fellow cops… all result in a specific world view. In this world view they are hard done by and “know” who “done it”.
         • infused 1.1.1.1.1

           25 November 2015 at 12:21 pm

           I’ve had a more recent once since. Nowhere near as bad as those two experiences, but same shit. They haven’t changed.

           Best advice I can give is know the law and don’t tell them a god damm thing.
2. mickysavage 2

   25 November 2015 at 9:53 am

   Headline of the year!
   • weka 2.1

     25 November 2015 at 2:35 pm

     or not. What do his sexual preferences, or occupation as a prostitute (alleged), or the fact that he cross-dresses have to do with this story? To juxtapose those things with criminal activities like harassing an ex, misusing police systems or growing drugs suggests there is something wrong with them and thus, by association, other people who are similar. They’re actually irrelevant.
     • Ron 2.1.1

       25 November 2015 at 5:12 pm

       I agree they don’t have anything to do with the crime but if I remember correctly the victim in this case had her details including her work spread all over the court and media.
       so maybe sauce for goose and gander applies
       • weka 2.1.1.1

         25 November 2015 at 5:25 pm

         Not on a left wing political blog IMO.

         Some years ago Cameron Slater was on a Sickness Benefit. There were a couple of people commenting on ts who would start calling him a bludger and questioning his right to a benefit and generally using his illness and status as a beneficiary to undermine him. When challenged on that they gave pretty much the same arguments as being used here i.e. that he deserved it.

         The problem is that those comments and that stance by the commenters basically legitimises a principle that it’s ok to hurt people as long as you think they deserve it. I have been on the receiving end of a number of people’s bigotry over my disability/illness (including some that had real world effects not just on me but on people I cared about), and I have no doubt whatsoever that the people who did that believed that I deserved it.

         To add to that (and I’ve commented elsewhere in the thread on this), it’s not just about his wellbeing, it’s about how it affects people close to him, and how it affects people who cross-dress/like BDSM/are sex workers, and how it affects society as whole.

         When people legitimise attacking Slater as a Sickness Beneficiary they endanger his livelihood and this affect his children, they reinforce the bludger and bene bashing memes (on a left wing political blog ffs), and they make society just that much more meaner.

         Sorry to go on about this, but it’s really simple. Sex workers, cross-dressers and people into BDSM all experience varying degrees of marginalisation through to outright abuse simply because of shit like this where people think having a go at someone on the basis of those things is legitimate. They’re nothing to do with this story (unless one is talking about the victim impact statement, or what actually happened to the woman, neither of which appear to be the topic of this post).
         • Ron 2.1.1.1.1

           26 November 2015 at 12:33 pm

           and once again The Victim seems to be sadly missing from all the comments.
           • weka 2.1.1.1.1.1

             26 November 2015 at 1:48 pm

             Why are completely and utterly ignoring what I said?

             If you want to talk about the victim then do so. But your prvious comment was saying that bad people deserve bad things. I responded to that.
     • PoliticallyCorrectedNZ 2.1.2

       26 November 2015 at 11:58 pm

       Hear! Hear! I too find the juxtaposition alarming and it’s clickbait nature detracts from the seriousness of the post. It would be good to see the title reflect the latter.
3. RedLogix 3

   25 November 2015 at 10:12 am

   Without taking anything away from all the other implications of BLiP’s impressive list; imprisoning ex-Police officers is always problematic. We put people in prison to serve time, not to be severely beaten or sexually assaulted because of their previous day-job.

   The Courts cannot but be aware that putting such a person in the general prison population is an almost certain guarantee of this happening. I’d suggest this creates an invisible threshold below which the Courts are reluctant to sentence prison time for relatively minor offenses.
   • Sabine 3.1

     25 November 2015 at 10:27 am

     actually no it is not. If they become criminals, and dope growing at this scale for anyone in this country would be prison or something up to a year of home detention and a lengthy probation period, then they too will go to prison.

     These guys are paid good wages to ‘protect and serve’ and if they become criminals, then they should go to prison, not go over start and not collect 200$. Or else our system is a sham. As for the ‘one’ rotten apple, let me tell you that you don’t want a rotten apple within your crate of good ones. You will remove that one rotten apple and throw it as far away as possible, together with all other apples that show sign of rot, lest they ruin the rest of the apples in your crate.

     Mind, one could argue, that if hardened criminals don’t want to go to prison, they just have to join the police force. Feel safer now?
     • RedLogix 3.1.1

       25 November 2015 at 10:38 am

       Sighs … sometimes I wonder why I bother.
       • Sabine 3.1.1.1

         25 November 2015 at 10:44 am

         why do you bother?

         Are you saying we should not put offending police in prison like all the other of us that would go to prison
         Because they might bet raped or beaten? What about the genral public that offended – and I don’t consider weed growing an offense that should fall under the criminal code at all – that gets thrown by the same judge into prison where they may or may not get raped or beaten?

         heck it is something of a running joke in all the blokes blow up movies that one gets done in the back side should they be send to prison?

         And if they assume they can not guarantee the safety of a prisoner cause he / she used to be a copper than they put them into isolation, or create a facility that only houses coppers.

         But frankly to be lenient on them because they get hurt? Have you read the litany of police offenses above and seen how many people they have hurt?
         And just who do you think is paying for the pay outs that come from the Police? That my dear would be you and me, Tax payer.
         So yeah if they can do the fucking crime, they can do the time.
         • tracey 3.1.1.1.1

           25 November 2015 at 12:22 pm

           IF the imprisonment of law enforcement officers showed a disproportionate number of rapes or assaults as against the “regular” population inside, would you consider something should be done to alter how the punishment is served?
           • barry 3.1.1.1.1.1

             25 November 2015 at 9:35 pm

             Maybe the problem is the prisons. If we can’t guarantee people’s safety in prison then we shouldn’t put anyone there.
       • greywarshark 3.1.1.2

         25 November 2015 at 3:21 pm

         RL
         My thoughts. The easy assurance of the PC perfect and pure in mind makes them fervent and unswerving in their opinions.

         About police needing consideration because of their jobs and attitudes towards them. We must try to keep them from being roughed up, and similarly try and stop them from committing violence and lowering standards themselves. I think cops must be affected by some of those disgraceful videos we see from abroad especially USA.

         I think they have become too powerful, too all-encompassing. Divide off the road cops to a parallel liaising force responsible for their own standards. Put search and rescue into its own separate organisation that liaises with police, and can request personpower when extra needed.

         And the expectation that having minority officers will gradually change attitudes. Doesn’t happen, according to a report I read from a black officer. The prevailing and dominant expectation and leadership rolls down and the newer cops of whatever ethnicity behave similarly to the majority group.
   • vto 3.2

     25 November 2015 at 10:52 am

     The police should in fact get heavier sentences, not lighter.

     Re prison and associated risks – just make a separate space for them. It is done with others so do so with police.

     In fact you could have a specially designated Police Officers Prison ha ha ha ha ha ha – wonder how full it would be???
     • McFlock 3.2.1

       25 November 2015 at 11:43 am

       I agree.

       Police are in a position of trust to uphold the law. They have an increased responsibility to obey it, rather than bringing the entire justice system into disrepute by breaking the law.

       Judith Collins laughed at the idea of prisoners being sexually assaulted because of double bunking. That was wrong of her – prisons should be safe places for prisoners and society. Failing in that duty should not be an excuse for leniency when criminal police officers fail in their duty to obey the law.
       • tracey 3.2.1.1

         25 November 2015 at 12:29 pm

         I agree too BUT and if they are shown to be disproportionately raped or assaulted than the general population then we need to look at alternatives. Which is NOT same as being more lenient.
         • McFlock 3.2.1.1.1

           25 November 2015 at 12:35 pm

           aye, true
         • weka 3.2.1.1.2

           25 November 2015 at 3:43 pm

           +1 tracey. I agree that the Police should be held to a higher standard/attract longer sentences, but rape and assault should in no way be part of that sentence.
         • greywarshark 3.2.1.1.3

           25 November 2015 at 5:18 pm

           I would like to know that all would be safe from sexual assault and attacks in prison (as well as outside). It makes me sick when I hear sly ‘jokes’ about what someone being sent away to jail might expect, like it is taken for granted. Those enjoying the idea, smirking about forced sex and attacks on an individual against their will, are as perverted as the criminal.
     • weka 3.2.2

       25 November 2015 at 2:38 pm

       “Re prison and associated risks – just make a separate space for them. It is done with others so do so with police.”

       How would you protect them from the Prison Officers?
       • tracey 3.2.2.1

         25 November 2015 at 4:17 pm

         Ignorance alert: I didn’t know offending cops were hated by the prison officers?
       • Sabine 3.2.2.2

         25 November 2015 at 4:23 pm

         Well we could send them to Christmas Island, and they could police themselves.? Or employ Serco to do the job. 🙂

         But of course we could just not criminalize criminal cops, lest they get roughed up in prison. Cause clearly its ok for the general public that is sentenced to prison to run the risk of beatings, death, and rape, but not cops. No we must create a different sentencing and housing system.

         These fuckwits are criminals, and they should be treated as that. Essentially no one knows the system better then a cop, so clearly if they offend it must be because they do believe that they will get a way with it.

         Safer yet? No. WE are not, and too boot we are forced to pay for their fuckups.
         • weka 3.2.2.2.1

           25 November 2015 at 5:12 pm

           “But of course we could just not criminalize criminal cops, lest they get roughed up in prison.”

           That’s probably the most idiotic comment in this thread. Please don’t misrepresent what people are saying, it just leads to fights.
           • Sabine 3.2.2.2.1.1

             25 November 2015 at 5:27 pm

             It is actually not an idiotic comment, considering that many cops don’t get to do hard time precisely for that fact.

             It is however somewhat stupid and even ‘second system’ promoting to say that we can’t lock ex cops (once they have been found guilty of criminal activities they should loose any and all status that comes with the job) into a standard prison, that you or i would be send should we be found guilty for the same offenses. And I do hope that this geezer is not on the force anymore. Once you start blackmailing some Dominatrix and get away with, you know, one may blackmail others. And sending pictures to the hubby and raising shit is simply that, black mail.

             Btw. I was tongue in cheek ….but i guess you just did not see the smiley face.
             • weka …

               25 November 2015 at 5:33 pm

               No-one has said what you just claimed. You are arguing with yourself and misrepresenting others.

               The idiotic bit is the second part of your sentence, which nobody is arguing but you.

               And no, I don’t have a smiley face on when talking about rape or beatings.
               • Sabine …

                 25 November 2015 at 5:52 pm

                 yes dear.
                 • weka …

                   25 November 2015 at 10:25 pm

                   That’s ok, I see your argument have all just fallen over.
   • tracey 3.3

     25 November 2015 at 12:17 pm

     We have isolation cells for this RedL. Even a month in isolation is some message to many… then put them on home detention.
4. Lanthanide 4

   25 November 2015 at 10:28 am

   It’s not illegal to be into BDSM, cross-dressing or prostitution. Mud slinging.

   Why don’t you just stick to the actual illegal acts of harassment and dope-growing, or do you want to sensationalise everything like the MSM does?
   • Sabine 4.1

     25 November 2015 at 10:57 am

     Because the same copper would give me a run down when i am in leathers on my bike. Or he would give you a rundown where you a cross dresser, a prostitute or a consenting participants in BDSM community.

     And yes, i have taken a copper to the IPCA for essentially what was revolting fucking behavior, harassment and intimidation. And no it was not a bloke, it was a female enabled by her male superiors. And she got shown up for it, as essentially with her attitude, and her harassment, and intimidation (fucking stupid women) she supported a chick that was committing insurance fraud. But i was the bikie in leathers, so it would be the easiest thing to write me several tickets for an accident that was caused by the other party. Ooops. the Court sided with me.

     What goes around, comes around. And no, they are not better then us clearly, but they would like to be treated better then they would treat anyone of us.

     But the question you should ask yourself is simple: Do you feel safer being ‘served and protected’ by these guys, and are you happy to pay money to people that have been hard done by the Police, cause its us that raise the funds for the Police via our taxes.
     • Rosemary McDonald 4.1.1

       25 November 2015 at 11:18 am

       @ Sabine “Ooops. the Court sided with me.”

       Don’t you just love it when that happens?

       So…after the court has dismissed the charge against you, you gather your evidence and go down to the Police Station to lodge a complaint against other parties for obvious, at the minimum…perverting the course of justice. Throw in there an obviously dodgy insurance claim, and the first cop seems sympathetic but when passed on to the higher ups…shot down. IPCA a chocolate fireguard.

       There is nothing one can do to fix this as a private individual. I am sure the Police have someone monitoring these pages…one day maybe, since I comment using my own name, some officer just might think “what the hell is this woman banging on about”. And look into this…and restore my faith in what I now consider to be an incompetent and corrupt police force.
       (I won’t hold my breath!)

       @Red Logix “The Courts cannot but be aware that putting such a person in the general prison population is an almost certain guarantee of this happening.”

       So too would a police officer know that committing crimes that attract a prison term if detected and successfully prosecuted is an almost certain guarantee of this happening.

       Arrogance? Assume the ‘club’ will protect them? Stupidity?
       • Sabine 4.1.1.1

         25 November 2015 at 11:49 am

         We went to court as the chick was refusing to accept the pay out the insurance offered her, claiming other parts of her vehicle were equally damaged – it was her insurance company that called for it. I strictly refused any damages was caused and i also refused to accept that I had caused the accident.

         So we all went there, the insurance officer essentially said, look we would be happy to settle but she is not ($ 300 co-payment – stupid women).
         So when all was said and done the judge asked if the car was there, yes it was, was it fixed – no she had not fixed it (this was several month after the ‘accident”), which raised eyebrows as that is unusual, and also is the bike there….yes it is.
         So down to the road we go, and we all agree that unless I ride a fucking submarine (and my bike is not tiny) , no way could i have hit her were she insisted i had hit her, considering as well all the photos that I took at the crash site, it clearly showed she hit me instead of the other way around.
         It went down hill from there, all ‘guilt’ was taken from me, lol, the other chick was suddenly guilty of causing an accident, careless driving, etc etc and to boot the face of the insurance guy….OHMGOSH, t’was funny.

         With the results of the court I went to the Police…..t’was fun as well. Essentially it is simple, don;t call my phone and try to intimidate me, don’t do that once, don’t do it several tens of times over the weekend. Don’t accuse me of providing false statements, when your coppers are as fucking dump as the dodo, and can’t read their own writing and can be called out on it, cause proof. Fuckit. Don’t threaten me with an arrest warrants for fines (heck these were my first fines in my life, and i am a middle aged broad!) when you are to dumb to send them out in the first fucking place – and they are still in your fucking out tray!. It just pisses me off, and then my inner german demands satisfaction, and i will lodge a formal complaint.
         And frankly i think every time a copper is basing decisions on what are clearly issues of discrimination, then lies, then starts harassing people by phone, threatening them to go to their work place etc etc etc a formal complaint should be lodged, and if it is only to get them sick of their fucking ‘rotten apples’ and maybe start doing their jobs.

         Speaking to Seargeant BlueBerryMuffin, i made it quite clear that they should mark my file with…..”Handle with Care, as she will complain to the IPCA everytfuckingtime if need be”.

         Lol.
         • Rosemary McDonald 4.1.1.1.1

           25 November 2015 at 12:15 pm

           “Speaking to Seargeant BlueBerryMuffin,”

           Hah! Love it! For all the Judiciary gets a hard time from the Left, Right and Centre…sometimes, just sometimes, you strike a Judge with a functioning bullshit detector.

           I too am a “middle aged broad”..not a bikie chick…just plain old boring hausfrau with a penchant for being pro active on disability issues.

           Until this shit went down…I kinda thought the poor old bobbies hard a tough job…and I cut them a lot of slack.

           Sometimes, even now, I get a bit dizzy when I recall the complete 180 degree turn my attitude towards the police took.

           And…realising that a shitload of other boring middle aged Kiwis have the same opinion as me about the police.

           Kia kaha Sabine.
         • Bill 4.1.1.1.2

           25 November 2015 at 12:19 pm

           🙂
         • left for deadshark 4.1.1.1.3

           25 November 2015 at 2:38 pm

           Good stuff, they can be lazy fuckers, by the way, I ride a Moto Morini 500

           🙂
           • Sabine 4.1.1.1.3.1

             25 November 2015 at 4:24 pm

             very nice, my little one is english…and does not leak oil . 🙂
           • gsays 4.1.1.1.3.2

             25 November 2015 at 6:59 pm

             black, naked bmw k75s. ’87, drops a little oil. lots of fun.

             got stopped in ashhurst 12 months ago, no wof or rego.
             “pay the fine quick and you can write away and they will wipe the fines”
             did this and got the reply “we are overturning the constable’s decision.”
             no refund.

             ’twas worth the fine so my son could see that the police lie.
             • left for deadshark …

               26 November 2015 at 4:06 pm

               Sigh..sad to hear. 👿
       • Ron 4.1.1.2

         25 November 2015 at 5:19 pm

         So what happened to former police prosecutor that was sent to jail for some pretty horrendous crimes against minors. Did he get beaten up/raped etc Don’t think so
     • tracey 4.1.2

       25 November 2015 at 12:20 pm

       If *I* supply cannabis and go to jail, I am exposed to the usual risks of incarceration. If a law enforcement officer is sent to jail whatever they are given is harsher because the risk of them being targeted is higher, than for general populace of the prison. My personal view is that because a crime against a law enforcement officer suffers a higher sentence than against a non enforcement officer (due to status and public interest) then a law enforcement officer who falls must suffer a higher punishment… BUT NOT a much higher chance of rape or assault or death.
       • Chris 4.1.2.1

         25 November 2015 at 12:52 pm

         Maybe while Harris had the hydroponic equipment he didn’t have more than 28 grams? Either that, or the cops did what they did here:
         • BLiP 4.1.2.1.1

           25 November 2015 at 2:26 pm

           ‘

           Harris had 15 plants. I think it would be safe to assume each of those plants had produced more than 2 grams of dope.
           • Sabine 4.1.2.1.1.1

             25 November 2015 at 4:25 pm

             bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

             maybe it was all just for research 🙂
           • Chris 4.1.2.1.1.2

             25 November 2015 at 4:27 pm

             Sure, unless they were tiny plants. But was really just looking for an opportunity to post the link.
5. trendy lefty 5

   25 November 2015 at 11:54 am

   Is there something illegal or wrong about cross-dressing, BDSM or prostitution?
   • BLiP 5.1

     25 November 2015 at 12:05 pm

     ‘

     No, not as far as I am aware. However, since reading past the headline is too difficult for some, allow me to point out that I was helping give voice to the victim. She was the one who felt it was important enough to mention that Harris was a cross-dressing, BDSM male prostitute. She made specific mention of it in her victim impact statement. The New Zealand Fox News Herald, on the other hand, chose instead to make a joke at her expense in the headline.
     • Lanthanide 5.1.1

       25 November 2015 at 12:15 pm

       You mean, the Herald, being bound by journalism standards, reported on the facts of the case, and not on the women’s hearsay testimony?

       You know how reporters always say “alleged to have done x” until there has been a sentencing for the offense? There’s a reason for that. Even the twat who police found in Brazil and extradited back to NZ was “alleged to have escaped and fled the country”.

       You are stating that this person is these things, based upon the unsubstantiated words of one woman who clearly has a grudge against this man (understandably so). Not something I’d choose to do.
       • Bill 5.1.1.1

         25 November 2015 at 12:22 pm

         Thing is Lanth, that if you have no issues with cross-dressing, BDSM and prostitution, then any incorrect ‘allegation’ is no allegation at all.
         • Lanthanide 5.1.1.1.1

           25 November 2015 at 12:29 pm

           It’s not an “allegation” of anything, it’s prying into someone’s private life when such details are irrelevant.

           When was the last time you saw a headline saying “man killed in car crash had a collection of toasters and enjoyed watching trains on the weekend”? Assuming that toasters and trains didn’t somehow contribute to the car crash.
           • gsays 5.1.1.1.1.1

             25 November 2015 at 7:01 pm

             hi lanth, i often read headlines ‘framing’ how police would like to see the story perceived.
       • Sabine 5.1.1.2

         25 November 2015 at 12:24 pm

         So the victim statement of the women who was the aggrieved party is something that you consider unsubstantiated cause she ‘clearly has a grudge against this man” (but you understand that she has a grude against this man) . oh dear.
         • Lanthanide 5.1.1.2.1

           25 November 2015 at 12:28 pm

           No, it’s unsubstantiated because it’s unsubstantiated.

           If the prosecution thought these things were relevant to the case, they would have introduced them. They didn’t.
           • BLiP 5.1.1.2.1.1

             25 November 2015 at 2:12 pm

             ‘

             A victim impact statement must be vetted by the court before it is read out and must be truthful. It is the Judge who decides what is and isn’t to be introduced into the record of the case. Your concern for the comfort of the perpetrator and your frothing contempt for what the victim chose to say is telling.

             Meanwhile, do you think it might be about time for Michael “Worm Farm” Woodhouse to at least recognise the New Zealand Police Force has to pull up its socks in order to maintain public confidence?
             • Lanthanide …

               25 November 2015 at 2:59 pm

               Thanks Blip, I wasn’t aware of the process for the judge to decide whether it should be allowed or not – although this is obviously how it would work so I could have assumed that.

               Even so, the prosecution evidently didn’t see it as being relevant to the case.

               “Your concern for the comfort of the perpetrator”
               No, it’s my concern for anyone that has irrelevant personal details about themselves, particularly sensitive ones, that are aired in public. The fact that they have committed a crime is irrelevant – just as the fact that people in the Australian detention centres have committed crimes, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be afforded basic human dignity and rights.

               “your frothing contempt”
               I strongly reject “frothing contempt” – that is you reading tone into my writing that does not exist.
               • tracey …

                 25 November 2015 at 4:24 pm

                 nicely put
               • miravox …

                 25 November 2015 at 10:16 pm

                 Yes, good points.

                 Also, yeah – I don’t think I’ve ever read you as a ‘frothing contempt’ type of person.
           • tracey 5.1.1.2.1.2

             25 November 2015 at 2:18 pm

             for clarity

             unsubstantiated
             adjective
             1.
             not substantiated; unproved or unverified:
             unsubstantiated allegations.
             2.
             being without form or substance.

             It seems to me that Lanth is saying that it is both irrelevant(?) and that there is no third part corroboration of the assertions?

             Yes?
             • weka …

               25 November 2015 at 3:22 pm

               That’s how I read the Herald article. The things the woman said the man was are presented out of context so no-one here knows what their relevance was to the case.

               And they certainly have no relevance to this post.
     • weka 5.1.2

       25 November 2015 at 3:27 pm

       No, not as far as I am aware. However, since reading past the headline is too difficult for some, allow me to point out that I was helping give voice to the victim. She was the one who felt it was important enough to mention that Harris was a cross-dressing, BDSM male prostitute. She made specific mention of it in her victim impact statement. The New Zealand Fox News Herald, on the other hand, chose instead to make a joke at her expense in the headline.

       As did you with your headline.

       If you don’t want people to have difficulty getting past a post headline, perhaps you could write one that is less inflammatory. Based on your authoring and commenting history on the standard, I’m sure that your post itself is good. Myself, I didn’t get that far as I had to go off and read the Herald article a number of times to understand what the headline and that case was about and came to the conclusion that the headline was a piece of bigotry based on things that are irrelevant. I’m pretty sure you didn’t mean it that way, but as I comment below, women get the label ‘prostitute’ used against them all the time and it’s not appropriate to do that in a left wing political blog not matter how much you are wanting to support someone who’s been victimised.
       • Lanthanide 5.1.2.1

         25 November 2015 at 3:29 pm

         I also had to read the Herald article several times to work out where the headline for this post came from, since the body of the post doesn’t mention it again, which is quite odd for ‘important’ details to be stated in a headline but not once in the body of the post.
6. Anno1701 6

   25 November 2015 at 12:03 pm

   policing citizens

   or citizens policing , there’s a big difference !
7. Psycho Milt 7

   25 November 2015 at 1:20 pm

   No dispute with the main points of the OP, but the numerous incidents of “Another Police chase” you mention aren’t indicative of criminality, thuggery or incompetence on the part of anyone but the driver of the fleeing vehicle.
   • BLiP 7.1

     25 November 2015 at 2:18 pm

     ‘

     Every police chase puts innocents at risk. Given the persistent high number of accidents which result from a police chase, its indicative of incompetence that the Police have not learned to manage them more safely and are still, in many cases, breaking their own guidelines.
     • Psycho Milt 7.1.1

       25 November 2015 at 4:08 pm

       The Police have a responsibility to minimise the risk to the public in apprehending offenders, but the responsibility for whatever risk the public ends up facing lies with the offender. It would be nice if the courts started dealing with them appropriately.
   • tracey 7.2

     25 November 2015 at 2:19 pm

     could be incompetence if they have disregarded the rules that apply to pursuits and/or are a really bad driver

     Of course the person fleeing bears the lion’s share by far of the consequences of their actions. However the police also have a responsibility beyond the apprehension of just the driver they are pursuing.
     • Psycho Milt 7.2.1

       25 November 2015 at 4:09 pm

       Agreed – could be incompetence in particular cases, but that’s not demonstrated anywhere in the post.
8. weka 8

   25 November 2015 at 2:44 pm

   Lanth, I agree.

   Those things have nothing to do with the story and are there to sensationalise something (not sure what) or give people a laugh. But what it does is associate those legal and normal things with crime and/or things to be ridiculed, which then reinforces stigma within society as well as reinforcing ideas about what is normal and what isn’t and just adds to the general fuckedupness in NZ around things considered marginal.

   Women sex workers get unecessarily described by their occupation as a way of undermining them because so many people still consider that to be a moral issue. That’s what’s happening here too. The man should be held accountable for his actions, not for things that have no bearing on that.

   I can’t be bothered getting into a argument about this today, but disappointing to see such a headline on a political blog.
   • Lanthanide 8.1

     25 November 2015 at 3:02 pm

     Thanks weka, I thought I’d probably get support from people, but so far it’s been less than I expected.

     I see feminists standing up for women and the language used when women’s issues are reported on. But it seems no one stands up for those who have sexual proclivities outside what is considered ‘the norm’.
     • weka 8.1.1

       25 November 2015 at 3:28 pm

       yeah, I’m surprised.

       So much for me not getting involved though.
     • Rosemary McDonald 8.1.2

       25 November 2015 at 3:48 pm

       Reading the article in the Herald…paragon of journalism that it is…there seems to me to be some ground for the victim ‘outing’ this guy.

       There is some relevance.

       Cop met victim”professionally”. She is a professional dominatrix.

       Cop was her client in this capacity.

       He then mounts (no pun intended!) a hate campaign against her…

       “Harris even sent letters to her husband at work, which included further explicit photos of the victim.

       The letters “outlined what you considered to be her immoral lifestyle”, Judge John Bergseng said.””

       http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11546240

       This was really quite vicious stuff…an attack on a woman hired by him.

       Methinks he richly deserved his outing.

       Hire a sex worker(after checking her out on the police computer (to see if any heavies have her back, perhaps?)) then harass her for her immoral ways?

       The toasters and the trains did have a fair amount to do with her becoming a victim.

       Are professional dominatrices bound by a code of client confidentiality?
       • wtl 8.1.2.1

         25 November 2015 at 4:01 pm

         Methinks he richly deserved his outing.

         No, he doesn’t. He deserves to be dealt with by the law (and he has been – unless you are claiming the judiciary is corrupt) not by a political blog spreading rumours about his private life.
         • weka 8.1.2.1.1

           25 November 2015 at 4:04 pm

           +1000 (and appreciate the succintness).
         • tracey 8.1.2.1.2

           25 November 2015 at 4:14 pm

           Yeah, does seem to be a strong element of 2 wrongs make a right here? He wrongly sent stuff about her to third parties… and has been punished so why the need to stoop to his level?

           I am confused.
       • weka 8.1.2.2

         25 November 2015 at 4:03 pm

         “Methinks he richly deserved his outing.”

         So says most people who harm others. This is why we have ethics, so we don’t have to rely on our personal sense of offense in deciding who deserves punishment and why. Myself, I think it’s unethical to use ‘they deserve it’ to undermine basic principles of fairness and justice. It’s not like I’m overly concerned for the man himself (although he may very well deserve concern, how would we know?), it’s that the basic principles have to be applied universally. If you get to pick and choose, why not Cameron Slater? Or anyone with prejudices?

         The justice system looks at the situation and applies sentencing appropriate to context, because it’s in the position to do so. We’re not. That’s certainly not an infallible system, and I’m guessing BliP’s post is about where it fails majorly. But to then say oh well, I think someone deserves shit because they were a shit themselves just makes the whole world blind.

         For instance, does the man have young children? What is happening to them at school? It doesn’t take much imagination to see how wanting to hurt people because we think they deserve it can affect far more than we can see. I’ve explained elsewhere how it can also affect other people as well because of the culture of shame and marginalisation in NZ.
         • tracey 8.1.2.2.1

           25 November 2015 at 4:15 pm

           Thanks weka, nice points made.

           It’s kind of like aspects of the detainees thing and stuff, but in reverse (I tihink)

           They have committed crimes so fuck their human rights… you want to protect their human rights, then you are a lover of paedophiles and rapists…

           High Ground – Gone
         • Rosemary McDonald 8.1.2.2.2

           25 November 2015 at 4:48 pm

           @weka “Myself, I think it’s unethical to use ‘they deserve it’ to undermine basic principles of fairness and justice. ”

           The offending words were in her Victim Impact Statement.

           The Judge, if he felt the need, could have suppressed all or part of her statement.

           http://www.justice.govt.nz/publications/publications-archived/2002/victims-rights-act-2002-a-guide-for-agencies-dealing-with-victims-of-offences/victim-impact-statements

           “The judicial officer can also make orders to limit the distribution and disclosure of a VIS. This includes how many copies can be made and who, apart from the offender, is allowed to see them.

           The Act requires that all copies of a VIS be returned to court staff at the end of proceedings, with the exception of copies held by the victim, relevant officials and specified persons allowed by the court to retain the VIS.”

           This would be in the “take it up with the Judge” category.

           “For instance, does the man have young children? What is happening to them at school?”

           Good question. One he maybe should have asked himself.
           As should all of us before we set off on such a path. Bearing in mind this was a carefully planned crime.
           His lawyer…could have asked for name suppression…

           Always more to a story in the media than meets the eye.
           • weka 8.1.2.2.2.1

             25 November 2015 at 5:09 pm

             You’ve missed the point. The ‘offending words’ are in the title of this post, that’s what is being debated.

             Good to know you think the sins of the fathers should be visited on the sons and daughters.

             edit, you also quoted me and then didn’t respond to what I said. The ethics I’m talking about are those of some of the people this this thread.
     • wtl 8.1.3

       25 November 2015 at 4:04 pm

       When I saw the headline of this post on my feed I thought it was a joke or satire. But it’s not. I agree with you Lanth and Weka and I am extremely disappointed to site it on this site.
9. Once was Tim 9

   25 November 2015 at 3:56 pm

   No surprises in any of the above.
   Personally, I think (reckon) there’s time to salvage things and there is time for those in power to change before things get out of hand.
   Quite obviously there’s a problem in the Police, AND there’s also a inkling of a problem with the Judiciary. Perhaps the Judiciary are inflicted with fear.

   I’d hate to think we (NuZull) have to descend into appointing overseas people to resolve the predicament we’re obviously headed into, but I suspect its inevitable.

   I suspect in the very near future – if we continue along the path of Natzi Keyoikon like administration, then there’ll need to be maybe some Canadians in the Pleece, and one or two International judges to remind us what we once stood for.

   I wonder how Dear Helen feels. One things for sure ….. she can be excused for not knowing what she unleashed
10. Vaughan Little 10

    25 November 2015 at 5:55 pm

    thanks heaps blip. this is all really good data which needs to be out there in the public domain.

    my pov is that declining standards are wider than just a cop problem.

    there has been a crisis in public morality for a long time. long crisis.

    it’d be interested to know what retired cops think.
11. greywarshark 11

    25 November 2015 at 6:31 pm

    Was he – A police officer,
    Harrassing someone,
    A prostitute,
    Growing dope,
    Into BDSM – for the ignorant like me – “Bondage and Discipline, Sadism and Masochism” .,
    Cross-dressing?

    Sounds far out for a police person. And with all the knowledge and experience that comes from being involved in his various pursuiits, he still harrasses someone like any common old bloke with a nasty nature and unhealthy obssession to control and dominate.
    His wide interests don’t seem to have made him a nicer human being and a better police officer.

    That’s my attempt at forming an objective view of the matter. I think that he is getting the velvet glove treatment too. What is everyone complaining about again?
    • weka 11.1

      25 November 2015 at 10:26 pm

      That punishment for crime shouldn’t include rape and beatings.
12. North 12

    25 November 2015 at 9:39 pm

    Gotta say I am touched by Infused’s account of ‘citizen meets police’. It’s fucking churlish I know but I hope Infused is straight up here. If so, I’m surprised you’re not on ‘our’ side Infused.

    Great list BLIP ! Note I’ve elevated you to all cap’s (partially ‘cos I can’t remember the one that’s lower). Anyway, Arise Sir BLIP ! And, provisionally, Sir-Infused.
13. Treetop 13

    27 November 2015 at 4:31 pm

    Good to see a conviction for harassment and it not being made into an employment issue, which has no teeth.

    Note: There is nothing good about a cop harassing anyone.
14. ZTesh 14

    28 November 2015 at 1:46 pm

    Why is this sort of bigotry towards trans people accepted on this blog. This is really puerile infantile stuff that I would expect from Cam Slater.

    Pathetic.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS