Open letter to Judge Glubb

Written By: notices and features - Date published: 6:10 am, March 7th, 2024 - 63 comments
Categories: feminism, violence against women - Tags: Judith Hobson, Te Whare Whero

Cross posted from Te Whare Whero

Dear Judge Glubb,

Let me say at the outset that I am against sending people to prison unless there are compelling reasons for doing so. I would much rather New Zealand’s judges did not use remand and custodial sentences for young offenders as often as you all do.

I know that people, and especially young people, can behave in uncharacteristic ways when under the influence of alcohol or drugs and/or hormones, and/or due to peer pressure or mob mentality.

Given a criminal record can have profound implications for a person’s future, I accept that in some instances a discharge without conviction, and granting of permanent name suppression are warranted.

All of this is why, in principle, I approve of your ruling in the case of the young man who, at the age of twenty, punched a woman who is old enough to be his grandmother, in the face, causing her bodily and psychological harm.

According to the reports I’ve read, you described the offending in question as “moderately serious” given the blows were to the head.

The outcome for the victim was a fairly minor physical injury; the psychological harm is much harder to assess but importantly, the assault had the very real potential to cause serious, possibly fatal injuries.

That fact should have featured in your sentencing, if only to use the opportunity to send a message to all men who punch women, and to young men who punch anyone in the head but especially old women, that it is an extremely dangerous act.

You may not be aware of it but men on average punch 160% harder than women. A man punching a woman is seldom an even contest; a young man punching an old woman is about as uneven as it gets.

That aside, women’s ability to withstand the force of a blow to the head is significantly less than men on average because of sex-based differences in the musculature of the male and the female posterior cervical spine.

Add to that, the probability of age-related osteoporosis in a 70 year-old woman, and any blow from a man, especially one in the grip of adrenaline and testosterone disinhibition, is likely to result in fractures. A blow to the head could result in a catastrophic cervical fracture.

The young man’s defence was that he is “neurodiverse”, ie he has ADHD and mild autism, which make him more prone to acting impulsively.

However, despite his reduced impulse control, he had got to the the age of twenty without any prior arrests or convictions which suggests either he must have had a sequestered life, or controlled himself pretty well, or there was a trigger in that situation, ie the anger he felt on behalf of trans people who he thought were being attacked by the mainly older, female rally attendees.

Whatever one’s opinion of the victim vis-à-vis her reasons for being at the rally, her actions in challenging a person who was removing lines placed to delineate the rally and the protesters, her refusal to engage in restorative justice, or the use of the case in the on-going arguments about trans and women’s rights, nothing can reasonably be said to mitigate such an assault.

It’s as reasonable to argue that the young man’s action, far from being impulsive, was somewhat calculated in that it is highly unlikely he would have lost control of his fists if the person he was confronting had been a large, muscly man.

It is noteworthy that in 2014, you were faced with another twenty year-old man who was charged with a similar assault.

In the grip of extreme alcohol and adrenaline/testosterone disinhibition, and after a domestic dispute, three police officers attempted to arrest him. In the course of the arrest he punched a detective in the face causing a small cut and a black eye.

The two defendants were the same sex and age; they both suffered a serious loss of impulse control, and there were analogous injuries caused to their victims.

So, what was so different that the young man in 2014 deserved to be sent to prison for thirteen months, with no reporting restrictions, while the young man in 2024 got discharged without conviction and was granted permanent name suppression?

Was it being drunk as opposed to being neurodiverse?

Was it resisting arrest by three police officers and in the process punching one of them in the eye, as opposed to launching an unprovoked attack on a 70 year-old woman?

Was it being working class and brown skinned as opposed to middle class and white skinned?

Or was it having prior convictions – which of course may well have been connected to being working class and brown skinned?

Mod note: comments are in premod and being released manually. Please stay on topic. If you want to make claims of fact, then please back them up with good evidence at the time, and all quotes must have a link or reference (and date/timestamp for video). Usual rules about robust debate and respect apply.

The assailant has name suppression and cannot be named in New Zealand including on The Standard.

63 comments on “Open letter to Judge Glubb ”

Comments are now closed

That_guy 1

7 March 2024 at 8:48 am

it is highly unlikely he would have lost control of his fists if the person he was confronting had been a large, muscly man.

This ^^^

One punch can kill. Happens all the time.

Another factor that should have been taken into account: this assault was a (successful) political act done with the explicitly stated purpose of stopping a marginalised group from gathering and discussing their rights.

The purpose and intent of the whole gathering was spelled out repeatedly, explicitly and with people's real names on social media: we intend to shut these women down and prevent them from speaking. Nobody was even trying to hide that this was a political act.
- Anker 1.1
  
  7 March 2024 at 9:41 pm
  
  Wonderful comments that guy. You are right, the activists went their to shut women's voices down. Remember the Green Party posting on their FB page [deleted]?
  
  [please provide some evidence if you want to make that claim – weka]
  - weka 1.1.1
    
    7 March 2024 at 10:48 pm
    
    mod note.
Francesca 2

7 March 2024 at 9:45 am

Reading some of the comments yesterday was unbelievable.

Have any of them raised boys? Did they teach them, never , ever hit a woman ?

Is it now ok to hit a woman? Even an elderly woman ?

Or only if you can afford a good lawyer?
Visubversa 3

7 March 2024 at 9:59 am

Possibly yet another demonstration of the way that promoters of Gender Ideology have battened on to the neurodiverse.

The Tavistock Report detailed the unusually high representation of autistic and similar conditions amongst the young people who have been encouraged online by various activists who tell them that all their problems relate to their so called "gender identity" and that altering that will "fix" them. The recent WPATH revelations discussed here yesterday confirms this.

Mr (name redacted) may have been convinced that real harm is being done to "people like him" by any deviation from the "Affirmation Only" model when it comes to the transitioning of young people. Add to that the dehumanising rhetoric found in the popular press and spouted by political figures setting the climate for the mob actions on March 25 2023.

None of them will be held accountable for their actions.
- David 3.1
  
  7 March 2024 at 11:58 am
  
  I was diagnosed as an adult with autism and ADHD about 15 or 20 years ago (mid 2000’s). At the time of my diagnosis, the psychiatrist was surprised that it wasn’t picked up when I started school in 1970, due to the severity, fortunately I’ve managed and the help of a couple of dedicated teachers at primary school should have the credit for that.
  
  From my experience, I’m aware that certain groups are trying to take ownership of neurodiversity, and it’s becoming political?
  
  like any disability, it’s up to the individual to understand themselves and to know how the condition affects them. For me the knowledge that I have about my condition allows me to navigate the world outside of myself.
  
  Unfortunately, some people use the condition as an excuse, as though they are expecting the world to revolve around them. This seems to be more common in primary and secondary school age children. Maybe due to their parents. I’m wondering if this is also something like the rise in narcissistic behaviour.
Darien Fenton 4

7 March 2024 at 11:28 am

I am still waiting for the prosecution of the Destiny mob motorcyclist who hit Marama Davidson.
- weka 4.1
  
  7 March 2024 at 11:51 am
  
  same. Also potentially dangerous.
  - francesca 4.1.1
    
    7 March 2024 at 1:18 pm
    
    I'm waiting for the "but what did Marama do to provoke this?"
- James Simpson 4.2
  
  7 March 2024 at 3:17 pm
  
  Was he ever identified and charged?
  
  I have seen grainy footage of the assault but can't see if the Police ever did anything about it.
  - Anker 4.2.1
    
    7 March 2024 at 9:45 pm
    
    I think the rider was never identified. I don't know if the case is closed.
    
    But again people are distracting from the issue of the week, which is the court verdict on the young man who repeatedly punched an elderly woman.
    
    Where do you stand on that Darrien?
- Anker 4.3
  
  7 March 2024 at 9:52 pm
  
  They have been unable to identify him.
  
  But tell me Darien as this post is about Judith Hobson who was deliberately and intentionally and repeatedly punched in the face by a young man when she was exercising her right to free speech what you think of that?
  
  Some on the left wing seem unable or unwilling to acknowledge the violence meted out to women at a peaceful rally in a park on a Saturday morning. What happened to feminism?
  - Darien Fenton 4.3.1
    
    8 March 2024 at 8:08 am
    
    At no point have I said punching a woman in the face is acceptable – in any context. It is not. But I do think PP brought violence with her along with her right wing views which are well known and provocative. I also think it's relevant that the Destiny zoomies saw this as an opportunity and caused mayhem. As for feminism, women are not stupid and nor do their views on gender criticism necessarily align. Happy International Women's Day. Think about the Gaza women. And I do note you quoting Leo Molloy ; doesn’t do your argument any good.
    - francesca 4.3.1.1
      
      8 March 2024 at 8:38 am
      
      "PP brought violence with her."
      
      Can you cite any violence perpetrated by PP or the women who came to hear her speak and offer their own stories?
      - weka 4.3.1.1.1
        
        8 March 2024 at 10:33 am
        
        that's not what Darien meant. Afaik she is referring to the idea that because of how KJK does her work, violence by others is a natural consequence.
        
        KJK was asked ahead of time by Australian gender critical feminists to not come to Aus because of what the Nazis would do. She ignored this, and the Nazis came to Melbourne. In Hobart KJK was out of control, deliberately taunting TRAs by verbally targeting an MP who has a trans child. I consider that provocative.
        
        I don't believe KJK brought violence to NZ. I think the TRAs had set that up here before she arrived. There was a strong narrative of KJK and anyone that doesn't condemn her = Nazi, and we all know that Nazis should be punched, so there's a clear line between what TRAs, the MSM, and others did and the physical violence that was done to Hobson, KJK and others that day.
        
        The idea that being provocative = bringing violence is too close to 'she asked for it'. I doubt that is intentional for many liberal TAs, but there is a tension across the left between values (eg that 'she asked for it' is misogynistic) and the need to regain power and control. It's not just in the gender/sex war, it's in other areas. We are becoming more authoritarian as society fractures.
        
        KJK is a right wing populist who uses techniques designed to rark people up and this is how she gathers power. She is mostly very good at what she does. I don't think she anticipated how badly Auckland would go, and she was bizarrely tone deaf to the Nazi issue in Aus (even after it happened), but there is no doubt she knew how to play the violence to her advantage afterwards and since.
        
        So both sides are right and wrong. Obviously let women speak, and the liberal left have a huge blind spot on this. They're also wrong that women's sex based rights = transphobia. But equally obviously, the GC movement is now increasingly actually transphobic either because there are people who hate trans people and have jumped on board, or because they're people who don't care, or they do care but were forced to pick a side and women chose women. The denial of transphobia within GC circles, even among feminists, has long been palpable.
        
        The revenge fantasies on twitter since the judge's ruling have been sick.
        
        https://terfisaslur.com/ is sick.
        
        See what I mean?
        
        francesca 4.3.1.1.1.1
        
        8 March 2024 at 11:12 am
        
        Well actually I haven't seen that transphobia .I keep the hell off twitter and facebook.
        
        Please don't link it either Weka , the kind of toxicity in the world is literally making me sick at the moment.But if that is happening, it's a terrible lurch to the right.Everyone is responsible for their own violence, nobody "makes" them violent, but I agree . PP is a demagogue.And I take your point
        
        My concerns are around the insanity now revealed by the WPATH disclosures, the whole affirmation of gender identity before all other considerations, the irreversible nature of the treatments, the too wide trans umbrella .The immediate rush to judgement when someone says tai hoa.
        
        I read an article in one of the UK trash papers that described a woman perpetrating a brutal murder, taking photos of the dead man she shared with her US girlfriend,also recording the beheading of a cat then putting it through the blender, with twisted voiceover , and I thought My god , what kind of women are these .Far down in the piece it said she had transitioned at a young age , and I realised , this was no woman .Sadly , I realised this was more believable when a man had done it.
        
        A different account in the Telegraph made clear both the killer and her girlfriend were transwomen .Most people would be in the dark., reading the first account. Links on request
        
        Transwomen aren't all Georgina Beyer and Carmen
        
        francesca …
        
        8 March 2024 at 11:36 am
        
        This account has no reference to transitioning
        
        https://www.itv.com/news/meridian/2023-08-14/woman-accused-of-murder-facing-charges-for-decapitating-and-dissecting-cat
        
        We are to believe she is a woman .How does this skew the female violence perception …and the statistics
        Actually Weka, don’t publish this if you think its going to set off a another storm where we’re at each others throats.And we don’t get anywhere with it
        The whole thing just pisses me off hugely .
        My point is that there can be a whole raft of mental health issues here, and maybe , just maybe , the belief of being the opposite sex can, on some occasions be one of them
        
        weka …
        
        8 March 2024 at 12:15 pm
        
        Louise Tickle, now ex-Guardian journalist, did really good work on this. The Guardian's first version of the story omitted that the murdered was male and put woman in the headline. They later changed it, but didn't notify the public of the change. Tickle wrote to them and published the correspondence on twitter (this is an example of why having a twitter account is a good idea, and to curate it well so you get the content you want).
        
        Her first letter,
        
        https://twitter.com/louisetickle/status/1761854674683023796
        
        The Guardian editor Kath Viner's response,
        
        https://twitter.com/louisetickle/status/1762574817247551707
        
        Tickle's response to the Guardian's response,
        
        https://twitter.com/louisetickle/status/1762591413512905117
        
        weka …
        
        8 March 2024 at 11:43 am
        
        Well actually I haven't seen that transphobia .I keep the hell off twitter and facebook.
        
        Please don't link it either Weka , the kind of toxicity in the world is literally making me sick at the moment.But if that is happening, it's a terrible lurch to the right
        
        If you've watched KJK enough, you've seen transphobia. This doesn't make LWS transphobic, but I really wish GCFs had come up with the idea.
        
        Another example of transphobia is people saying trans people don't exist. Obviously they do and the issue is what is 'trans', but the rhetoric itself promotes a narrative that is anti-trans.
        
        When I first joined the debate on twitter, I got blocked equally by both sides. GC women blocked me for talking about transphobia in the GC movements, but to me it was weird because feminism has always had to deal with things like racism and homophobia within its own ranks. It's ok to acknowledge transphobia too and try and work though the issues. It's complicated by the fact that TRAs use the term transphobia as a catchall against anything that doesn't support trans women are literal women. So it's both a term with meaning and a term that is meaningless. Context matters.
        
        I don't think being transphobic is inherently a lurch to the right, although that is certainly happening too. There are racist, sexist and homophobic people on the left too.
        
        Molly …
        
        8 March 2024 at 11:56 am
        
        "Another example of transphobia is people saying trans people don't exist."
        
        The only reference to this is a claim given by some that saying people don't change sex equates to saying "trans people don't exist".
        
        It's not an example of transphobia – still not defined – but an example of bad argument.
        
        Some may dismiss the very real desire of people to be the other sex, which is also not a good definition of transphobia. But it needs to be clear about whether they are dismissing the right to cement that belief in legislation and policy or the understanding that people have psychological difficulties accepting their sex. Still neither is a good definition for transphobia as it is used.
        
        weka …
        
        8 March 2024 at 12:08 pm
        
        Please don't take my words selectively to support your argument. What I said,
        
        Another example of transphobia is people saying trans people don't exist. Obviously they do and the issue is what is 'trans', but the rhetoric itself promotes a narrative that is anti-trans.
        
        emphasis now added.
        
        That means, don't run round on twitter in a frenzy yelling trans people don't exist in a situation where the GC movement is increasingly becoming reactionary and regressive.
        
        If people want to to talk about the fact that humans can't change sex, there are ways to do that without buying into rhetoric and politics that seeks to remove the rights of trans people and create and anti-trans atmosphere.
        
        Molly …
        
        8 March 2024 at 12:22 pm
        
        I wasn't taking your words to support my argument, I have enough of my own, but I may have misunderstood yours.
        
        "That means, don't run round on twitter in a frenzy yelling trans people don't exist in a situation where the GC movement is increasingly becoming reactionary and regressive."
        
        I no longer use the term GC in reference to myself, because I have no idea now what the term actually means, and am aware that others who hold opposite views to my own – claim the term for themselves. As our conversation indicates, there is a wide diversity of views amongst those who will be labelled GC even if they don't claim it for themselves.
        
        There are many who are attracted to any movement that are reactionary and aggressive. They need to be called out when that is the case. Blame for those aggressions belong to the aggressors.
        
        Molly 4.3.1.1.1.2
        
        8 March 2024 at 11:28 am
        
        "Afaik she is referring to the idea that because of how KJK does her work, violence by others is a natural consequence."
        
        How does KJK do her work that results in violence being a natural consequence? Also, I'd like to hear Darien respond in her own words to that question.
        
        "KJK was asked ahead of time by Australian gender critical feminists to not come to Aus because of what the Nazis would do. "
        
        Full context means that you also have to say that she was also invited by women who don't use unaffiliated men's groups as a gauge of permitted behaviour.
        
        " In Hobart KJK was out of control, deliberately taunting TRAs by verbally targeting an MP who has a trans child. I consider that provocative."
        
        Context again: After the MP came with a group through a designated no-man's land to harass and inflame antagonism towards attendees.
        
        https://www.youtube.com/live/rt09IHWLi_E?si=3DYodZCjnAV1k_F8&t=3580
        
        Provocative (in your consideration) is neither a crime, nor a call for violence. There has to be clear understanding of this distinction.
        
        "KJK is a right wing populist who uses techniques designed to rark people up and this is how she gathers power."
        
        What techniques? Name them.
        
        " The denial of transphobia within GC circles, even among feminists, has long been palpable."
        
        What is transphobia, weka? Give your definition and then we can discuss, else it is an amorphous word interpreted in a variety of ways to suit.
        
        Molly …
        
        8 March 2024 at 11:45 am
        
        Coincidentally, JK Rowling just posted a definition on her X account:
        
        https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1765822003246768198?s=20
        
        "The word ‘transphobic’, as used here, does not mean an irrational fear or dislike of trans people. It means refusing to use gender identity ideology’s jargon, refusing to parrot its slogans, refusing to accept that sex doesn't matter when it comes to sport and single-sex spaces, refusing to believe a bearded heterosexual man becomes a lesbian when he declares himself one, and refusing to believe an abusive, misogynistic male is a woman because he likes to wear mini-dresses and pout in selfies…."
        
        weka …
        
        8 March 2024 at 12:01 pm
        
        that's not a definition of transphobia. It's an explanation of how the term has become meaningless and weaponised when TRAs use it. That doesn't mean there is no such thing as transphobia and JKR points to what that is.
        
        Molly …
        
        8 March 2024 at 11:53 am
        
        Here's another definition, to help understand the problem:
        
        https://x.com/libsoftiktok/status/1765818289479954838?s=20
        
        with a link to the bill he is submitting on:
        
        https://documents.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills241/hlrbillspdf/3148H.01I.pdf
        
        weka …
        
        8 March 2024 at 12:04 pm
        
        there is also no definition of transphobia in that tweet. What you are doing is pointing to TRA use of the term, but it's indirect.
        
        What I want to know is do you accept there is such a thing as transphobia? And if so, what's your definition?
        
        Molly …
        
        8 March 2024 at 12:16 pm
        
        No. I don't have a clear definition of transphobia, because I haven't yet heard or come across one, despite the common use of the term.
        
        I connect the use of "phobia" to be an irrational fear of something.
        
        As transgender as a concept is (to my mind) ill defined and incoherent, then my (personal) interpretation would be an irrational fear of an ill-defined concept, which makes no sense.
        
        I see it used in the way that JK Rowling defines, and also in the way used by the submitter in the Missouri hearings, which shows the lack of consistency in the way it is used. This lack of clarity in language by using such badly defined terms, does not aid discussion.
        
        weka …
        
        8 March 2024 at 1:43 pm
        
        If a bloke said to a lesbian, you’re not really a lesbian, you just need a good shag, would you consider that to be homophobia?
        
        If some men beat up a gay man when he was on the way home from the pub and while beating him told him he was a useless queer, would you consider that homophobia?
        
        I’m trying to get a sense here if this is about trans issues specifically, or if you don’t recognise prejudice at the personal and societal level.
        
        Molly …
        
        8 March 2024 at 2:38 pm
        
        "If a bloke said to a lesbian, you’re not really a lesbian, you just need a good shag, would you consider that to be homophobia?"
        
        I'd consider it all too commonplace and idiotic, whether it was said by a bloke or a woman. Homophobic possibly, if it is intended to deny the sexual orientation they ARE.
        
        "If some men beat up a gay man when he was on the way home from the pub and while beating him told him he was a useless queer, would you consider that homophobia?"
        
        That's pretty clear cut.
        
        "I’m trying to get a sense here if this is about trans issues specifically, or if you don’t recognise prejudice at the personal and societal level."
        
        If that is your intention, don't use examples related to sexual orientation. That's a common, but misused analogy.
        
        Homophobia is when people refuse to accept who people ARE.
        
        Transphobia is used as an accusation, when people refuse to accept who people ARE NOT.
        
        I’m probably not going to bother responding anymore, because due to the moderation I am unsure what comments relate to what I have already said, or how conversations can work in such a piecemeal way.
        
        weka []
        
        8 March 2024 at 10:39 pm
        
        apologies for the delay in releasing your last three comments. I didn’t have much availability for a number of hours and this evening has been taken up with moderating.
        
        Putting the whole post in pre-mod was an experiment to see if we could avoid some of the degradation of debate that has tended to happen on this and a few other topics.
        
        Your comments this afternoon were released in the order they were made, and I was replying as I went. So it should have been reasonably easy to follow under the post by date/time stamp and the Replies list. I think the confusion happened because we were commenting on top of each other, not because of the premod. That happens a lot when people are talking fast.
        
        weka …
        
        8 March 2024 at 11:55 am
        
        "Afaik she is referring to the idea that because of how KJK does her work, violence by others is a natural consequence."
        
        How does KJK do her work that results in violence being a natural consequence? Also, I'd like to hear Darien respond in her own words to that question.
        
        I guess the theory is that being politically provocative in the way that she is pushes other people to violence? I dunno, I think it's a weird position for leftists (not talking Darien here, she can speak for herself). But there are people who think misgendering or saying TW are male is literal violence and I guess they feel entitled to punch back.
        
        "KJK was asked ahead of time by Australian gender critical feminists to not come to Aus because of what the Nazis would do. "
        
        Full context means that you also have to say that she was also invited by women who don't use unaffiliated men's groups as a gauge of permitted behaviour.
        
        What does "women who don't use unaffiliated men's groups as a gauge of permitted behaviour" mean? Or rather, are you saying that the GCFs who asked KJK to not come to Aus are women who use unaffiliated men's groups as a gauge of permitted behaviour? Can you please explain that in more detail?
        
        " In Hobart KJK was out of control, deliberately taunting TRAs by verbally targeting an MP who has a trans child. I consider that provocative."
        
        Context again: After the MP came with a group through a designated no-man's land to harass and inflame antagonism towards attendees.
        
        Are you arguing for tit for tat here? Or simply pointing out like I was that there is context? What's the point more precisely? That KJK was also provoked? I agree. My point was that she responded from her transphobia. I've seen that multiple times. When she loses her shit that's the kind of thing she defaults to.
        
        Provocative (in your consideration) is neither a crime, nor a call for violence. There has to be clear understanding of this distinction.
        
        Completely agree. This is the crux of it right? The liberal left have lost their moorings and are basically arguing 'she asked for it', and the right are using that to provoke the left. Both sides are fucked up on this and have lost sight of how wars start (actual wars where people get killed and women and children get raped). I can see that path if we don't make different choices.
        
        "KJK is a right wing populist who uses techniques designed to rark people up and this is how she gathers power."
        
        What techniques? Name them.
        
        In your video link, the house with no mortgage comment is still funny. She knows how to taunt and enjoy herself and that's part of her appeal. Very Trumpian.
        
        Given how much you have seen of her work, if you don't already understand what she does, what she is good at, that she intentionally says provocative things, and this is attractive, I'm not sure I can explain it to you.
        
        " The denial of transphobia within GC circles, even among feminists, has long been palpable."
        
        What is transphobia, weka? Give your definition and then we can discuss, else it is an amorphous word interpreted in a variety of ways to suit.
        
        I consider transphobia to be wanting trans people to not exist. Discrimination against trans people for jobs or housing is transphobia. A visceral feeling of yuk when thinking about trans people and then acting on that politically. That's three examples.
        
        Molly …
        
        8 March 2024 at 12:10 pm
        
        "But there are people who think misgendering or saying TW are male is literal violence and I guess they feel entitled to punch back."
        
        That's not a result of KJK though. It is a failing on the part of those committing violence.
        
        "What does "women who don't use unaffiliated men's groups as a gauge of permitted behaviour" mean? Or rather, are you saying that the GCFs who asked KJK to not come to Aus are women who use unaffiliated men's groups as a gauge of permitted behaviour? Can you please explain that in more detail?"
        
        Sure. You wrote: "KJK was asked ahead of time by Australian gender critical feminists to not come to Aus because of what the Nazis would do. " Many do not use unaffiliated Nazi groups to indicate whether they should meet and speak.
        
        "In your video link, the house with no mortgage comment is still funny. She knows how to taunt and enjoy herself and that's part of her appeal. Very Trumpian.
        
        Given how much you have seen of her work, if you don't already understand what she does, what she is good at, that she intentionally says provocative things, and this is attractive, I'm not sure I can explain it to you."
        
        When commentary based on reckons, allusions to provocation, taunting and Trumpism results in women meeting to speak and listen in NZ, being aggressively targeted and assaulted – then you should be able to be very clear what the limits of speech are. Mortgage free? The horror!!
        
        "I consider transphobia to be wanting trans people to not exist. Discrimination against trans people for jobs or housing is transphobia. A visceral feeling of yuk when thinking about trans people and then acting on that politically. That's three examples."
        
        Saying trans people to not exist, is weighted with the implication that elimination is demanded.
        
        People who claim gender identities exist. Whether or not their claim is accepted by others.
        
        Discrimination against ANYONE for housing or employing is already against the law.
        
        "A visceral feeling of yuk when thinking about trans people and then acting on that politically."
        
        Given the wide diversity of those claiming a gender identity, "a visceral feeling of yuk" is a poor indicator of transphobia. What political acts fall into this category in your mind?
        
        weka …
        
        8 March 2024 at 12:20 pm
        
        I’ll reply after you’ve answered this,
        
        https://thestandard.org.nz/open-letter-to-judge-glubb/#comment-1992175
        
        Molly …
        
        8 March 2024 at 12:23 pm
        
        I thought I had. Is the comment in moderation?
        
        weka []
        
        8 March 2024 at 1:22 pm
        
        all comments under this post are in premod, as per the mod note at the bottom of the post.
        
        Molly …
        
        8 March 2024 at 1:27 pm
        
        @weka
        
        So. all good I guess… I don't have to rewrite and you have access to my already supplied response.
        
        Molly …
        
        8 March 2024 at 12:41 pm
        
        "Trans people don't exist" is a strange conclusion to make when someone does not accept an individual's self declaration.
        
        A person being told they are not an airline pilot – when they are not, or even when they are – does not negate their existence. It just means that someone disagrees with them.
        
        If you are speaking about transsexuals – then how does saying "trans people don't exist" apply here?
        
        Like a woman who has had a double mastectomy still exists – and is still a woman. A man who undergoes medical and surgical interventions in respsect of opposite sex mimicry still exists – and is still a man. There existence is not in question. Nor is the affliction – cancer or gender distress – that put them there.
        
        What do you mean by saying "trans people do not exist"?
        
        Anker 4.3.1.1.1.3
        
        8 March 2024 at 9:26 pm
        
        Not all gender critical feminists asked PP not to go to Australia
        
        "because of how KJK does her work, violence by others is a natural consequence". Can't believe you have written this Weka. A bit like saying because Mrs Smith at number five doesn't keep the house tidy, her husband gives her a wack as a natural consequence"
        
        It is because PP won't shut up that she is most effective. It demonstrates the violence of the tras rights activists as we saw in Albert Park
        
        [I didn’t say that. Don’t take my words out of context. If you selective quote me again and thus misrepresent my points, I will ban you. You appear to be reaction posting and not understanding what you are reading. Either take a break or I will moderate – weka]
        
        weka …
        
        8 March 2024 at 9:50 pm
        
        mod note.
        
        Anker …
        
        9 March 2024 at 1:00 pm
        
        accepted!
    - Anker 4.3.1.2
      
      8 March 2024 at 8:56 pm
      
      What on earth do you mean "PP brought violence with her"?
      
      Actually it was the tras and the Green Partywho brought the violence along.
      
      Her right wing views? She was a member of the Labour Party until she joined a Labour women's group where a trans identifying male start talking her down and the trans maidens in the Labour Party stood up for the trans male, that for Posie.
      
      I don't know what you mean by right wing views.
      - weka 4.3.1.2.1
        
        8 March 2024 at 9:24 pm
        
        It's been a long time since KJK was involved with Labour. It's pretty clear her politics have shifted since then.
        
        Symptoms of right wingery:
        
        anti-feminist
        
        conservative views on abortion
        
        didn't inherently understand the need to condemn actual Nazis in Melbourne
        
        is quite happy to work with the right
        
        seems ok to be platformed with or interviewed by far right and neofascist speakers
        
        some examples here
        
        https://twitter.com/LeftwingGc/status/1593912578702548992
        
        Whatever arguments about free speech and freedom of association people might want to run, I think it's reasonable consider KJK is now centre right (at least). Imo she's been in a trajectory movement rightwards for some time and still is.
        
        There's a difference between people from the centre left who become politically homeless but retain liberal and left wing values, and those that actually shift to the right in their thinking. Doesn't track exactly with whatever party one is in or votes for.
        
        Anker 4.3.1.2.1.1
        
        8 March 2024 at 9:33 pm
        
        Is PP anti feminist? Link? Isn't she allowed conservative views on abortion?
        
        She did condemn the Nazis in Melbourne (said something like "I find nazis abhorent". PP happy to work with the right……she will work with almost anyone who will support her cause. In this case, I blame the left for trying to de-platform her. Who are the neo fascists speakers?
        
        weka …
        
        8 March 2024 at 9:42 pm
        
        KJK routinely attacks feminists online, notably left wing gender critical feminists in the UK. This is why she doesn’t call herself a feminist. This is so common, I’m not going to provide evidence but you can look on twitter. If you are not on twitter you are missing a huge context
        
        Yes, KJK is allowed conservative views on abortion. Please slow down and start reading/rereading what people are saying. My comment was to provide a list of examples of the things that make KJK right wing. I didn’t say or imply anything that she can’t have her own views.
        
        KJK refused to condemn the Melbourne Nazis for 24 hours. In the post-LWS video, KJK and other women sat and drank wine and laughed, they didn’t even seem to be aware of what had just happened. In the end, after quite a bit of bad press, KJK make a statement later the following day. This is what I meant when I said “didn’t inherently understand the need to condemn actual Nazis in Melbourne”
        
        Emphasis added.
        
        Again, please slow down and make the time to understand what you are responding to.
    - Anker 4.3.1.3
      
      8 March 2024 at 9:19 pm
      
      "I do think PP brought violence with her"………….OMG sometimes I can't believe what people on the left say!
      
      The people who brought violence to Albert Park were the people who were violent, possibly incited by the Greens who put [deleted] on their social media page" No just the 20 year old who repeatly punched an old lady…….
      
      Parker was also the victim of violence that day, not just from tomato juice thrower but the vile mob of thugs who kick and punched the women trying to get her out of the park. She had liquid poured over her and feared if the managed to force her to the ground she would never get up. If you watch the videos her perception look completely credible.
      
      So its blame the victim of serious death threats (Parker) who was assaulted and had to have police protection to get her out of the country.
      
      For god's sake…once we were feminists (on the left)
      - weka 4.3.1.3.1
        
        8 March 2024 at 9:44 pm
        
        I gave you a mod note last night about that particular claim about the Greens. I’m giving it again and have again deleted the phrase. Please pay attention and please start checking your Replies when you come on site so you see mod notes. I have almost no tolerance now for re-explaining things to regulars who should know better.
        
        When you put words in double quotes, I will consider them an actual quote and expect a link. If you are paraphrasing, then you need to make that clear, but as per the site Policy, you need to provide back up for claims like that when asked.
        
        Darien Fenton 4.3.1.3.1.1
        
        9 March 2024 at 7:08 am
        
        Thank you Weka.
        
        Anker 4.3.1.3.1.2
        
        9 March 2024 at 6:39 pm
        
        Weka I have a pic of what I said the Greens said which was posted on their social media. It has likely been deleted, but it is bone fide.
        
        I am fiddling around with technology trying to post it!
Shanreagh 5

7 March 2024 at 2:39 pm

I believe he should have been convicted and discharged, or possibly subject to extended supervision etc

I think also that it could have innovative/creative for the Judge to place him doing good work at a place such as the Womens Rights Party or hosts of LWS.

They may have been able to thoughtfully & gently provide evidence of womens rights and how they have been fought for over the years. In return he could have helped with mailouts, under supervison, admin work,even provided some of his anime work (I'm not a fan of this but he is not alone in being rather 'off' in some of his takes).

He could have also been guided through a ED or ortho ward where unconscious patients who have been punched are dealt with, or he could have been given an essay to complete by the Judge on NZ's record of domestic violence and possibly have some solutions.

I also think that the judge could have sought to ensure that he is given counselling on how to live a life with Autism/ADHD without violence. A propensity to violence doesn't follow from these diagnoses but people can be given tips and tricks on how to avoid being triggered.

The outcome for the victim was a fairly minor physical injury

I also don't think it was a relatively minor attack.

I do agree that the Judge could have given a response that covered as above the powerful difference in punch ability/result. (At the back of my mind I can't help thinking of the differences in physical ability and possiblility of injury to females by men in women' sports teams.) But we won't go there.

Who is to say that it is better for a young pakeha male to have no record of a severe and unprovoked assault while perhaps in south Auckland a young brown male may not have had the same good fortune available to him. It seems that a young brown male who lashes out then turns himself around is saddled with a conviction that can make it hard to emigrate to places like the States, UK or Australia.

This is bought justice.

Bought justice where an offender has a family who can pay for expensive medical diagnoses, reparation and expensive solicitors.

I also think it is significant that the assailant of James Shaw was given a a prison term for a similar unprovoked attack.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/402681/jail-for-man-who-assaulted-green-party-co-leader-james-shaw
- SPC 5.1
  
  7 March 2024 at 3:49 pm
  
  The alternative was
  - Conviction and discharge – This is only available if there isn’t a minimum sentence. Also, the judge can only convict and discharge if the judge is satisfied a conviction would be a sufficient penalty in itself. This means you do have a criminal record but receive no other penalty except the fact of conviction. This charge will go onto your criminal record.
  - Order to come up for sentence if called on – If you have been convicted, then instead of imposing a sentence the court may order you to come up for sentence if called on within a period of up to one year. This means if you come back to court within that time you could then be sentenced on the earlier charge too. This is sometimes called a “suspended” sentence, or a “good behaviour bond”.
  https://communitylaw.org.nz/community-law-manual/test/sentencing-the-judges-decision-about-punishment/the-different-types-of-sentences/
  
  The reason to discharge without conviction – is usually employment – all convictions being on record.
  
  It would appear we need an alternative
  
  A suspended conviction, one that times out (and becomes discharged without conviction) if there is compliance with the sentencing and no further offending.
  
  In the James Shaw case, the man was in his 40's, showed no remorse, it was aggravated – targeting of a politician and prolonged. For mine, there was no alternative to conviction and a sentence.
SPC 6

7 March 2024 at 3:27 pm

If a man has assaulted a woman in a domestic and then police when they arrive and had prior convictions, he would need good representation* (finding a group to provide residency and therapy etc) to avoid prison.

The failure of protection orders is well known.

The political tribalism of the event, places it in the area of the assault on James Shaw.

Most male on male violence does not result in a prison sentence – even when involving greater physical harm. Because of the issue of determining intent – though if it were a hate crime, that would be seen as an aggravating factor.

For more serious cases of common assault, particularly if you have any previous assault convictions, you may be fined or given a community-based sentence or a prison term, as in these examples:

Beyond common assault, there are a range of offences for violent behaviour of increasing seriousness, including:
- male assaults female (with a maximum penalty of two years’ prison)
- aggravated assault (maximum penalty – three years)
- assault with intent to injure (maximum penalty – three years)
- intentionally injuring a person (maximum penalty – five years)
- wounding with intent to cause injury (maximum penalty – seven years)
- injuring with intent to cause grievous bodily harm (maximum penalty – 10 years)
- wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm (maximum penalty – 14 years).
https://communitylaw.org.nz/community-law-manual/chapter-33-common-crimes/assault/

https://www.districtcourts.govt.nz/about-the-courts/j/discharge-without-conviction-an-option-not-widely-understood/

As per violence against women, men have been raping women and getting sentenced to home detention (and some name suppression).
Mike the Lefty 7

7 March 2024 at 3:58 pm

I wonder what would have happened if someone had given the assailant a bunch of fives in retaliation for his attack on the victim?

I know exactly what would have happened.

The police would have gone after the avenger at all cost and ignored the offender.

The sort of rubbish that so often serves as justice in this country and plays right into the hands of the self-serving "get tough on crime" lobby, and of course this government propped up by conspiracy theorists.
Anker 8

7 March 2024 at 9:48 pm

Yes the police were tardy about following up this crime and making an arrest. In fact it was Leo Molly's detective work who identified the perp (whether you love him or hate him).
Anker 9

7 March 2024 at 10:01 pm

Actually for me now it is not so much about the sentence the judge delivered to the perp.

I am waiting, likely in vain for an apology to the women at Albert Park who experienced a threatening bullying, violent mob, who were carrying signs like "suck my lady d..k"

The apology needs to come from the media who reported misinformation about Kellie-Jae (blanked out "white supremacy symbol", when it was perfectly obvious KJK was merely playing with her zipper (bad luck Newshub), the Green Party for their toxic adoption of gender ideology, Marama Davison who at the time was the Minister for Violence and Sexual Violence Prevention and when asked, failed to condemn the violence against women at Albert Park (should have been sacked imo), the Labour Party politicians who ramped up the freenzy over PP and who have failed to listen to gender critical women. I am sure there are others.
Chris Clark 10

8 March 2024 at 10:49 am

Cam Slater called Judge Glubb "woke" and David Seymour thinks that no woman in NZ is safe.
- weka 10.1
  
  8 March 2024 at 11:03 am
  
  mod note:
  
  The Slater bit was easy enough to find, but I can't find where Seymour thinks that. Please provide a credible source as per The Standard's Policy.
  
  Please also explain your point, because it's not at all clear.
Chris Clark 11

8 March 2024 at 3:17 pm

I was just saying that not everyone agrees with the judgement handed down and I was showing you what some rightie's opinions were. Slater’s was from the BFD by the way.

As for David Seymour, I later checked and I had it all mixed up. Could the bit about Seymour be deleted please?

I apologise if I might have wasted your time.
mickysavage 12

8 March 2024 at 9:05 pm

I always get concerned at discussions about sentencing.

The public only see a fraction of what is happening.

I have appeared before Judge Glubb a few times. I always found him to be professional and careful to balance competing interests.

Sentencing is something of a science and something of an art. There is nothing about the second person's previous convictions mentioned in the post and this could have played a major part in the decision. Also for better or for worse being drunk is not a mitigating factor whereas being neurodivergent is.

The Judge should be allowed to get on with his job. There will be plenty of opportunities for the right to beat up on judges because of individual sentencing decisions.
- weka 12.1
  
  8 March 2024 at 9:10 pm
  
  I feel like the public is let down with MSM reporting of cases. We can only go on what we see, and this judgement/sentencing was always going to come with a large amount of reaction.
  
  Ordinarily, are the details of a case available to reporters to report freely (things like name suppression aside)? Are those details available to the public?
- Psycho Milt 12.2
  
  8 March 2024 at 9:32 pm
  
  I don't see how it does the neurodivergent any favours to say neurodiversity makes you more likely to punch people who are weaker than you if you get angry with them.
  - Anker 12.2.1
    
    8 March 2024 at 9:38 pm
    
    Love it psycho milt!
randal mcmurphy 13

11 March 2024 at 1:10 am

does all his mean our society is rotten at the core?