Tony Veitch: I’m the Real Victim Here.

137 comments on “Tony Veitch: I’m the Real Victim Here. ”

• Comments are now closed

1. tinfoilhat 1

   8 May 2016 at 12:16 pm

   Hmmm perhaps it is best to take what he says at face value.

   He has been found guilty and done his time and to the best of our knowledge not reoffended. I don’t see why there’s a need by many to continue to vilify him which to my mind is one of the worst aspects of our attitude to offending and rehabilitation in NZ.
   • te reo putake 1.1

     8 May 2016 at 12:24 pm

     Dude, he bought his way out of trouble. Ten years on, he’s still trying to minimise his offending. He will not acknowledge the full extent of what he did and relies on the fact that he had a single conviction.

     The message he continues to send is that there is that if you are rich, there are ways out of any bad situation. That’s not a message to his fellow A listers, it’s a message to victims. Shut up and cop it sweet.
     • Draco T Bastard 1.1.1

       8 May 2016 at 12:39 pm

       +1
     • Wainwright 1.1.2

       8 May 2016 at 4:30 pm

       He lies about what he did. He abuses his victim. He’s a scumbag. Excellent post, trp.
   • Paul Campbell 1.2

     8 May 2016 at 12:25 pm

     I don’t think we have to put him back in the position of privilege he once had, we don’t owe him a 6 figure salary, his money got him out of the worst of his situation, he doesn’t need more, that would just be enabling.

     Let him start again in some other business where he’s not plastered in our faces all the time, the country needs more tradespeople why doesn’t he go take a job there
   • Rosemary McDonald 1.3

     8 May 2016 at 12:37 pm

     “I find this post unnecessary and distasteful. All it does is rip open wounds and ill-feelings, pushes buttons and perpetuates the wrongs on all sides.”

     “…the wrongs on all sides.”

     What the fucking fuck?

     Enabler.
     • RedLogix 1.3.1

       8 May 2016 at 12:53 pm

       The only violence I have ever experienced as an adult was at the hands of a woman. Or more specifically her feet. Repeatedly. Over many years. I hinted at this some years back; I’ll say it plain now.

       It put me in hospital once with concussion and a broken arm.

       One of my two daughters was also hurt.

       Hospital staff refused to believe me. At one point I thought I was going to be accused of being the perpetrator; I shut up.

       The only close friend I could speak to was so embarrassed we never spoke again.

       And I never struck back; not once. Not once. I thought I was doing the right thing.

       But like Veitch I don’t ask for pity, nor sympathy. Just understanding that my experience shapes my beliefs on this matter. So fuckety fuck yourself.

       This uni-dimensional obsession that all men are evil and all women are angels (who never do any wrong and are always the victims) has led the issue down a cul-de-sac for decades. Domestic violence figures are as bad as they ever and attitudes as displayed by yourself and trp only enable more of the same.

       This is an issue that affects both genders in many complex and difficult ways; and while male violence is always and rightly the most visible and dangerous symptom, it is not the root cause.

       I made it clear … we need clarity, compassion and healing on all sides. We don’t get this from trp’s post.
       • Rosemary McDonald 1.3.1.1

         8 May 2016 at 1:19 pm

         RedLogix… never once did I say that violence was gender specific.

         Moko’s murderer was female. I read the account of what he went through at the hands of that woman and literally fell apart. I was again a three year old seeing this female foot descend yet again upon my head. Repeatedly.

         The abuse was such that sometimes I really do believe that the dead kids are the lucky ones. They are spared the torture of having to grow up knowing that even your own mother couldn’t love you.

         So…my beef with your enabling ‘lets all forgive and forget in the spirit of redemption’ position?

         Redemption (in my mind anyway) is predicated on the perpetrator actually unreservedly owning the problem.

         No excuses. No victim blaming. No blaming stress or poverty or colonisation. No blaming having grown up in a culture of violence. No blaming violent images through various media.

         No excuses.

         Tell the truth. The whole truth. Admit 100% responsibility.

         Do the work to make those around you safe.

         Then, forgiveness and redemption.

         Not the self serving crap that Veitch churned out.
         • RedLogix 1.3.1.1.1

           8 May 2016 at 1:33 pm

           See my reply to DtB below. I read what Veitch writes through the lens of a what are called “I statements”. (Or at least that was what they got called when I first encountered the idea.)

           Men are trained to abstract and compartmentalise. They either do this by talking in the third person, talking about the subject in general terms, or speaking on behalf of other people.

           Also they often use direct apologies as a way of diverting anger, and frankly in the modern cynical world no-one believes them anyway. They’ve become yet another social media minefield.

           But what Veitch is writing here is indeed coming from himself. And it is indeed all about him. Because he is the only person he now has responsibility for here, and recognising what happened, owning it and expressing how he now feels about it is indeed the ONLY thing he can usefully do towards changing his behaviour and preventing it from happening again.

           Maybe the next stage towards redemption lies in finding a way to make a positive contribution. And maybe now he’s trying to do that:

           My story is public and while that’s hard personally, maybe it is a good thing. Perhaps somewhere it might help someone else make a better decision.
         • RedLogix 1.3.1.1.2

           8 May 2016 at 2:02 pm

           Incidentally I ask you to consider how I might have felt when I read this charming account in the Herald this morning:

           http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11635381

           Now let me make this plain; the guy involved is guilty alright. His actions absolutely wrong, and absolutely typical of what happens when alcohol is abused. When people get that drunk and insensible it’s like a mental illness and their actions are often wrong and utterly destructive.

           Our Courts allow mental disturbance or illness as a plea in even the most serious cases of homicide, yet the temporary madness of drunkenness, self-inflicted as it is, is not permitted such latitude. Suffice to say I’m making zero excuse for him.

           But then McIvor goes on to say:

           Then I straddled him, whacked him as hard as I could in the face and ran for the door. He was so drunk he didn’t wake up.

           And reports this with no sense of wrong herself. From her account it’s absolutely clear she believes (as will most of her readers) that “the guy was asking for it”. Fuck me.

           Yes she was rightly angry, furious, with him, yes she had been very much wronged. But here is a person, unconscious, helpless and she deliberately chooses without immediate provocation to hit him in the head as “hard as she can”. She can’t even plead to have been all that drunk.

           If a male columnist had written such an account …

           And to anticipate the obvious response .. I’m absolutely not diverting from the fact of male violence. I’m not even trying to point out the now reluctantly accepted view that women are in broad terms equally as abusive as men. That isn’t the point.

           But as McIvor’s article neatly demonstrates, attitudes are very, very much not equal. And I maintain until we are willing to confront this deep polarisation of attitudes, both genders will remain stuck in hostile, unmoving camps.

           Oh and I chose not to write this up a post. I don’t think bashing McIvor for what she wrote this morning would help anyone, not her, not me not anyone else. Again, provocation and abuse only perpetuates itself. Physical, verbal, public or private. None of it helps.
           • mpledger 1.3.1.1.2.1

             8 May 2016 at 11:25 pm

             So what was she supposed to do? a) Lie there naked in terror until he woke up again and “let” her go (or maybe have a second round) or b) run for the door, find some clothes and hope he didn’t wake up and have another go at her.

             She was effectively kidnapped. She hit her kidnapper to give her the time to make her escape. She only knew how far under he was when he failed to respond to her hitting him.

             If a man had kidnapped another man and the kidnappee had punched out his kidnapper when the kidnapper fell asleep then I can’t see anyone not seeing that as justified.
       • Anne 1.3.1.2

         9 May 2016 at 3:33 pm

         Hospital staff refused to believe me. At one point I thought I was going to be accused of being the perpetrator; I shut up.

         The only close friend I could speak to was so embarrassed we never spoke again.

         Remove “Hospital staff” and replace with “Police” and I went through a similar process Redlogix. The perpetrator was a woman and the acts (violence to pets and property among other things) was carried out clandestinely and over a lengthy period of time. A male accomplice was responsible for obscene messaging and phone calls but his involvement was at an earlier stage of the harassment. It was a terrible shock to eventually discover my ‘mysterious taunter’ was a friend whom I had wholly trusted.

         Yes. I also lost friends – people who didn’t understand what was happening and presumed I had done something to deserve it.
     • lprent 1.3.2

       8 May 2016 at 4:36 pm

       Rosemary, I’ve been reading RL in comments and posts on here for a lot of years. He is honest, accurate, thoughtful and generally well worth reading – even when you disagree with him. And I routinely disagree with just about everyone.

       Dismissing him with a label is just damn stupid.
       • Rosemary McDonald 1.3.2.1

         8 May 2016 at 5:00 pm

         Apologies, lprent, and RedLogix.

         The first comment by RedLogix that triggered my response of “enabler” has unfortunately disappeared.

         I’ll never make the mistake of having an opinion that differs from that of a man in the area of family violence ever, ever again.

         And I’m really, really sorry….that I ever took the risk and participated here on a subject I have first hand experience of.

         Blame my damn stupidity.
         • te reo putake 1.3.2.1.1

           8 May 2016 at 5:25 pm

           RL has chosen to remove the comment, which makes putting later comments in context tricky. In the meantime, there’s this:

           https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w
       • weka 1.3.2.2

         9 May 2016 at 5:16 pm

         Rosemary, I’ve been reading RL in comments and posts on here for a lot of years. He is honest, accurate, thoughtful and generally well worth reading – even when you disagree with him. And I routinely disagree with just about everyone.

         Dismissing him with a label is just damn stupid.

         I’ve also been reading RL in comments and talking with him here for many years, and I would say that on pretty much every other topic he is as you describe. But on gender he is not. This isn’t about disagreeing with points. As you know, I can do that. It’s about enabling, and Rosemary’s label was spot on. At this point in time we simply shouldn’t have to be pushing back against these kinds of attitudes from left wing men. They’re damaging and tiresome and use up precious resources not just in this kind of political sphere but out in the rest of the world where people are still getting hurt.
   • Draco T Bastard 1.4

     8 May 2016 at 12:40 pm

     If he was redeemed and showed that he was then it’d be a different story. That’s not what we’re seeing though. In fact, we’re seeing the exact opposite.
     • RedLogix 1.4.1

       8 May 2016 at 1:06 pm

       The key to healing is to take personal responsibility and to speak for yourself. The method often used is called “I statements”. It is particularly useful to help men from abstracting or compartmentalizing what they have done or how they feel about it.

       It is a powerful and vital tool in getting people to own and make the changes in belief that will guide their future behaviour.

       Veitch has written a clear and comprehensive “I statement”, taking ownership of what he has done, and how shamed he now feels about it. In terms of changing behaviour this counts.

       If everyone else here choses to misread this as “being all about Veitch” then I can’t change that. But I read it and was proud of him. He’s taken a big and critical step in the right direction.
       • tangled_up 1.4.1.1

         8 May 2016 at 2:15 pm

         Very well put. Couldn’t agree more.
       • te reo putake 1.4.1.2

         8 May 2016 at 2:54 pm

         RL, you seem to assume that Veitch is deliberately writing in the “I statement” form. We have no idea if he’s had the benefit of such learnings. Either way, neglecting to specifically address the central issue, the damage he did to his partner, suggests he hasn’t learned a damn thing. He can’t even bring himself to use her name.

         I think it’s more likely he’s just a narcissistic, self justifying git who needs to see a doctor about his I problem.
         • RedLogix 1.4.1.2.1

           8 May 2016 at 3:03 pm

           I would think it highly likely he has already attended or been required to attend at least some form of anger management course, if not counselling in even more depth.

           If nothing else his employer may well have required it.

           Therefore my assumption is probably on stronger grounds than many of the ones you are making here.

           He can’t even bring himself to use her name.

           Maybe she doesn’t want to be dragged back into it. Maybe it was her choice not to be named? Maybe there are other legal considerations in play here.

           More information required before conclusions can be made.
           • Jenny Kirk 1.4.1.2.1.1

             8 May 2016 at 3:34 pm

             Sorry RedLogix – I can get what you’re saying, but I, too, don’t think Tony Veitch is being genuinely apologetic .

             Just read the story highlighted in TRP’s post – here’s the link to it –
             http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2427247/Tony-Veitch-police-file-released

             Someone who has done what was in those charges – dropped because his victim was paid $100,000 in reparation – needs to acknowledge that he has a vile out-of-control temper and to explain what he’s done to overcome his past violent reactions to situations which would occur no doubt in the future. Then I might believe him.
       • NZ Woman 1.4.1.3

         9 May 2016 at 11:12 am

         Saying he only committed ONE act of violence towards his victim is untrue and as long as he can’t face the truth he has no credibility.
   • Keith 1.5

     8 May 2016 at 5:43 pm

     If you listen to Newstslk ZB, Tonys employer, Tinfoilhat, ongoing vilification is stock in trade, for “real criminals”, usually of a different colour to Tony, and like their buddies in the ironically named Sensible Sentencing Trust, no punishment is good enough or long enough, until its one of their own of course. I recall all too well how supportive ZB was of their Tony!

     I agree, he should shut up.
     • tinfoilhat 1.5.1

       8 May 2016 at 5:46 pm

       So now we should vilify him because of his employer ?

       I must admit I’m finding the attitudes and justifications on this thread somewhat daft.
2. Tiger Mountain 2

   8 May 2016 at 12:35 pm

   another pathetic display of self pitying, carefully qualified non contrition from Mr Veitch, sorry still seems to be the hardest word for him
   • amirite 2.1

     8 May 2016 at 12:47 pm

     +1,000
3. Rosemary McDonald 3

   8 May 2016 at 1:05 pm

   Te Reo Putake. (capitalised because you deserve it)

   I was hoping that a respected commentator from the Left would have the guts to pull this shiny little turd into the light, brush of the glitter that has obviously served it’s purpose to blind, and show this perpetrator for the unrepentant privileged little prick that he is.

   Many thanks for that. Good work. You’ve more than done enough for a mallowpuff.

   Veitch is still using his undeserved celebrity status and his White Privilege to diminish the magnitude of what he did. He lies.
   He pretends remorse…and anyone who can see past the glitz would see that.
   • te reo putake 3.1

     8 May 2016 at 1:13 pm

     Cheers, Rosemary, I’m sure I won’t be the only left blogger to pick up on Veitch’s article. I see there’s a lot of discussion on Twitter; search his name and nothing positive comes up. btw, it’s ironic that the Herald chose to publish his apologia on Mothers’ Day. A coded message there, I guess.
     • Rosemary McDonald 3.1.1

       8 May 2016 at 1:25 pm

       On Mother’s Day.

       Oh, yes. That one didn’t escape me either.

       Perhaps the Herald is being deliberately ironic.

       Interesting that they had ‘the”List” of numbers readers can call if the articles triggered reactions that one might need support to deal with. More interesting is a link so that readers can hide the fact they have been there.
       • Paul 3.1.1.1

         8 May 2016 at 1:45 pm

         Why does it even feature?
         Clickbait and ratings.
     • Jenny Kirk 3.1.2

       8 May 2016 at 3:15 pm

       I reckon he’s saying sorry to his mother. After all, its “Mother’s Day”. The victim doesn’t count, in his story. Every time he’s talked about this he’s said he hurt his family (and presumably particularly, his mother).
   • stunnedmullet 3.2

     8 May 2016 at 5:32 pm

     “…respected commentator from the Left..”

     Comedy gold
     • adam 3.2.1

       8 May 2016 at 5:47 pm

       You seem to be adding this to your already low standards today stunnedmullet.

       http://cdn.youthkiawaaz.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/09/sexist-trolls/sexist-troll.png
       • stunnedmullet 3.2.1.1

         8 May 2016 at 5:54 pm

         Pffffft – you wouldn’t know a troll if you looked in the mirror while holding a sign saying

         “llort a m’I”
         • adam 3.2.1.1.1

           8 May 2016 at 6:05 pm

           Unoriginal, copy cat.

           Any original thoughts in there stunnedmullet?
4. Tony Veitch (not the partner-bashing 3rd rate broadcaster) 4

   8 May 2016 at 1:20 pm

   I have never been ashamed of my name before! I just hope that he is not related to me in any way – though Veitch is not a very common name.

   In 2009 when this issue was hitting the news, I had just returned from 4 years overseas. So I had no real knowledge of the problem.

   I landed in Auckland and hired a car to drive up to see a friend in Whangarei. One night I took the hired car out and got stopped by a policewoman. When I asked what for, she indicated that one of my rear lights wasn’t working.

   As routine, she asked me to say my name into a breathalizer. When I said ‘Tony Veitch’ she looked at me hard and asked: ‘Are you having me on?” I had to show her my driver’s licence to convince her I was telling the truth!
   • Reddelusion 4.1

     8 May 2016 at 2:38 pm

     You have the same name, big bloody deal
   • b waghorn 4.2

     8 May 2016 at 3:17 pm

     If I was a mod I’d ban your Arse! Till you dropped the shit at the end.
     • Reddelusion 4.2.1

       8 May 2016 at 9:48 pm

       Me think our friend enjoys the infamy of his name, he certainly protests to much, a good conversation piece with all his lefty mates I bet , just my opinion that’s all, nothing more nothing less, hardly deserving a ban
       • Tony Veitch (not the partner-bashing 3rd rate broadcaster) 4.2.1.1

         9 May 2016 at 5:07 am

         I used to post here as just ‘Tony Veitch’ which, of course, I am entitled to do. But the name caused some confusion – I was accused of hypocrisy and of ‘changing my spots’. So I adopted a suggestion of another commentator and added the qualification in brackets.

         I am quite willing to go back to being just plain old ‘Tony Veitch.’

         Ah, you can’t win!
         • b waghorn 4.2.1.1.1

           9 May 2016 at 7:47 am

           You could just go as Tony ,its peoples views that are the focus of the standard not their names IMO
5. Richardrawshark 5

   8 May 2016 at 1:33 pm

   The people see Tony for what he is, they can make their own judgements I do.

   I’m sure his radio station gets a few letters hence his media need for some words.

   IE Tony you need to go write something we get a lot of hate mail about you still, funny they keep going on about some women with a broken back scenario.

   Tony shuffles off writes a piece the Heralds already in the loop and ready to run……

   Pretty sure it went down something like that.

   Let the rich media play their games, the public will always remember what Tony Veitch did, no matter what he says..
   • seeker 5.1

     8 May 2016 at 1:41 pm

     Key seems to get on with him. Another nauseous pairing when it occurs.
     • Tricledrown 5.1.1

       8 May 2016 at 1:45 pm

       Narcissists fame seekers flock together.
       • Paul 5.1.1.1

         8 May 2016 at 1:47 pm

         Age of the Selfie in the Neoliberal Era

         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOiaZ9vncdM
       • seeker 5.1.1.2

         8 May 2016 at 4:38 pm

         @Trickledrown @1.45pm

         A ha, but yuk.
6. Richardrawshark 6

   8 May 2016 at 1:59 pm

   Funny, but I turned off, never taken a selfie, ever. Lol hate my photo being taken, no doubt confidence issues.
   • Paul 6.1

     8 May 2016 at 2:06 pm

     The age of entitlement: how wealth breeds narcissism
     Anne Manne

     http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/08/the-age-of-entitlement-how-wealth-breeds-narcissism
7. One Two 7

   8 May 2016 at 2:13 pm

   Trash articles are pervasive
8. NZJester 8

   8 May 2016 at 2:18 pm

   It does sound as if he is still in heavy denial and anger at why he was prosecuted.
   Till he comes to real terms with what he did he is a likely danger to any woman he hooks up with.
   As the saying goes “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
9. Ad 9

   8 May 2016 at 2:31 pm

   I would like to hear a responding article from the victim.
   Otherwise his article is a bad case of the victor writing history.
   He is victorious because she is silent.

   I would believe him more if she accepted what he said is true.
   • te reo putake 9.1

     8 May 2016 at 2:45 pm

     She was paid to stay silent. None of us have seen the agreement so we don’t know if it has a watertight confidentiality clause covering both the criminal prosecution and public disclosures. If there is no ability for her to speak, then that leaves Veitch in total control of the story. Power and control, power and control.
     • CR 9.1.1

       8 May 2016 at 10:55 pm

       I haven’t read Veitch’s article but i was interested to read about it in this thread because just last week there was an article in our local paper about the woman he assaulted in this case. The article never mentioned this incident, his name, her association with him or her history of having been a victim of assault/domestic violence. All power to her, the article was about her recent appointment as CEO of a prominent regional organisation. What an inspirational story of recovery and overcoming adversity. She too, has rebuilt her life and career.
   • Rosemary McDonald 9.2

     8 May 2016 at 2:57 pm

     “Poor judgment on my behalf changed so much that day and I apologise unreservedly for that.”

     The key words in that sentence are “that day.”

     Read his wee piece and count the number of times that he uses those two words.

     Then come back and tell us that he is being completely truthful.

     And hence deserving of our respect…nay… pride…

     “This is the smug, self conceited, ugly side of the left I find really unattractive.”

     Smugly yourself Red Logix.

     As a survivor, I personally find the position that many on the left take that the perpetrators of family violence are victims themselves and should hence take no responsibility for their actions repugnant.

     What no one ever seems to ask is why most of us who grew up in a violent family don’t go on to offend ourselves.

     Why most people who are materially deprived do not commit acts of violence.
     • Rosemary McDonald 9.2.1

       8 May 2016 at 3:02 pm

       PS in response to subsequent mod edit…

       I don’t know what Veitch’s political views are, and whats more I don’t think it matters.

       Can’t you just respect the fact that, thank god, a shitload of Kiwis are not beguiled by him.

       That says much about how we are, as a nation, starting to really cut through the crap that has allowed our appalling stats to persist.

       [I’ve moved the comment you refer to, Rosemary. It’s now just below @ 9.1.2. TRP]
     • RedLogix 9.2.2

       8 May 2016 at 3:09 pm

       I personally find the position that many on the left take that the perpetrators of family violence are victims themselves and should hence take no responsibility for their actions repugnant.

       In making that statement in reply to me, you are making are putting words directly and offensively into my mouth Deliberately and provocatively so. [No, she is not. She’s making a general comment. Stay above the line or leave. TRP]

       You know perfectly well I have said no such thing, yet you go ahead and abusively make shit up in the hope I’ll be provoked into saying or doing something stupid in response. [As above. TRP]

       Then you get to play victim again.

       It’s a shitty game you are playing. I’m calling you on it.
       • RedLogix 9.2.2.1

         8 May 2016 at 3:20 pm

         @trp

         I can see you are into the business of misusing moderation again. You have history in this regard.

         I’ll do this in the open and not on the private authors thread.

         I could right now permanently trash this entire post and drop you as an author. I have that power.

         But I emphatically choose not to misuse it. Like Rosemary you will not provoke me into retaliating. Feel free to carry on playing games. They are quite transparent and I’m happy for everyone else to see what you are doing in the open.

         [Angry man makes threats. #powerandcontrol. RL, you’re no longer welcome on this post. TRP]
       • Rosemary McDonald 9.2.2.2

         8 May 2016 at 3:25 pm

         “It’s a shitty game you are playing. I’m calling you on it.”

         I don’t play games.

         Unlike some people.

         I am expressing my opinion. Which, I thought I had a right to.

         Maybe not.

         You disclosed the abuse you were subjected to, I do the same and I’m playing the victim?

         I’d say get a grip…but maybe you should lighten up a bit…blood flow and all that?

         General question…where are the other women on TS…too scared to risk being attacked for expressing an alternate opinion?

         SNAFU.
         • RedLogix 9.2.2.2.1

           8 May 2016 at 3:48 pm

           You made this statement in direct reply to me:

           I personally find the position that many on the left take that the perpetrators of family violence are victims themselves and should hence take no responsibility for their actions repugnant.

           If you were not directing it to me, now would be a good time to say so.

           where are the other women on TS…too scared to risk being attacked for expressing an alternate opinion?

           By sheer numbers alone, I’m the ‘alternate opinion’ around here at the moment.

           I’ve long maintained and argued the best way to progress domestic violence is to dismantle the gender politics that it’s become infested with and start treating it as a serious human problem that affects both genders as perpetrators and victims.

           The vast majority of people are fundamentally good most of the time. That’s the remarkable thing we keep overlooking. We don’t want to hurt each other, yet still it happens. And rarely do I see a convincing systemic answer why? Personally I think has less to do with gender and more to do with our economic and political violent society.

           Yet somehow the ONLY violence we are motivated about is the personal intimate violence men inflict on women and children and everything else is minimised. The ONLY people we hold accountable are men, yet all of us participate in the social framework that enables it.

           And you then wonder why men don’t wholeheartedly get on board with change. You wonder why there is a backlash, and it’s plain to observe the rising tide of misogyny and misandry everywhere on the net. Doesn’t strike me as helpful at all.

           The path we have been on for at least three decades now has not seen any real improvement in the hurt and harm. Maybe it’s time to consider some ‘alternative opinions’?
           • Anne 9.2.2.2.1.1

             8 May 2016 at 6:13 pm

             I have been out all day so haven’t as yet had a chance to follow this post. However I support Redlogix when he says the following:

             Yet somehow the ONLY violence we are motivated about is the personal intimate violence men inflict on women and children and everything else is minimised. The ONLY people we hold accountable are men, yet all of us participate in the social framework that enables it.

             I can vouch for the truth of that statement. That is not to degrade the ever present ‘intimate’ violence perpetrated by men against women and children. However women are just as capable of performing vicious and violent acts – often in a clandestine way – against other individuals. The victim or victims rarely get the justice and support they deserve because it doesn’t fall directly into the man rapes/sexually assaults woman category. In other words, their experiences are ‘minimised’ or in some cases not even believed. Yet the ramifications can be equally degrading and distressing.
         • tinfoilhat 9.2.2.2.2

           8 May 2016 at 4:57 pm

           “General question…where are the other women on TS…too scared to risk being attacked for expressing an alternate opinion?”

           A bit of an irony Rosemary as I was the first comment on this post and was quickly jumped on for expressing an opinion in variance the the author.
           • te reo putake 9.2.2.2.2.1

             8 May 2016 at 5:04 pm

             You weren’t jumped on. However, the ideas you expressed in your comment were responded to in some detail. As you’d kinda expect in a debate in the comments section of a blog post.
             • tinfoilhat …

               8 May 2016 at 5:31 pm

               You seem overly sensitive TRP.
   • te reo putake 9.3

     8 May 2016 at 3:05 pm

     A further comment from RedLogix:

     RL: The meaning is plain. We are mobbing Veitch because we don’t like his political views and he’s an easy target. I used an ugly word for an ugly action.
10. b waghorn 10

    8 May 2016 at 2:45 pm

    “In January 2006 I made a huge mistake, a grave misjudgment on my behalf that has impacted the lives of many people and for that I am truly sorry”

    That sounds like an apology to me, I would of thought lefties would be the first to hope a person can redeem themselves.
    • te reo putake 10.1

      8 May 2016 at 3:01 pm

      As the post points out, he’s only apologising for the single conviction he plea bargained for. Note he speaks in the singular at all times. He is claiming it was a one time thing, when the police summary suggests multiple incidents with varying levels of violence.

      He is being self serving and still trying to minimise what he did. If he was really apologising, he’d address the victim by name, acknowledge the real depth of his criminal behaviour, and, if it’s in his gift, allow the victim to tell her story. Now that’s an apology I would applaud.
    • Colonial Viper 10.2

      8 May 2016 at 3:59 pm

      b waghorn:

      Some people believe in their own ethical superiority to the extent that they feel completely justified in extracting a moralistic pound of flesh from others over and over again and certainly above and beyond the laws of the land.
      • tinfoilhat 10.2.1

        8 May 2016 at 4:59 pm

        Yep and that trait seems to span the political spectrum.
        • Colonial Viper 10.2.1.1

          8 May 2016 at 5:26 pm

          And a very unattractive trait it is.
      • b waghorn 10.2.2

        8 May 2016 at 5:51 pm

        Yes the guys a dick who’s painting him self in as positive a light as possible, but to my knowledge he’s taken what punishment was handed to him and hasn’t repeated his behavior ( keeping in mind that its not his problem if our judiciary is scewed in favour of the wealthy ) and is it really setting a “the standard ” to attack him here.
        • weka 10.2.2.1

          8 May 2016 at 6:20 pm

          From a political perspective it’s not enough to serve ones time and refrain from physically damaging other people. If you want forgiveness you need to make ammends. I’ve yet to see Veitch understand that, let alone do it.

          As for lefties, well when Veitch stops using his position of privilege to mislead the public about what happened, then he might get some support. Some lefties can write the others off as vindictive or something, but are the issues themselves being addressed? I think not.

          If you want a clue about how this goes down with women, consider how many women are staying away from this particular thread and are instead talking elsewhere.
          • miravox 10.2.2.1.1

            8 May 2016 at 6:31 pm

            +1
11. McFlock 11

    8 May 2016 at 3:32 pm

    It’s an interesting statement, and as a FB friend wrote, it’s light-years better than his statements when the abuse was first brought to light.

    Additionally, I tend to agree with Redlogix that the “I statements” are more towards taking ownership for his actions, rather than just making it all about him.

    And yet…

    He still tries to minimise his actions and distance himself from them. Saying you were under stress is an excuse, even if you say it is not. Claiming that you are a different person now is also distancing yourself from your actions, that it was a different “you” who did it. He still talks at length about the pain he has felt, barely acknowledging the extent of the pain he caused and never to someone whom he probably doesn’t have any contact with any more. He says a lot of things were made up in the media, and seems to rely on the difference between throwing your partner down stairs and dragging them (as in the police summary of facts). He never mentions that he put his partner in hospital.

    So, marks for improvement over ten years, but still a dick.
    • weka 11.1

      8 May 2016 at 4:39 pm

      That’s what I think too. Plus there’s the issue of whether to believe him. Remorse means so much more when backed up by action. Words are easier and why is he doing all this in public anyway?
    • Sabine 11.2

      8 May 2016 at 5:48 pm

      well put.
12. Incognito 12

    8 May 2016 at 4:03 pm

    I don’t know about the inner workings of Tony Veitch but he might be still very much going through a process of catharsis, which will take a life time. In any case, nobody gets to decide the exact terms & conditions and place & time of another person’s apology because that would defeat the whole purpose of a personal apology.

    I often find myself guilty of judging other people, not just too quickly or even misjudging but simply judging them; it’s a personal habit that I’d like to moderate because it closes off the mind.

    I admire RedLogix’s guts and honesty as well as that of many other commenters (and authors) here; I do learn a lot of things here.
    • Colonial Viper 12.1

      8 May 2016 at 5:43 pm

      I admire RedLogix’s guts and honesty as well as that of many other commenters (and authors) here; I do learn a lot of things here.

      +1 for sure.
    • Kiwiri 12.2

      8 May 2016 at 7:54 pm

      + 1
13. stunnedmullet 13

    8 May 2016 at 4:22 pm

    Wow TRP just wow…
14. Psycho Milt 14

    8 May 2016 at 4:54 pm

    Or preferably, just stay silent and put some effort into thinking about the victims of domestic violence and put some time into helping them.

    Yes. Instead of whining about how badly you were treated for what you seem to consider a trivial incident of violent assault, shut your fucking gob and use some of that money you get for doing nothing obviously valuable to help the victims of people like yourself. Just don’t expect any thanks.
15. weka 15

    8 May 2016 at 5:03 pm

    A couple of historic posts outlining the issues, including what Veitch actually did. He’s still trying to mislead people,

    http://hadassahgrace.tumblr.com/post/131550431361/who-the-hell-is-tony-veitch

    Perspectives on Kristin Dunne-Powell and how she was affected are there too including her victim impact statement.
    • Paul 15.1

      8 May 2016 at 5:04 pm

      How does he get so much opportunity to publish his point of view?
      • Sabine 15.1.1

        8 May 2016 at 6:02 pm

        My abuser, years after i have left home and such, asked me at the dinner table with a quivering voice …..are you still angry with me? This came after he complained to me that mother would not put out any more at almost 63 years of age and after a full hysterectomy and cancer treatment. 🙂 Yes, he was / is a charming fellow.

        I did not mean it, I was stressed, the alcohol made me loose my mind, she was pretty and wore a short dress or a flannel nightgown to the floor, she did not run away fast enough, etc etc etc …..are you still angry with me?

        Fact is, that most abuse victims are angry with themselves for a long time, until the day that they realise that there really was not alot they could have done to prevent the abuse. At that stage the healing and the self forgiveness can start with the victim.

        In my case it was the realisation that a. i was a child, b. i had no idea what sex was, and c. did not know that i was being raped, d. that i was not an evil bad child. That realisation came many many years after the abuse had ended with me running away from home.

        To come to the end of it, I was able to tell my abuser that I am not angry with my self any more, that I had forgiven myself, as for him tho, he could and most likely will rot in hell, and I would be there to throw wood on the fire. 🙂

        And with this Tony Veitch thing it is the same, he has not forgiven himself for having been such a dismal failure at being a human being, that he is still seeking forgiveness of others. And i agree with those that take his whingings for that, whingings of a man that has yet to admit that what he did, came from him, had nothing to do with what the women did, or the stress that he was under, and that unless and until he accepts that that is part of his personality make up he will not forgive himself for what he has done, and most likely he lives in some fear of doing it again.

        so expect some more written mea culpa’s from the man until the day that he says, i fucked up, i was lucky i only did the damage i did, and the real victim is the women whom i have hurt physically and emotionally and who props is still having some scars from the fuckwittery and abuse that i rained down on her. And all of that because i could, and because I thought i could get away with it, and frankly i did get away with it.
    • te reo putake 15.2

      8 May 2016 at 5:12 pm

      Thanks, weka.
16. Bill 16

    8 May 2016 at 5:52 pm

    So he severely injured his then partner and has spent ten years or whatever accepting responsibility for his actions and becoming a new man, yet…(and I’m quoting from his piece in HoS) “Regaining my career has been the toughest challenge of my life”.

    Hmm.

    If the HoS wanted to do a piece to highlight the issue of domestic violence, this piece isn’t the vehicle they should have used.
17. Colonial Viper 17

    8 May 2016 at 5:56 pm

    Nothing more convincing than moralistic Lefties who believe in the spiritual healing power of the confessional, and of eliciting convincing confessions from evil sinners – mostly men of course – via whatever means possible.

    Just a reminder that none of you are holy, even though you enjoy acting and sounding like you are.
    • Sabine 17.1

      8 May 2016 at 6:12 pm

      oh you are coming to your senses and accept that you are no more special then the rest of us.

      Goody, cause for a while i thought you would be St. Left of the Lefties, the purest of them all, and only your form of leftism would save us.

      🙂
      • Colonial Viper 17.1.1

        8 May 2016 at 6:31 pm

        I’m not a left winger. I find the left wing right wing divide obsolescent and increasingly meaningless.
        • Kiwiri 17.1.1.1

          8 May 2016 at 7:42 pm

          Your recent comments did make me wonder.
          Thanks for clarifying.
          Good on you.
          Will be watching with keen interest any initiatives that you will instigate!
          • Colonial Viper 17.1.1.1.1

            8 May 2016 at 8:09 pm

            Most obliged, Kiwiri.

            Many of my values remain “left wing” but the fundamentals of today’s left wing were forged in the mid and late 20th centuries and have greatly decreasing relevance today.
        • Sabine 17.1.1.2

          8 May 2016 at 7:45 pm

          bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

          yes dear.
        • Paul 17.1.1.3

          8 May 2016 at 7:52 pm

          So what is your new position?
          Is it environmentally based?
          • Colonial Viper 17.1.1.3.1

            8 May 2016 at 8:04 pm

            So what is your new position?

            That pretend and extend is nearly over and that we only have 25 years (at the most) to get NZ ready for the hard times that we will be facing over the next 100 years.
            • Paul 17.1.1.3.1.1

              8 May 2016 at 8:10 pm

              So you share the views of Guy McPherson, Michael Ruppert, Derreck Jensen?
              • Colonial Viper …

                8 May 2016 at 8:17 pm

                Yes. But in a small measure rather than large. Mainly because shit is way more fucked up in the USA, which is the perspective they are speaking and writing from.
                • Paul …

                  8 May 2016 at 8:21 pm

                  Do you share their opinion on catastrophic climate change?
                  • Colonial Viper …

                    8 May 2016 at 8:46 pm

                    My position is that the impacts of climate change are going to be far more severe, wide ranging and faster in onset than 95% of people who care about climate change think about it today.

                    The goal of limiting the 21st century to a 2 deg C change is already goneburger.

                    More in line with Bill’s thinking. I think Robert Atack is a bit of a pessimist, but not by that much.

                    In addition I believe that fossil fuel energy depletion, financial oligarchy and the establishment political parties are going to become increasingly severe road blocks in our trying to deal with climate change.
18. Sabine 18

    8 May 2016 at 6:28 pm

    From Weka’s link http://hadassahgrace.tumblr.com/post/131550431361/who-the-hell-is-tony-veitch

    Quote:
    Because one in three NZ women experience psychological or physical abuse from their partners in their lifetime.

    On average 14 women, six men and 10 children are killed by a member of their family every year.

    Police are called to around 200 domestic violence situations a day – that’s one every seven minutes on average, and police estimate only 18% of domestic violence incidents are reported.

    Quote End.

    on average 14 women, six men and 10 children are killed by a member of their family every year.

    let that think in. And the Tony Veitch victim was lucky she did not end up permanently disabled or worse.

    Maybe we should speak of domestic violence in a more gender neutral term, but fact is that it is the women that get most of it, then the children and then the men. Maybe that is something that we need to take into account? Fwiw, as a women i will always speak of violence the way i see, feel and process it. So frankly i would hope that the men that are survivors speak about their abusers, as i can’t comment on that.

    And i would also like to point out, that there are comments by some that make personal ‘confessions’ almost impossible, while in fact the victims should make these ‘confessions’ at any given chance. Domestic Violence, sexual violence and a mixture of both are so prevalent in our society that if the victims were to speak up – all of them, across the ages, and genders and sexual orientations, we would probably be horrified to know just how common it is and how many of those that we hold dear have been at the receiving end of it.

    And maybe it would should those that would like to silence the victims and survivors up for a day or two.
19. Lucy 19

    8 May 2016 at 9:52 pm

    When you look at the police statement of fact – which is what he admitted to, there is a pattern of violent acts from April til the following January when he finally broke her back. So there was 10 months of acknowledged pushing, shoving hitting before he got to the kicking her in the back stage! For him to minimize this as he hit her on one day means he is not acknowledging his behaviour. This is a white guy blaming the victim for his crime. The day he broke her back was the worst day of his life??? He had to work hard to get his dream job back, what a little self entitled man! This is why the Kerre McIvor rage is there even if we hit a man who has hit us – someone will point to us being the aggressor!
    • RedLogix 19.1

      8 May 2016 at 10:39 pm

      For him to minimize this as he hit her on one day means he is not acknowledging his behaviour.

      We already know that there was a series of ‘pushing, shoving and hitting’ beforehand; I can fully understand how in the interests of brevity he didn’t detail each one. The facts are public domain already. He’s not denying them, but clearly pointing to how over a period of time, via the effects of a ‘toxic relationship’ that was escalating in confrontations, over-work, and anxiety and depression, it all culminated in one awful event he clearly deeply regrets.

      This is a white guy blaming the victim for his crime.

      Ah … no. You’ve read something into it you wanted to see.

      He had to work hard to get his dream job back, what a little self entitled man!

      Well Veitch addresses your thoughts:

      Regaining my career has been the toughest challenge of my life. I know there are those of you who believe I don’t deserve it. I get it. Fortunately I have met some incredible Kiwis who have helped me find some inner peace to grow, live my life once more and to be a better person.

      Why would you want Veitch not to become a better person. Why is it so important he should continue to play out this pre-defined role you have affixed to him?

      This is why the Kerre McIvor rage is there even if we hit a man who has hit us – someone will point to us being the aggressor!

      So it’s ok for a woman to hit a man if she is angry enough with him? Because I know if a male had written those words …
      • maui 19.1.1

        8 May 2016 at 11:07 pm

        Becoming a better person is not walking back into a high profile, well paid, privileged public broadcasting role where he still makes fun of violence from time to time. Especially after you’ve seriously assaulted someone.
        • Colonial Viper 19.1.1.1

          8 May 2016 at 11:20 pm

          Please explain how giving up his chosen career will make him a better person inside, and a person better able to contribute to society.
          • McFlock 19.1.1.1.1

            8 May 2016 at 11:36 pm

            Losing the job isn’t about his penance, it’s about him not being a role model for others, in the same way that NRL players who mistreat animals or people get disciplined.
            • Colonial Viper 19.1.1.1.1.1

              8 May 2016 at 11:54 pm

              So him giving up his career and his livelihood is not about him bearing the cross, but about him becoming a cautionary tale?
              • McFlock …

                9 May 2016 at 12:00 am

                No, it’s about him not being a role model who teaches other people that you can break your partner’s back and still masquerade as a functioning human being.
                • Colonial Viper …

                  9 May 2016 at 12:05 am

                  Should Veitch have been put behind bars until he was 65?

                  There are thousands of people in NZ who have been convicted of murder and of causing grievious bodily harm, as well as criminal manslaughter and many many other violent crimes.

                  But according to you – all these people now merely “masquerading” as human beings?

                  All these people now need to hide their faces from the rest of society and not involved themselves in their communities any more?
                  • McFlock …

                    9 May 2016 at 12:12 am

                    Depends.

                    To take your example of a murderer, if they minimised their offending by saying that they were stressed, and how hard it was on their family, and complains that the media made the murder look more brutal than it actually was, and barely mentions the harm they did to the person they murdered… then nah I wouldn’t want them as a scout leader or pastor or whatever.

                    edit: arseholes have redeemed themselves – Gov George Wallace comes to mind, and ISTR one or two murderers and slavers who became religious leaders. But the first step was to take responsibility for their actions
                    • Colonial Viper …

                      9 May 2016 at 12:16 am

                      And all these people are just masquerading as human beings?

                      I suppose you don’t want these people living next to you or in your neighbourhood either?

                      Definitely you wouldn’t want their kids mixing with your kids.
                    • McFlock …

                      9 May 2016 at 12:22 am

                      🙄

                      masquerading as a functioning human being.

                      Hey, I’m not arguing for legislation here, I’m just saying that if someone said “yeah, I got convicted of murdering a kid, but I suffered so much because of it”, I’d think they hadn’t quite learned that murdering kids was wrong. And I’d be wary of giving them unsupervised access to kids.
                    • McFlock …

                      9 May 2016 at 12:34 am

                      fuck it, I’m off to bed.
                    • Colonial Viper …

                      9 May 2016 at 1:13 am

                      Am very interested in your judgement of what a functioning human being is, versus someone masquerading as a functioning human being is. And how you would judge that.

                      What percentage of Kiwis would you regard as being fully functioning human beings? Would it be over 90%, in your view?
                    • McFlock …

                      9 May 2016 at 10:33 am

                      Anyone who treats their intimate partners like objects to own, control and dispose of.

                      No, I wouldn’t want my kids to be in a relationship with someone like that. Would you wish that on yours?
            • RedLogix 19.1.1.1.1.2

              9 May 2016 at 12:00 am

              So the general rule for all people convicted of crime is that they should never be allowed to work in any job again.

              Or is that any job that pays over a certain amount?

              Or is this a special rule for Tony Veitch?
              • McFlock …

                9 May 2016 at 12:02 am

                I’d say it’s a special rule for people in high profile roles that enable them to be held up as exemplars and that often give them the power to abuse again.
                • Colonial Viper …

                  9 May 2016 at 12:09 am

                  So keeping Veitch down in the dumps and forcing him to disconnect from his career, his profession and his colleagues, will make him less angry and safer for his future partners.
                  • McFlock …

                    9 May 2016 at 12:17 am

                    But he’s had therapy, he’s not the same person now /sarc

                    Are you really arguing that he should keep a job that literally dozens of other people could walk into, just to stop him beating someone else?

                    And how many of his listeners might slap their partner because veitchy keeps mouthing off and minimising his actions?
                    • Colonial Viper …

                      9 May 2016 at 12:27 am

                      So you think Veitch is going to be safer for his future partners and less angry as a person if you cut him out of his career, sever him from his profession and force him to take a lower wage job.

                      Are you really arguing that he should keep a job that literally dozens of other people could walk into, just to stop him beating someone else?

                      Whaaa…?

                      “Just” to stop him beating his future partners? What’s “just” about that? That’s the thing here which matters, isn’t it?
                    • McFlock …

                      9 May 2016 at 12:32 am

                      Oh noes, I’m feeling a bit violent today, someone give me 10ccs of a million dollars, stat!

                      Veitch isn’t forced to beat anyone, even if he ends up unemployed. Just fucking expect him to be responsible for his own actions. Why is that so difficult?

                      And by your logic, how many people will be harmed if he’s held up as a public figure?
                    • Colonial Viper …

                      9 May 2016 at 12:41 am

                      Hey McFlock, has been interesting chatting to you and seeing how you hold the moral compass.

                      I am interested in your ideas for how social, economic and professional punishment for a criminal should be ongoing and at least partly based on harsher punishment if the criminal’s level of privilege and position in society is higher than average.
                    • Colonial Viper …

                      9 May 2016 at 12:46 am

                      Veitch isn’t forced to beat anyone, even if he ends up unemployed. Just fucking expect him to be responsible for his own actions. Why is that so difficult?

                      Also I really like your take on personal responsibility here.

                      That people in poverty or people who are unemployed are not forced to engage in bad behaviours. Everything from domestic violence to drinking, to smoking and gambling, child abuse, and many other societal vices.

                      Your philosophy that these kinds of people need to grow up and be responsible for their own actions without making excuses blaming every thing else except themselves will resonate with large sections of NZ.
                    • RedLogix …

                      9 May 2016 at 1:29 am

                      @CV

                      The Rescue Game
                    • McFlock …

                      9 May 2016 at 10:31 am

                      @CV:

                      Veitch has made a lot of excuses for his actions.

                      Which of those excuses point to systemic socioeconomic causes that might mitigate his actions? Which of those excuses suggest, after a decade of therapy, a modicum of self-awareness about why he broke his partner’s back?

                      Because I don’t see any.

                      Mind you, he only made excuses for the past offending that he would admit to: you’re throwing out excuses for future offending that not even he has considered yet.
                  • Instauration …

                    9 May 2016 at 12:30 am

                    But his career is premised upon advocacy for and seeing value in beating people. He wishes to perpetuate that career.
                    The non-winners in this premise will continue to suffer – some may die.
                  • Instauration …

                    9 May 2016 at 1:04 am

                    Hey CV
                    “people in poverty or people who are unemployed”
                    Yep – they are inundated with Veitch-ly memes of;
                    Warriors and AB’s and Black Caps and SANZAR and ANZAC
                    “Beating Is Good ! ”
                    Veitch – is the least person that should be commercially associated with these memes.
          • maui 19.1.1.1.2

            8 May 2016 at 11:52 pm

            Well I think consequences and loss of privilege are a good thing when you make serious fuck ups in important roles. The public tends to believe that this outcome makes people better people too.

            It might even make the perpetrator able to contribute to society as much as the victim has:

            Through Kristin’s charitable work we have met many former perpetrators of violence who are now White Ribbon ambassadors
            • Colonial Viper 19.1.1.1.2.1

              9 May 2016 at 12:01 am

              So you think Veitch needs to suffer more consequencesm and for longer, because he hasn’t suffered sufficiently yet?

              The public tends to believe that this outcome makes people better people too.

              And you think that there is public demand for Veitch to get right out of broadcasting and give up his career because that will prove that he has become a better person inside?

              Personally I feel that RL’s position that Veitch is likely expressing himself honestly and from a position of having had to do a lot of self reflection in the last couple of years is about right.
              • Instauration …

                9 May 2016 at 12:13 am

                Veitch – [RL Deleted. Just making shit up is not needed in this thread.]
        • McFlock 19.1.1.2

          8 May 2016 at 11:33 pm

          Veitch’s latest outpouring irks me not so much because he’s back as a broadcaster (which still irks me a bit because people look up to broadcasters and their faces go everywhere, which must not be fun for the people they hurt), but more because he quite obviously still minimises what he did, and his focus on the pain he caused seems to be proportional to the distance he is from that suffering – himself most of all, then his family, etc etc. And he, his publicists and employers are still trying to rehabilitate him in the eyes of the public so that his broadcasts sell more crap.

          If he continues improving himself, in ten or twenty years he might take full responsibility and actually be a mentor for others to similarly redeem themselves. And yeah, he’ll always be that dude who did that stuff. But at least he won’t be a dick anymore.
      • Rosemary McDonald 19.1.2

        9 May 2016 at 12:34 am

        “We already know that there was a series of ‘pushing, shoving and hitting’ beforehand; I can fully understand how in the interests of brevity he didn’t detail each one.”
        from …http://hadassahgrace.tumblr.com/post/131550431361/who-the-hell-is-tony-veitch

        “During the argument the Defendant (Veitch) stood in front of the Complainant’s face, forcing her backward against a wall,” the summary of facts in the police file says.

        Ms Dunne-Powell slid down the wall toward the floor and “and as she moved to escape sideways (Veitch) kicked her two to three times to the back of the thigh”, it said.

        The file said she left and was “shaken and frightened by the assault.”

        The next charge related to an incident between April 14, 2003 and April 9, 2005 at a cottage in Mangawhai. The couple argued and Veitch grabbed Ms Dunne-Powell and threw her on a bed, according to the file.

        The police file says: “The Defendant stood over the Complainant shouting at her as she lay on her back, then picked up a glass of water from the side table and threw the content into the Complainant’s face. At one point during the assault the Defendant punched a hole in the wall of the cottage.”

        Another incident occurred on June 3, 2005 at the Novotel in Rotorua, according to the summary.

        In the room Veitch grabbed Ms Dunne-Powell from “behind with both hands and lifted her off her feet and threw her onto the bed”, the police file said.

        The summary of facts file says he pinned her to the bed and she later fled.

        At Veitch’s St Heliers Bay home on July 8, 2005 the two argued again. Veitch chased her upstairs into the bedroom and then blocked her escape.

        “As (Ms Dunne-Powell) lowered herself to the floor to get away (Veitch) kicked her in her right thigh with a force so hard it spun her onto her back,” the summary says.

        He kicked her twice more and she suffered severe bruising. On the morning of July 5, 2005 at the home they argued again.

        The police summary says Veitch jumped on her as she lay in bed “with his knees at hip height and punched the complainant once in the torso with his left hand while shouting at her.”

        In December 2005 at the home Veitch grabbed Ms Dunne-Powell “by both arms and pulled her out of the room and down the stairs to the front door entrance.”

        Inside the front door he kicked her a number of times on both legs.”

        Yep. I can well understand why in the interests of brevity he didn’t detail each one. All those kicks…

        “He’s not denying them,”

        Yes RL he is. In his wee article. Over and over and over again.

        “So it’s ok for a woman to hit a man if she is angry enough with him? Because I know if a male had written those words”

        It is within the memory of some here that once it was not a crime for a man to rape his wife, that it was considered acceptable for women to be disciplined by their husbands, that the death by beating of a de facto wife was considered less of a crime than beating to death a legal wife. Even today, most sexual assaults on women go unreported because they simply won’t be believed or are revictimised through the court process. Even today, we have new immigrants who struggle to accept that here, at least in theory, women are equal and not mere chattels of their fathers and husbands.

        Women have had millenia of hearing that narrative, so we well understand where you’re coming from with McIvor’s little rant. I confess to having just a tiny wee “onya girl” moment myself. But that “onya girl” moment was when he came crawling back begging for forgiveness and she showed him the door. Again, you have read her account of that event as a “bit of shoving’ fueled by booze. Read it again. He set out to absolutely humiliate and disempower her. He locked her up.
        He left her bruised and naked. To walk home alone.

        You are not progressing your cause to gain equal recognition of the effect of violence perpetrated by women by minimalising the violence perpetuated by men.
        • Colonial Viper 19.1.2.1

          9 May 2016 at 12:57 am

          No one is going to bear a cross to your satisfaction, or to prostrate low enough or long enough to gain your approval.

          If you want a full confession from Veitch it seems that you better sit him down in a room for 24 hours under supervision until you get exactly what you want, expressed how you want, on a piece of paper.

          And we want that piece of paper soaked with his male tears, please.

          Perhaps we should also force Veitch to head to court and be trialled and re-trialled until we get the level of punishment which we deem suitable for him.

          As for your “on ya” McIvor moment. That’s called living vicariously and vengefully. That’s nothing to do with coming to an understanding of justice or fairness.

          And there are plenty here on this thread calling for extrajudicial punishment of Veitch. Take away his career, take away his profession, etc.

          And why not. He earns too much, is too prominent, is too white and too male. Too much privilege overall. He needs to be taken down a peg.
        • RedLogix 19.1.2.2

          9 May 2016 at 1:23 am

          Well yes. As I said all the details have long been public domain and easily found if you wanted. Scarcely deniable or hidden.

          Now you’ve taken maybe 4-500 words to detail it. Now how hard is to imagine that when Veitch wrote this article everyone is attacking because it left all this detail out, that perhaps, just perhaps these events were condensed into one culminating event for the purpose of brevity, readability, edited down to keep to the essential message.

          No-one can contain the whole truth and nothing but the absolute truth in 1000 words, so yes stuff almost certainly got left out. Now none of us can know what was in Veitch’s mind when he wrote it like this, but it’s a reasonable possibility that it was a simple editorial decision. And in the context of the crystal clear intent of the rest of the article I don’t see that much would have been added by including it.

          Yes RL he is. In his wee article. Over and over and over again.

          Again no. Find me the exact quote where he explicitly denies anything he did and I’ll accept your point. Otherwise no you really are just reading what you need to read, and keeping Veitch firmly in his predefined role here.

          confess to having just a tiny wee “onya girl” moment myself.

          And at no point can you bring yourself to condemn her for hitting a helpless, unconscious person in the head “as hard as she could”. Clearly he asked for it and it was fully justified in your mind.

          But as I said above I’m not out to vilify Kerre McIvor. That wouldn’t help anything. I’m not even all that exercised by the monumental hypocrisy and double standard; I’m entirely accustomed to it. My sole point here is that as long as this extraordinary pretense that only male violence matters and only men can be assigned the role as the villain of the story, please do not be surprised if we decline to turn up to the party.
          • Rosemary McDonald 19.1.2.2.1

            9 May 2016 at 2:08 am

            Bugger me dead this is getting more than tedious…but hey…if you insist.

            http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11635378

            1. “In January 2006 I made a huge mistake,”
            2. “Even though it was the only time that I have ever lashed out in my life, once was too much.”
            3.Poor judgment on my behalf changed so much that day…”
            4.”While I can’t change what happened that day, ”
            5. “I am a completely different person from the one I was that day. ”
            6.”In 2009 I pleaded guilty to one singular act which Judge Doogue said was not planned and that I was not a serial offender.”
            7. “but most importantly to every one of the people’s lives I changed that day, ”

            Over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.

            It has just been suggested to me that yourself and CV are actually playing Devil’s Advocate on this issue…pretending super human compassion for this person for the sake of provoking argument.
            Perhaps you are intentionally misconstruing comments so you have yet another opportunity to condescend to lesser mortals such as myself who are so bound up in our ‘feminist frameworks’ that we cannot recognise a genuine apology from a domestic violence perpetrator when we see it.
            Your sweeping generalisation (on your own Tony Veitch thread) of your version of “what women want” is (I sincerely hope) beneath you. I am so pleased that you acknowledged to mpledger that perhaps you had oversimplified the premise. I wonder if we turned back time, just a tad, and had myself challenge you on that….?

            And…oh my goodness… criticism of Veitch’s pathetic little PR exercise is worse than what he did to his victim?
            • RedLogix 19.1.2.2.1.1

              9 May 2016 at 2:37 am

              That does puzzle me a bit. The Police charge sheet says one thing, and the Judge another. What happened?

              I am so pleased that you acknowledged to mpledger that perhaps you had oversimplified the premise.

              Yes the premise is oversimplified, and intentionally so. But it doesn’t really change my underlying point, males evolved to be competitive and dominant because this advertised they had the best genes. This is the general pattern in evolutionary biology and it remains plainly observable in humans.

              But for humans with our extremely dependent babies, wild risk-taking males are a bad bet as long-term partners and child-raisers. So this complicates the story a lot.

              All of which still leaves my argument intact, that the human competitive instinct for dominance does not appear in a vacuum.

              criticism of Veitch’s pathetic little PR exercise is worse than what he did to his victim?

              No they are not the same thing. The physical attack is a far more serious matter, but it has been prosecuted, acknowledged, apologised for and maybe even redeemed. Who would want nothing more than for Veitch to get on with being useful in life and never commit something like this again? It is a shame we have not heard from the victim, Kristen DP. I agree if she wanted to speak and tell her story this would add immeasurably.

              But the social mobbing I see in this thread, something which clearly remains invisible to you, has been enthusiastically embraced and everyone feels happily justified. And in that sense I see it as worse.
20. Instauration 20

    8 May 2016 at 11:27 pm

    TC Veitch – is an advocate for competitive sport.
    By this measure he sees value in people beating people.
21. Jenny Kirk 21

    9 May 2016 at 8:29 am

    I’ve just read the DomPost story this morning – with the comments from Kristen DP’s father. Its heartening to read that she’s okay, and getting on with her life – but NOT heartening at all to realise that actually TC Veitch is not really apologising – he hasn’t even done that for her privately. And the Herald gets a whack too, for putting out his sob-story on a day important to women. Am pleased Kristen has a father who speaks up for her – not all fathers do that, either.
22. Lucy 22

    9 May 2016 at 11:15 pm

    The social mobbing is a consequence of Tony trying to validate the abuse of a woman on Mothers Day and NZ herald given him the platform. The great piece of writing was the wonderful Stuff article from his victim’s father. i do not want Tony to be in prison, or lose his job but he needs to change the mind set – to minimize the harm he did makes his beating a woman OK because he thinks it was a one time thing, even when it was not. If a smart, well educated, on radio man can turn a litany of abuse into a one time thing how can we complain when any one else does?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS