SkyGate: Judge Forrest finds former TVNZ News Anchor Guilty of Assault to Save Face for Police, Auckland Airport and Jacinda Ardern — in Red Herring Trial [Verdict Vivisection]
SkyGate: Judge Forrest finds former TVNZ News Anchor Guilty of Assault to Save Face for Police, Auckland Airport and Jacinda Ardern — in Red Herring Trial [Verdict Vivisection]
Judge Calls for Law Change to Stymie Political Dissent while Setting a Legal Precedent for Attention Touching that Deflects Attention from Police Brutality
"The police can't be prosecuted if they thought what they were doing was right"?? This looks like a trial run of the proposed Democratic Party argument that illegal immigrants CAN vote in a US presidential election -- and have their votes counted -- IF THEY THOUGHT AT THE TIME THEY VOTED THAT THEY WERE CITIZENS OF THE US.
This can't be allowed to stand, whanau. The world needs this ridiculous argument to be "debunked" before November. PLEASE won't somebody prosecute the two police thugs in the Gunn case for assault and grievous bodily harm?
Don McLean did the song, " The Day the music died" . Today we see another chapter of the story of the non legal political activist court decisions have buried any justice as we once knew it . As a serious student of history, this have been the bases of many revolts and civil wars. It now has consistency in its pursuit to destroy society and protect and enrich those protected . The truth is more dangerous than the poison of the media's lies and honesty must be destroyed to protect the misdeeds of those that yeild power . Society has come to its end when the integrity of Judiciary flees the courtroom . When its possible to select the Judge to proceed with the prosecution and in cases where the jury can be selected to achieve the desired outcome as is the case with Former President Trump then justice must be sought outside the courts and that is the beginning of a revolt . I can cite numerous historical revelations to back this up .
I recommend that all New Zealander's read this. Events like this should not be allowed to go un-noticed and I found steve's article 'awakening' and very interesting. Thankyou Steve.
yeah it's pretty bad. that's why I identified the logical fallacies - to show how deft the Crown apparatus is at closing ranks to avert a crisis with a red herring show trial .. and how the two major TV networks lock-stepped to censorship by 'unofficial means'
This is not justice as it should be. Appeal this decision all the way to the Supreme Court if needs be and expose the hypocrisy . Start a fund me page to help pay for legal expertise.
So as has been successfully done by Rebel news in Aussie ,and with similar cases in Canada , we need to bring an assault charge against the thugs involved .After the case with louise Wallace ,and her actually being used to educate new coppers as to how easy it is for the 'ipsos Qustodies' to get drunk on power ,I have high Hope the NZ police can build a cluture of serving and protecting the people that fund them .But it won't happen if sham trials like this are allowed to stand . What do we do ? and have to ask are we at the stage of actual LAW awareness that we can bring a case before a superior court as private coomplainants , this way we need have no lawyers that are unable to 'embarrass the court' . Do we have whistle blower that loves the real kiwi values ,working at Auckland airport that can supply all the security footage . I believe in the US a counter suit 'for discovery' can be lodged , which means the prosecution have to provide any and all evidence exculpatory or not , we must have the same rights ,as we are a common law juris-diction ,like them .
I have zero faith in the justice system in this country. Gently touching someone's arm is not assault. Politicians and royalty do it all the time. We all do it all the time. This judge should be stripped of her title and her law degree for arse licking the not-for-people police and the murderous Ardern family.
I am a former police officer and a number of years ago I was involved in an operation where a search warrant was executed at an address. While at the address, one of the occupants became agitated and had to be forcibly removed from a car parked at the premises as the vehicle was included in the search warrant. During this extraction I was punched and kicked by the occupant and he was subsequently arrested and placed in custody. He was charged with obstruction, resisting arrest and assaulting police. This all progressed to a defended hearing in the courts, where it was found that the original search warrant was deemed as unreasonable which resulted in our police action also being unlawful. The result was that my use of force on the defendant, during extraction from the vehicle, was found to be not acting in the lawful execution of my duty which caused the obstruction charge to be withdrawn and likewise his resisting during arrest was determined to be self defense on his part. Putting pride and hurt feelings aside I believe that in the circumstances this was technically and ethically the correct result.
Anyway, sorry about the bloated comment, but I wanted to raise a point. To suggest that an officers use of excessive force is justified if they believe they are acting in lawful execution of their duty is absolute BS and legally incorrect. It is absolutely apparent that the force used in this matter is excessive and it's just another disappointment over the state of our judiciary and law enforcement.
Section 62 of the Crimes Act 1961 states that everyone authorized by law to use force is criminally responsible for any excess, according to the nature and quality of the act that constitutes the excess.
Thanks for coming out and sharing that. You are the sort of individual we need in that sort of roll, FULL CREDIT to you.
Sadly a friends son who is a senior Sgt. There is no f..... way should he be in that roll! Take about racism.
Years ago, I was held up in a house with a friend and her young daughter. I phoned 111 11 times over those bastards. I was threatened with "an oz of lead behind the ears" which was recorded clearly.
Another elderly friend was also verbally threatened with a killing at the same location. Police did absolutely nothing.
Would I now support the Police establishment? No f...... way,
Would I have gone to the aid of a 'Copper'? Yes, in the past, of maybe 20 or 30 years back, definitely,.... but now, it would be, "Sorry mate but you have chosen to join the wrong gang."
I would be interested to know why you made the decision to exit the Police and why there is such a level of attrition. Was it the culture of the Police FORCE? (a word I suggest to encourage negative vibrations of 'fear' )
Sincere best wishes with your present occupation and peace & love to you. (And no, Im not a hippy but am of that generation.)
Liz Gunn certainly had to put up with a lot of police brutality that day, considering she only touched someone. It shows how corrupt and brutal our police are when it suits them.
Thanks Snoopman, an enthralling read. If the boil is to be healed, , it must be "popped", and the"poisonous puss" released. (Forrest, the Judiciary, the police, the media, and the silent political class, are once again exposed!
During my twenty years serving as a police officer, it was a well known dictum that “if you hit them, you’ve got to nick them.” Having said that, I have never experienced, seen or even heard of an incident when a person became a defendant to an assault charge simply by touching another person’s arm.
In the Summary Offences Act, assault means the act of intentionally applying or attempting to apply force to the person of another, directly or indirectly, or threatening by any act or gesture to apply such force to the person of another, if the person making the threat has, or causes the other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose; and to assault has a corresponding meaning.
The light brushing of another’s arm can in no way be described as applying force to a person, that is a total nonsense and leaves the field well open when people push their way through rush hour crowds, assist a blind person across the street or shake another’s hand without first obtaining permission. This judge has sullied the integrity of the rule of law in New Zealand and should face to appropriate sanction..
"The police can't be prosecuted if they thought what they were doing was right"?? This looks like a trial run of the proposed Democratic Party argument that illegal immigrants CAN vote in a US presidential election -- and have their votes counted -- IF THEY THOUGHT AT THE TIME THEY VOTED THAT THEY WERE CITIZENS OF THE US.
This can't be allowed to stand, whanau. The world needs this ridiculous argument to be "debunked" before November. PLEASE won't somebody prosecute the two police thugs in the Gunn case for assault and grievous bodily harm?
Don McLean did the song, " The Day the music died" . Today we see another chapter of the story of the non legal political activist court decisions have buried any justice as we once knew it . As a serious student of history, this have been the bases of many revolts and civil wars. It now has consistency in its pursuit to destroy society and protect and enrich those protected . The truth is more dangerous than the poison of the media's lies and honesty must be destroyed to protect the misdeeds of those that yeild power . Society has come to its end when the integrity of Judiciary flees the courtroom . When its possible to select the Judge to proceed with the prosecution and in cases where the jury can be selected to achieve the desired outcome as is the case with Former President Trump then justice must be sought outside the courts and that is the beginning of a revolt . I can cite numerous historical revelations to back this up .
I recommend that all New Zealander's read this. Events like this should not be allowed to go un-noticed and I found steve's article 'awakening' and very interesting. Thankyou Steve.
yeah it's pretty bad. that's why I identified the logical fallacies - to show how deft the Crown apparatus is at closing ranks to avert a crisis with a red herring show trial .. and how the two major TV networks lock-stepped to censorship by 'unofficial means'
This is not justice as it should be. Appeal this decision all the way to the Supreme Court if needs be and expose the hypocrisy . Start a fund me page to help pay for legal expertise.
Thank you Snoopman! It sure needs exposing far and wide!!
So as has been successfully done by Rebel news in Aussie ,and with similar cases in Canada , we need to bring an assault charge against the thugs involved .After the case with louise Wallace ,and her actually being used to educate new coppers as to how easy it is for the 'ipsos Qustodies' to get drunk on power ,I have high Hope the NZ police can build a cluture of serving and protecting the people that fund them .But it won't happen if sham trials like this are allowed to stand . What do we do ? and have to ask are we at the stage of actual LAW awareness that we can bring a case before a superior court as private coomplainants , this way we need have no lawyers that are unable to 'embarrass the court' . Do we have whistle blower that loves the real kiwi values ,working at Auckland airport that can supply all the security footage . I believe in the US a counter suit 'for discovery' can be lodged , which means the prosecution have to provide any and all evidence exculpatory or not , we must have the same rights ,as we are a common law juris-diction ,like them .
I have zero faith in the justice system in this country. Gently touching someone's arm is not assault. Politicians and royalty do it all the time. We all do it all the time. This judge should be stripped of her title and her law degree for arse licking the not-for-people police and the murderous Ardern family.
I am a former police officer and a number of years ago I was involved in an operation where a search warrant was executed at an address. While at the address, one of the occupants became agitated and had to be forcibly removed from a car parked at the premises as the vehicle was included in the search warrant. During this extraction I was punched and kicked by the occupant and he was subsequently arrested and placed in custody. He was charged with obstruction, resisting arrest and assaulting police. This all progressed to a defended hearing in the courts, where it was found that the original search warrant was deemed as unreasonable which resulted in our police action also being unlawful. The result was that my use of force on the defendant, during extraction from the vehicle, was found to be not acting in the lawful execution of my duty which caused the obstruction charge to be withdrawn and likewise his resisting during arrest was determined to be self defense on his part. Putting pride and hurt feelings aside I believe that in the circumstances this was technically and ethically the correct result.
Anyway, sorry about the bloated comment, but I wanted to raise a point. To suggest that an officers use of excessive force is justified if they believe they are acting in lawful execution of their duty is absolute BS and legally incorrect. It is absolutely apparent that the force used in this matter is excessive and it's just another disappointment over the state of our judiciary and law enforcement.
Section 62 of the Crimes Act 1961 states that everyone authorized by law to use force is criminally responsible for any excess, according to the nature and quality of the act that constitutes the excess.
Thanks Harrison Hawk, I've added Section 62 with a screen shot from the Crimes Act.
Thanks for coming out and sharing that. You are the sort of individual we need in that sort of roll, FULL CREDIT to you.
Sadly a friends son who is a senior Sgt. There is no f..... way should he be in that roll! Take about racism.
Years ago, I was held up in a house with a friend and her young daughter. I phoned 111 11 times over those bastards. I was threatened with "an oz of lead behind the ears" which was recorded clearly.
Another elderly friend was also verbally threatened with a killing at the same location. Police did absolutely nothing.
Would I now support the Police establishment? No f...... way,
Would I have gone to the aid of a 'Copper'? Yes, in the past, of maybe 20 or 30 years back, definitely,.... but now, it would be, "Sorry mate but you have chosen to join the wrong gang."
I would be interested to know why you made the decision to exit the Police and why there is such a level of attrition. Was it the culture of the Police FORCE? (a word I suggest to encourage negative vibrations of 'fear' )
Sincere best wishes with your present occupation and peace & love to you. (And no, Im not a hippy but am of that generation.)
Liz Gunn certainly had to put up with a lot of police brutality that day, considering she only touched someone. It shows how corrupt and brutal our police are when it suits them.
Thanks Snoopman, an enthralling read. If the boil is to be healed, , it must be "popped", and the"poisonous puss" released. (Forrest, the Judiciary, the police, the media, and the silent political class, are once again exposed!
During my twenty years serving as a police officer, it was a well known dictum that “if you hit them, you’ve got to nick them.” Having said that, I have never experienced, seen or even heard of an incident when a person became a defendant to an assault charge simply by touching another person’s arm.
In the Summary Offences Act, assault means the act of intentionally applying or attempting to apply force to the person of another, directly or indirectly, or threatening by any act or gesture to apply such force to the person of another, if the person making the threat has, or causes the other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose; and to assault has a corresponding meaning.
The light brushing of another’s arm can in no way be described as applying force to a person, that is a total nonsense and leaves the field well open when people push their way through rush hour crowds, assist a blind person across the street or shake another’s hand without first obtaining permission. This judge has sullied the integrity of the rule of law in New Zealand and should face to appropriate sanction..