- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Friday, February 13, 2009

Crown must appeal the Emery sentence

4 years, 3 months for manslaughter. Slaughter. He only slaughtered the kid. He's done almost three months in remand, so he'll be out in a few short years. Is that going to be satisfactory to the victim's family, or indeed the community?

The NZ Herald reporting is straight out of a right-wing conservative pressure group press release. The victim was a tagger and the stabber was defending himself - that is what the Herald says. Emery chased two kids down the street with a knife - several hundred metres - and then stabbed one of them who couldn't get away, killing him, he then fled the scene and washed his knife and pretended to his family - the same family used in mitigation of his crime - that nothing had happened. The survivor of Emery's attack described in his testimony that you could tell by the look on his face that he was out to kill. However the jury decided he was a manslaughterer but not a murderer:

The starting point for sentencing in a case where one person stabs another was five to seven years imprisonment, but with mitigating factors it can be reduced to three-and-half to four years. Justice Williams added he was unable to find a case of this nature.

Meaning it might be tricky to let the white guy off problematic to deliver a sentence on a defendant with vocal public backing - sold as the Pakeha version of Michael Douglas's angry white middle class American male character in the film Falling Down. It is difficult because all the other cases of this type are MURDER.

Remember that "New Zealand's Youngest Killer" is also a manslaughterer, but all this 12 year old did was say "now" while the bigger kid hit Michael Choy once with a baseball bat. He got 7 years for that. Seven years. Both cases in South Auckland. A 12 year old gets 7 years for participating in someone being hit with a baseball bat and the Sensible Sentencing Trustwant them in forever, but when an adult stabs and kills a 15 year old they only get 4 years and 3 months. And the SST stance on that?

Will Emery get put on their data base of violent offenders? Their motto is:
"Stop escalating violence in our community" - really.
Here's what the head of the Sensible Sentencing Trust had to say about this man who had killed this kid:

Trust spokesperson Garth McVicar says the verdict is a shame, because he understands the frustration Emery was going through when he caught the tagger at his house.
He says the trust would have liked to have seen Emery discharged altogether.


Well Garth will be disappointed Emery didn't get Home D. As for Justice Williams: how about aggravating circumstances?

Emery's aggravating circumstances of stalking his teenage prey with a weapon he selected, through the neighbourhood - what about that? That trifling little detail doesn't seem to merit much in the way of influence over the sentence. The use of a knife - if you believe the Herald account - was dismissed by Williams J as Emery being naive about how dangerous knives can be. Absurd. Emery selected it for its killing potential. Why did he grab anything? What did he think he was going to do with it when he got them? Emery's police interview on this point was less than convincing.

Many people might actually think that such piffling minor factual points cancel out all of these typically spurious mitigating circumstances ("family", "community standing" etc.) that white people use to get off tends to favour middle class defendants. We are back to the starting point at the very least, not talking about lopping years off already. The Crown must appeal the Emery Sentence.

If the judge is unable to find a case of a white middle class person stabbing a brown neighbourhood child and getting away with it, then he ought not try to be the one to establish it. There must be a more competent judge to set a higher sentence - one reflecting the seriousness of the offence.

42 Comments:

At 13/2/09 2:24 pm, Blogger Bomber said...

Well Blogged Mr Selwyn!

 
At 13/2/09 2:45 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You seem to have added a whole bunch of 'motive' to Bruce Emery's actions that hasn't been reported publicly, Tim.

I doubt anyone 'ponders the deep and meaningful efficacy of sharp implements' prior to chasing off a pair of taggers.

And you have nothing but conjecture that Emory attacked the taggers - didn't the surviving tagger state they approached Emery once in the cul de sac?

Not saying Emery was right to take a knife, kill or wipe clean and go quiet after - just saying the full details of what happened has not been reported (and may never be).

Oh, and Bailey Kurariki actively chose to go out and rob someone with such violence the guy died - far more serious intent than spontaneously chasing a tagger with a knife. Actions and intent (and impact) are what the sentence is based on.

 
At 13/2/09 2:45 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

An ABSOLUTELY appalling sentence .

Your comparison with the BJ Tuariki (?) sentence is valid.That kid was made to look like Charlie Manson in the media yet he never at any time had a weapon in his hand,he was a CHILD - Emery a 50 year old, decided that the Death Sentence was appropriate punishment for having his property tagged and he himself would do the deed. He didn't stop to help the kid, he never rung an ambulance. HOW THE FUCK do these two sentences make sense ???

I can see no other conclusion to draw from this than " one rule for brown skin, one for white ".
When I heard the sentence announced on the radio ths morning I thought " I wonder what ole 'hang 'em high' Mc Vicar will say about this - isn't he the staunch supporter of victims who is always asking for tougher sentences ?
Well, well, what a surprise, when its a white guy killing a brown kid then the sentence is ' too tough'. What a fucking hypocrite .

 
At 13/2/09 3:04 pm, Blogger Bomber said...

And you have nothing but conjecture that Emory attacked the taggers - didn't the surviving tagger state they approached Emery once in the cul de sac?

Are you pretending that Emery chased these two kids up the road and that it was self-defense?

 
At 13/2/09 3:10 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

He's not middle class he a struggling small businessman hence the reason he lives in South Auckland. Anymore sterotypes you want to throw in there.

 
At 13/2/09 3:28 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

He's white, ergo he is middle class. Ask Bomber to give us a clear definition of what middle class actually is, he won't be able to do it.

I'm not sure why it makes a difference anyway, was Michael Choi middle class too? Or doesn't that matter when the killer is brown?

 
At 13/2/09 3:32 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well I'm a 'struggling'( make that " hard- working- making-an-honest-living- but-not rolling-in-it-dammit") small- business woman , who lives near Hornby in Christchurch but I don't think that gives me any more rights than anybody else.
I caught someone tagging my property a year or so ago. I didn't go get a KNIFE , i got a camera, snuck up on him and took a photo - did he ever crap himself when the flash went off. Result: great photo of tagger holding spray can , next to his tag.
Result : little rat had to come back and clean his tag off while I stood by and watched. perfect.

I HATE tagging - I think taggers are morons and akin to dogs who piss everywhere to mark their territory . If I were 6 ft tall and a bloke i'd like to grab one and use his precious hoodie to - with him in it - to clean his tag off, but a KNIFE ? You carry a knife for one reason - to STAB someone

 
At 13/2/09 3:39 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

or to make sandwiches.

 
At 13/2/09 3:43 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How did poor Mr Choy (or his family) murdered by BJT and his associates contribute to his own death.

If there is a 1-10 scale of being the ‘author of your own misfortune’ I would say My Choy would score 0, his family would also score 0.

Mr Cameron on the other hand would score (I would say) 4-7, his family would score 8-10, they failed as parents, people have a habit of blaming others for problems they bring upon themselves. Have these parent really looked at how they contributed to their son being a criminal.

There seems to be an attitude that it is ‘normal’ for children to go through a crime phase, surely most children manage to get though life with spending time as criminal. I accept that manny kids do a few very minor things, you cannot compare taking a couple of buck from your mums purse with being out half the night for no other purpose that to wreck other peoples property, you cannot compare trying a cigarette behind the bike sheds with illegal drug use.

If this criminal had been at home with his parents, like he should have been, he would still be alive, crime is a dangerous activity.

Being a self employed trades person or semi-skilled worker is not 'a businessman', its a 'job' (usually badly paid) without sick-pay, many of the self-employed are only that because they can not get a real job. You can be against this guy without deliberately misrepresenting him.

 
At 13/2/09 3:48 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Was BJT (and the others) a victim of a crime being committed against him by Mr Choy when he killed him.

Did Mr Choy provoke his killers, was Mr Choy doing something dangerous, was he where he should not have been.

Was Mr Choy totally innocent, was Mr Cameron totally innocent.

If Mr Cameron had been punished/educated/controlled for his criminal activites at an early stage maybe he would have been safer, its all very well getting or letting they off, but its a short term gain for a long term loss, for everyone.

 
At 13/2/09 3:50 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In some circles going to university makes you classed as middle class.

 
At 13/2/09 3:50 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

if I were 6 ft tall and a bloke i'd like to grab one and use his precious hoodie to - with him in it - to clean his tag off,

Fair enough, you believe some assault is warranted, but only if your a six foot bloke.

But what if you're not a six foot bloke?

but a KNIFE ? You carry a knife for one reason - to STAB someone

The kids carry theirs for self defence.
Well thats what they say.

BBB said:

I can see no other conclusion to draw from this than " one rule for brown skin, one for white ".

Sorry to burst your bubble their big fella, but a Mr Paul Kingi would disagree.
He is the Maori 6ft 5in 130+kg professional K1 fighter who punched his 60 year old uncle in the head, who then struck his head on the ground and died.
Lets say that again.

A 6ft 5in 130kg professional fighter punches a 60 year old man.

After three trials, he has been found not guilty of manslaughter.

So I guess your "one rule for white skin..." comment doesn't hold.

Oh, and who championed his cause, and believed the two previous trials were a miscarriage, and that Paul Kingi should never serve time?

Well BBB, it was your old mate Garth McVicar.

So I guess your comment:

When I heard the sentence announced on the radio ths morning I thought " I wonder what ole 'hang 'em high' Mc Vicar will say about this - isn't he the staunch supporter of victims who is always asking for tougher sentences ?

isn't as cut and dried as you think.

 
At 13/2/09 4:22 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"There seems to be an attitude that it is ‘normal’ for children to go through a crime phase, surely most children manage to get though life with spending time as criminal."

All the evidence on this (rather than just anecdote or hunch) is that most children (particularly boys) go through a phase of committing anti-social crimes of varying significance. Only about 1% of all youths go on to be serious offenders. So it is relatively normal, and, while I hate tagging, its a property offence, not violence.

On the topic: the comparison with Choy/Kuariki is a bit of a side show. The real issue is whether the judge was right about the mitigating/aggravating factors. I would have thought getting a weapon and chasing someone down would be a fairly serious aggravating factor. On the other hand, having children seems relatively minor (I'd love to see SST getting up in arms about the number of Maori offenders in prisons who have children).

My views on this are a bit conflicted. I think the sentence he got was out of line with sentences for similar offences. On the other hand, I'd rather see sentences be shorter, more money spent on prevention/rehabilitation. Unlike SST I'd rather there were fewer victims.

 
At 13/2/09 4:53 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

All the evidence on this (rather than just anecdote or hunch) is that most children (particularly boys) go through a phase of committing anti-social crimes of varying significance.

That is a very extrodinary statement to make without backing it up with some evidence. "Most" children - i.e. over 50%, commit anti-social crimes?

I call bullshit on that, very few of the people I grew up with commited crimes - anti-social or other wise - when we were growing up, certainly not 50%+.

I find your casual remark about tagging being a property offence, a bit disturbing. Are you saying that ruining other peoples property, even stealing it presumably, is somehow not so bad just as long as there is no violence involved?


Unlike SST I'd rather there were fewer victims.

Okay, now we know you are just being a dick.

 
At 13/2/09 4:53 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 3:32PM

Totally agree. Although grabbing a knife and chasing the dum fucks up the street will end up in tears, the sentence is an accurate one that I am happy with.

Taggers scribbling all over the place with illegible marks and I might add, on any piece of wall, fence, gate, door they can find causing anger from the owner who has to pay money to remove it.
If Taggers IQ had two extra points added, they would be a rock. Stupid fucken waste of air!

Now the family are whining over the sentencing, stating that it was all over "a bit of paint." LOL
Get over it!

 
At 13/2/09 5:42 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Is that going to be satisfactory to the victim's family, or indeed the community?

What the fuck do you care Bomber? It is you who is always bleating about NZ's justice system being blinded by vengence and infected with hatred.
It is you who is always bleating about the SST and Garth McVicar being so wrong about wanting tougher sentences.
It is you who is always claiming that our prison system is fucked, does nothing to rehabilitate, breeds more criminals.

And now all of a sudden you are worried that this guy hasn't been locked up and 'oh dear what will the community think'.

You can't have it both ways - either you support tougher sentances or you don't, not just when its a white "middle class" male in the dock.

 
At 13/2/09 6:05 pm, Blogger Unknown said...

The sentence is a disgrace.

Where was the media? Where was the crippled father on camera missing his murdered kid who he "didn't bring up" properly?

It makes me ashamed to be (mostly) pakeha.

 
At 13/2/09 6:15 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It makes me ashamed to be (mostly) pakeha

Well thank goodness you aren't completely pakeha then Jamie, wouldn't that be just awful? You'd have to go around feeling ashamed at every bad thing any white person had done.

 
At 13/2/09 6:28 pm, Blogger Tim Selwyn said...

So, he's just a tagger and so he lost his rights and Emery should be forgiven for a silly mistake. The victim, the deceased, was guilty of a crime and so he had to expect to be killed. That's what I've been hearing from the wingtards and the Herald and even the Noelle McCarthy panel session this afternoon. They are at the taliban end of popular opinion, using prejudice and racism to instinctively react against the tagger and his family.

What those people are saying is that if one of Emery's children (for example) should go on a tagging spree when they are 15 and one of Cameron's relatives (for example) decides to chase after them and stabs them and they die and he comes up for sentencing he should get no more than 4 years three months. Or maybe he should get off altogether in the same way that many people, like Sensible Sentencing Trust's Garth McVicar, thought he should? Maybe Home D.

Justice Williams has said today basically this: If you kill a young tagger (provided you're white of course ;) you will do barely half the sentence of what a 12 year old would do for merely being an accomplice (providing of course the 12 year old is not white ;) to a similar offence of manslaughter. Just being white and middle class is mitigation enough to warrant a huge discount at sentencing. Fuck, let me just look at my watch here for a sec.... ah, yip - that's right: it's another great day to be a white man in New Zealand! Much, much better than other races and genders.

And if the TV3 news was correct, the govt. are announcing increased penalties for knife crime. I think that's what I just heard. Oh the irony.

 
At 13/2/09 6:29 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A very lenient sentence. I am disappointed with the judge.

Pihema Cameron did not deserve to die, but he did in some way contribute to his misfortune, as others have mentioned. To compare him to Michael Choy is not valid.

No winners here. Cameron loses his life and his family loses him. Emery gets a lenient sentence. The justice system appears weak, yet again.

 
At 13/2/09 6:34 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great blog, Tim. Yet another example of institutional privileges for landowners who are white. Think that's been going on for a while now.

 
At 13/2/09 6:36 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The sentence took into account that Mr Emery did society a favour by eliminating that scumbag.

Sometimes the system works!

 
At 13/2/09 7:11 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What the fuck do you care Bomber? It is you who is always bleating about NZ's justice system being blinded by vengence and infected with hatred.
It is you who is always bleating about the SST and Garth McVicar being so wrong about wanting tougher sentences.
It is you who is always claiming that our prison system is fucked, does nothing to rehabilitate, breeds more criminals.

And now all of a sudden you are worried that this guy hasn't been locked up and 'oh dear what will the community think'.

You can't have it both ways - either you support tougher sentances or you don't, not just when its a white "middle class" male in the dock.


Clown, you do realize bomber didn't write this blog, Tim did. Jesus mate if you are going to have a go at him, have a go over something he wrote.
Clown

 
At 13/2/09 7:21 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

........... If the system works why is Emerys family having a cry about it and why is Emery thinking of appealing the sentance ( he'd be stupid if he did because its just as likely to get LONGER ) .

But any fool should know THERE IS NO JUSTICE SYSTEM ....


We have a legal system and its run by lawyers for the benefit of lawyers

......... its hard to say if we ever had a justice system

I doubt it

 
At 13/2/09 7:26 pm, Blogger Advocatus Diaboli said...

Emery should have been given a Gold Medal for removing this piece of filth. And the state should compensation him for protecting us from these criminals.

 
At 13/2/09 9:27 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Kia kaha A. 13/2/09 3:32 PM

If you all lived in Christchurch and were white went to a $10K plus a year school for five years then **Armed Bank Robbery** would be a Home D offence.

Kind of like J walking.

Lets remeber the 12yr old never hit/caused the death of Mr Choy and got 7yrs.
That is a great injustice, we should have never know who this boy was let alone him being sentenced to 7yrs!

 
At 13/2/09 11:12 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr Tim

It is NOT because the stabber is a white man and the tagger is a brown man... It's nothing to do with racism.

It's TAGGING. We are sick off taggers marking the walls everywhere. This is what the big deal is.

IF, however, the white man stabbed the brown man because the white man was having a bad day, then yes, it would be an outcry and justice must be done.

 
At 13/2/09 11:48 pm, Blogger Rangi said...

Someone forgot to tell Pihema Cameron

"WHITE IS RIGHT"

 
At 14/2/09 12:45 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As Bomber once posted 'vengence has no place in our justice system'. Therefore the sentence is appropriate and Emery should be reintegrated back into the community as soon as possible. Unless of course Bomber doesn't really believe in what he writes or that it applies to maori/PI's ONLY.

 
At 14/2/09 7:44 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As Bomber once posted 'vengence has no place in our justice system'. Therefore the sentence is appropriate and Emery should be reintegrated back into the community as soon as possible. Unless of course Bomber doesn't really believe in what he writes or that it applies to maori/PI's ONLY.

Clown, you do know Tim wrote thos blog right?
Clown.

 
At 14/2/09 8:04 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Justice Williams has said today basically this: If you kill a young tagger (provided you're white of course ;) you will do barely half the sentence of what a 12 year old would do for merely being an accomplice (providing of course the 12 year old is not white ;)

Er no he fucking didn't Tim, you did.
Why put qwords in his mouth?
Is it because you can't go on your little racist rant without doing so?

Clown, you do know Tim wrote thos blog right?
Clown.


Whose the clown.
The post didn't even mention bomber writing this blog, it said;
"as bomber once posted"

If you would stop practicing tags and pay more attention in class you would grasp basic comprehension.
Clown.

 
At 14/2/09 8:45 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well you are clown, you didn't even mention Tim in your post...

As Bomber once posted 'vengence has no place in our justice system'. Therefore the sentence is appropriate and Emery should be reintegrated back into the community as soon as possible. Unless of course Bomber doesn't really believe in what he writes or that it applies to maori/PI's ONLY.


...admit it, you didn't read who posted this, went off at bomber and feel a bit of dick because you got called on it. Just man up, don't get all grumpy and childish.

 
At 14/2/09 11:33 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So... i guess this means i'm well within my rights to head out and stab to death a boy racer who has been terrorising my neighbourhood for 3 years ... WOOHOO !!! ... now where's that knife ?

I think 4 years may even be worth it .

Oh ..hang on ... most boy racers are white ( and often bring letters from their mummys to court ) and i'm not ... sheesh , back to plan B

 
At 14/2/09 12:33 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

...admit it, you didn't read who posted this, went off at bomber and feel a bit of dick because you got called on it. Just man up, don't get all grumpy and childish.

Er stoner, there is more than one anon.
And when anon writes:

As Bomber once posted 'vengence has no place in our justice system'. Therefore the sentence is appropriate and Emery should be reintegrated back into the community as soon as possible. Unless of course Bomber doesn't really believe in what he writes or that it applies to maori/PI's ONLY.

That means he is addressing his comment to bomber, who has commented on these issues before, it doesn't mean he is directing the comment to the thread author, in this case Tim.

For a stoner you are quite angry, which is unexpected.
The fact that you are befuddled, well thats par for the course innit stoner.

 
At 14/2/09 3:07 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

GOT WOT HE DESERVED/TAGGER!

 
At 14/2/09 3:53 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tim - there seems to be some ambiguity over what actually happened when Emery confronted the taggers, which is why many people feel unhappy with the whole trial & sentencing outcome.

From the Otago Daily Times:

"During the tagging they ran off when a man called out and asked what they were doing.

A man chased the two boys for about 300 metres before Pihema Cameron turned and faced him with his fists up.

Emery had his knife out and was advancing while waving it about, Mr Perkins said.

The court heard Cameron's relative told the man to go away as Cameron used his spray can to try to stop the man with the knife."


So Cameron and his cousin were facing Emery, and waving the spray can about (and spraying?) while Emery was waving the knife (which suggests he had lost it with rage, or was shit scared when they turned to face him; the taggers also sound scared). And this is from the Crown's testimony.

So the verdict of manslaughter really depends on who you believe - Emery or the surviving tagger (as to who was advancing on who) and any forensic evidence of how hard/deep/wide the stab wound was - which is the one thing the media have not covered much at all.

No racism - just frustrated people trying to understand where the responsible adults were for Cameron, and why the cops are so useless in Manukau that people like Emery don't even call them...

 
At 14/2/09 3:53 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you changed the race of the offender & perpetrator I still think he would have received a similar, or possibly even lighter sentence.

Would you be so outraged if you had the following scenario?

A 53 year old Maori business man Mr Tapsell is at home with his wife of 20 years and young daughters. His wife is preparing food for an indonesian church the next day. He lives in a poor white suburb and is the owner of an upholstery business he runs from home. His garage is regularly tagged.

About 11pm he sees someone tagging his garage door of his home and business.

There are two, identities disguised by hoodies. Mr Tapsell isn’t anonymous. They know his property and therefore who he is. He hurries downstairs, grabs a fishing knife, gives chase. He is dressed in shorts and T-shirt, his feet bare.

There is an altercation. The knife had a 14cm blade but penetrated 5cm, so it’s hard to say it was some frenzied attack. Mr Tapsell claims he was defending himself.

Mr Tapsell is convicted of manslaughter. Mr Tapsell had no prior criminal record.

Judge John Parata sentences Mr Tapsell to 4 years 3 months in jail. Judge Parata notes the danger of using knives.

Mr Tapsell’s lawyer sought a sentence of home detention. He also sought donations to help his family. Mr Tapsell did not qualify for legal aid, his business had to close and he had exhausted his finances on his defence.

 
At 14/2/09 3:57 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Pihema Cameron did not deserve to die, but he did in some way contribute to his misfortune, as others have mentioned."

Try going and tagging a Marae or go to Samoa and tag a families Fale.

I imagine you'd get a similar result. And people like Tim and Bomber wouldn't be objecting.

Taggers are basically bullies. They know that they will get away with it. People are too scared of getting bashed to confront them. They realise they will get diversion or minimal community service. The sympathy for them generally is sickening.

 
At 14/2/09 4:39 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

That means he is addressing his comment to bomber, who has commented on these issues before, it doesn't mean he is directing the comment to the thread author, in this case Tim.
Yeah - totally busted, you didn't read the thread was written by Tim and just had a brain fart and had a go at Bomber and you now feel a bit stupid becauase you've been called on it. Stoner is right, just man up and admit you cocked it up, stop being so childish.

 
At 14/2/09 5:59 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just cos he had a knife doesn't mean he intended to kill - he probably only intended to cut him.

 
At 15/2/09 4:42 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The moment Officer Keith Abbot got let off the hook for murdering Stephen Wallace who was also apparently vandalising middle class property, that pretty much set the precedence for any future such actions to protect middle class property....it seems that means kill the vandal then claim it was self defense...

 
At 16/2/09 9:17 am, Blogger Graeme Edgeler said...

Now if only Garth McVicar had read his "Three Stikes" law...

I realise it wouldn't apply in this case, because Emery doesn't have a previous assault conviction, but someone in Emery's position with a single strike would get life imprisonment under that law.

 

Post a comment

<< Home