Friday, April 13, 2007

Riding crop mother has her day in court, again

NB this post has been updated
As some people are expecting me to write about the riding crop mum of Timaru (and I wish people would stick to the facts and desist from calling it a horse whip), who was back in court on assault charges, I may as well.

As readers will know, I was a aware of the charges, in fact I blogged about them in July last year. That's how long it has taken to come to court. Public Address blogger Russell Brown criticises my earlier post:
the account of the third-party witness, who has no reason to lie, directly contradicts the account relayed by Dave Crampton on some key points. Hopefully he'll now stop depicting these people as victims of their terrible children and think a bit harder about the violence in this family.
Actually, the account of the witness doesn't contradict my key points. Thats because the witness didn't witness the woman assaulting the boy.Neither did he witness the boy punching his mother in the face and breaking her nose at the start of this whole sorry episode. He witnessed the father assaulting the boy, and that father pleaded guilty to assault, as he should.

What Russell Brown hasn't mentioned is the following, much is (apparently) in the summary of facts but not in the media report he relies on: The teenager (aged 16 or 17) was on an access visit. He punched his mother in the face and broke her nose prior to all this happening, resulting in his mother getting ACC. He was was charged with assault but Police decided not to pursue it and let him off with a formal warning, reasons of which are suppressed. Charges were laid against the mother but police withdrew the charges when they found out what her son had done, but the crown relaid them after what was most probably political and CYF pressures after the boy got his warning.

Furthermore, the man who witnessed the stepfather's assault on the boy has said that the woman didn't exactly do anything to stop the assault - but would you if your nose had just been broken? Russell has criticised the woman, alleging that she is a bad parent for not doing anything to stop the beating, even questioning why she did not call out for her partner to stop.[This has since been refuted in comments by the woman herself].

Russell has criticised the actions of both parents, but not the teenager. Why? I don`t condone the actions of the stepfather either, but if Russell's son was in the care of a former partner or CYFs and came home on an access visit, broke his nose, spat blood in his face, assaulted his partner, kicked him and swore at him, what would he do - give him a hug and play this on his stereo?


ScrubOne said...

You're an absolute legend mate. Well done. Pity none of this will get in the media.

Anonymous said...

I am the "riding crop lady".
I do not condone violence, and my husband has pled guilty for his actions.
There are mitigating circumstances surrounding this which will be revealed at the hearing.
Court evidence from the boy himself was that I told my husband to stop - the media selectively did not publish this.

I didnt physically step into the incident because I feared for my safety and I didnt want to get hurt by the boy any more.
The boy had seriously assaulted me breaking my nose just prior to the incident between him and my husband and had also assaulted my husband.

Myself and my husband both required medical treatment as a result of this boys actions.

I did NOT beat the boy.

I think my son should have been treated as we were - as equally under the law. Who is calling him to accountability for his actions? Since when is it acceptable to assault someone, breaking that person's nose?

I believe charges have been laid against me for purely political reasons, not in the interests of justice.

Murray said...

Because Russell Brown has a history of lying and misrepresentation to support his political position which is dictated to him by the 9th floor.

He is a dishonest political hack for whom the truth is of no particular interest.

If he thought he could pull it off he'd still be referring to it as a horsewhip because this is more emotive than the facts.

Your time is up Brown, we've had enough of socialist home invasion legislation and agenda.

Move to Sweden. It's where you belong.

prettyroses said...

Thank you for this blog. I knew when I saw the headlines that there would be important information missing so that the truth was concealed.

Chuck said...

Riding Crop Lady, It sounds like you are have been a little selective yourself. Would you please tell us the following.

How old was your son in years and months at the time of the incident?

Did the latest incident happen after the court found you not guilty on the riding crop case?

Is the article correct that your husband swore at the boy and that the first act of violence was when you slapped or hit your son in the face?

Chuck said...

Riding Crop Lady, I have read Dave’s earlier comments since my last comment. It appears your son was 16 at the time and the incident happened after your earlier court case. So the critical issue is did you slap you son before he hit you? If you were the first to use violence then I can not see what defense you can use.

I do not normal think court case should be discussed on a blog but you are the one who choose to go public.

Dave said...

Chuck, go get yourself a coffee. There is nothing selective. This court case is not being discussed on this blog apart from what anyone is allowed to discuss in the normal course of a prosecution. Who hit whom first is not the critical issue, nor is it relevant to link two court cases together and treat an accused person as guilty before trial.

Finally, who cares who swore at whom. We are allowed to swear in this country, you know.Do you have a problem with that?

dad4justice said...

I feel for the riding crop lady as I have dealt with both Timaru police and the vindictive Timaru Cyfs office invloving a case of six alienated children . Cyfs have distorted the facts ( Liars Incorp) in this tragic case - and have caused so much unnesssary trauma for the parents and children I am shamed to be called a kiwi. I just wonder if the Cyfs practice manager Mareen Turnock helped put the knife into you ?

Anonymous said...

This was 2 years after the riding crop incident.
The boy was able to use the previous case to give credibility to the lies he has told.
The first act of violence was from my son not me or my husband and the foul language was from my son.
I cannot go into further detail as this may compromise our trial.

Chuck said...

Dave, you may know something or think you know something about this case that the rest of us don’t but is appears you do not know very much about the law. Who hit who first is entirely relevant in any case of assault.

The swearing is also relevant. Whether her husband swore at her son has not been established. However, if he did swear and by that I mean use foul language it would be very relevant for a number of reasons. Firstly, there is a matter of provocation. Secondly, IMHO it is entirely inappropriate for a parent or step-parent to use foul language at a child.

From what I have read in Timaru Herald things do not stack up. It states the boy had got out of the car. Could the two adults not just have driven off.? If the boy stuck his mother breaking her nose without being hit, slapped or toughed in any manner it would not be hard to do a private prosecution. I am keeping an open mind on the case. Do you have problem with that?

Russell Brown said...

Seeing as Dave was kind enough to comment on my blog, I'll reciprocate.

The difference in accounts I mentioned was between the account relayed by Dave in July last year, and the evidence given in court by the motorist the boy flagged down for help.

From July:

"The stepfather had to physically restrain the boy, and pull the punching and swearing boy off his mother. The mother physically disciplined him and his stepfather tied his feet together to stop him from kicking him in the head again, before calling the police, who handcuffed the swearing boy and took him away."

From the witness:
The boy managed to call his birth father on his cellphone, but his mother grabbed the phone.

His mouth was filling with blood from his bleeding nose. He spat it out, further angering his stepfather.

The vehicle stopped and the boy ran into the road, in front of a vehicle driven by Geraldine man Colin Hobbs. Mr Hobbs told the court the boy's arms were tied together. There was blood around his nose and mouth.

Mr Hobbs saw the man kick the boy two or three times and then grab him by the scruff of the neck, pulling him toward the vehicle, and put both his knees into the boy's ribcage.

"He was putting everything into it," he said. The woman did nothing to stop the assault."

When Senior Constable Graeme Walker arrived at the scene, all three family members were visibly upset. In an attempt to defuse the situation, he took the boy home and sent the couple on their way.

There are some quite significant differences and omissions here, certainly enough to cause me to doubt the mother's account. And *even if* the boy behaved as alleged, I do not see how that justifies the subsequent assault described by the witness.

I note also that the mother said last year that she "physically disciplined" the boy in the midst of this ghastly situation; a statement she does not appear to want to make now.

The husband's actions, as described by the witness - including dragging the boy *towards* the car - do not seem to fit the claim of self-defence.

I am mindful that the police chose to charge the parents, and not the child, and I am not inclined, in the absence of any evidence, to attribute that to a police-government conspiracy.

This seems like a very violent family indeed.

3mmmz said...

Riding Crop Lady, you stated that "I didnt physically step into the incident because I feared for my safety and I didnt want to get hurt by the boy any more.
The boy had seriously assaulted me breaking my nose just prior to the incident between him and my husband and had also assaulted my husband."..If you feared for your safety as much as you say..why didn't you just leave and report him to the police? Your injuries would certainly have been proof of an assault. Perhaps HE would be the one standing in court facing charges now.

Maybe you stayed because you were you going to give your 'LAST RESORT' technique another go? You know, the one you said dramatically improves their behaviour. Your logic, now leaves much to be desired.

I agree the newpapers do leave alot of relevant information out, and we do need to be critical of the way they report the news sometimes. But I find your comments and your video merely serve to validate what they are saying.

'Your kids are the product(victims) of the environment YOU provided for them.'

When you can take a step back and look closely and honestly at the environment you provided for these boys their entire lives, ask yourself this...when did I start putting my needs before theirs? When you find the answer to this, and accept your role in the manifestations of their behaviour problems,your sons will begin to show you a non-violent way of saying they love you.

Good luck in your court case...something tells me your gonna need it!!!

Anonymous said...

Hi Dave, The link in your story " in July last year" opens the same page instead of going to the earlier story. Thanks for blogging. After personal experience I don't believe a word in the mainstream media anymore.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, the link actually opens to a different page with both stories on, the other story link is also there under it. Here's the link to the initial story