We do try to keep first-time 18 year-old defendants out of prison where possible.
Which I agree with entirely. The question I have is do the severity if the injuries and the inferred violence of the assault play any part in the sentencing.
Two things really concern me about this boy, first is he kept on hitting after the woman went down at that point the only intent is to cause real harm. To me that suggests psychological problems. The second is that the attack was on a woman, so not a test of strength between immature male animals but something much more horrible.
How was he able to take these photos?
It's a tourist attraction now.
We also visited the Titan missile museum in Tucson Arizona and it really was interesting. Just as strange. The oddest part was how primitive all the equipment looked.
We only lived in Tucson for 7 months but it proved to be a really cool place, The Pima air and space museum which gets examples of just about every weird plane the US has made plus lots from other countries. The massive aircraft storage site where enormous numbers of military aircraft are mothballed. Then there's the desert museum and the desert and mountains themselves. And finally really good stargazing.
I'm sorry but I don't think a competition point is a suitable punishment. And much as I am in favour of donations to women's refuge I don't think money can negate the crime. Neither of those things actually acknowledges the harm done.
A woman was abused and assaulted. I think those "independent witnesses" are liars. I think everyone at NZR knows what happened. They are weaseling out of responsibility.
Essentially they are happy accept the abuse and assault of a woman.
That says a lot about their worth as humans.
If we had a media with an ounce of conscience every single interview with anyone associated with rugby in New Zealand should start by asking why they accept the assault and abuse of women as part of their sport.
Mitchell is a business process guy.
Paul Commons, the COO who’s been fronting a lot of the meth stuff for HNZ, comes from project management, originally in the cement business.
That's true of every agency now. There is a myth (spread by management) that a good manager can manage anything. Our own CEOs come from Fonterra management who (guessing here) want to come home to NZ. They are nice guys but have no passion for science nor real deep-seated understanding of it, so they impose management doctrine without understanding the damage it does when it doesn't fit with the work we actually do.
You can see the same in most government departments. Ground level staff despairing of the management decisions.
And boards of directors are as bad, old white male accountants in suits all recommending each other for the next directorship, hiring yet more managers into leadership positions where they don't fit.
And any time the going gets remotely tough they're off with a golden handshake to the next management position ...
a pox on all their houses.
It seems like HNZ was wrong and now finds itself unable to admit that and so is just digging it's heels in to justify the obviously flawed policy.
To be fair given the way the media react I can see why HNZ would hate to admit any mistake in its policies. But that's part of being a grown-up, if you make mistakes you need to admit them and work to fix the damage.
If you were a cynical type you might suggest a bunch of people are making a ton of money from testing and cleanup contracts and some of that money might directly or indirectly driving this policy. But in this case I think it's just an error of judgement that they should simply reverse.
Paywalls for quality, sure.
But the key point is the news service has to demonstrate quality first. You can't spew drivel onto your webpage and then promise "oh if you pay you'll get real news".
not enough local stories are produced
You're right, we just aren't doing enough weird shit. It's our responsibility to provide strange bizarre behaviour for The Herald to report back to us. There are only four and half million of us so it will require some effort but we're kiwis, we can step up to the mark and do what's needed, no matter how stupid or trivial.
We need a national campaign, do more stupid stuff, preferably with videos, so The Hearld can fill it's web page.
... oh wait you meant real news.
shared on Facebook three days ago
Yeah this is the thing that bugs me too. When I look at Stuff or The Herald I frequently get the weird deja vu feeling of didn't I see this in my twitter feed a weeks ago ... oh yes I did.
So not only are they plagiarizing twitter they are really slow and bad at it - it pretty much defines digital media failure - the kind of thing thought up by OWGs in suits over an expensive lunch on the viaduct.
Just trying to make a nuanced point about the unacknowledged role blind faith plays in providing us with a social reality based on the supposedly sound basis of science.
Yup I do get that. I really do understand the role interpretation can play in conclusions drawn from observations and I'm very aware that it's possible to have systematic errors that thoroughly distort the data.
The problem is that for those not embedded in the scientific system there is a tendency to go from seeing scientists challenge and test each others observations to assuming all observations are suspect. And also to assume all opinions about observations are equal.
It is not reasonable to say scientists are like lawyers I can always find one with another opinion. It also isn't reasonable to base activism on thoroughly debunked experiments simply because they fit preconceptions.
There really are facts, with enough experimental data to be certain they are real. Activism in opposition to facts is just stupid.
That's not to say there aren't areas where the data really isn't certain. Or much more importantly the response to the facts is not subject to the needs of society.
For me that's where Sasha's comment has it's greatest importance - the experiences and knowledge of society need to be considered and incorporated into responses to the data. Society informs the response.
... I believe someone born a couple of months after ...
I really hope you're not suggesting his age, or gender, or race has anything to do with his intelligence and knowledge.