Media Take: Crime and punishment

Last year, at a Wintec Press Club lunch, I listened to Paula Penfold tell the story of how she and Eugene Bingham put together their reports for TV3's 3D untangling the monstrous conviction that put Teina Pora in prison for a rape and murder he never committed.

It's the kind of story journalists like to hear. It helps us believe that in an era of shrinking budgets and sagging standards, what we do can still matter. But, as Penfold acknowledged, there's a deeper story here: that of private investigator and ex-cop Tim McKinnel, who spent six years working to free Teina Pora and in the process exposed some unpleasant truth about our justice system.

It's the story told by Michael Bennett in his new book, In Dark Places:

Bennett's book is a bracing read: pacy, accessible and important. He joins us this week on Media Take to talk about it.

In what has become a kind of crime and punishment special, we also talk to reformed gang member Fa'afete Taito, Deirdre Nehua of the prisoner reintegration service Out of Gate, and the Salvation Army's Reina Harris about the backdrop to a Waitangi Tribunal claim over persistently high rates of Maori incarceration and reoffending.

And we'll also take a hard look at a news phenomenon that's been doing my head in: the feckless and and often nonsensical stories about "meth houses" and contamination. As this Science Media Centre roundup of expert opinion indicates, the conflation of the risks at properties formerly used for methamphetamine manufacture and those where meth has simply been used is deeply misleading.

Ironically, I hadn't seen that opinion when I scripted a video for this week's show, but I came to the same conclusion: at best this stuff is confused, at worst it's simply bullshit. And it's bullshit very frequently driven by companies with a direct interest in generating public alarm. (Also: by government ministers, with much the same motivation). News stories end up full of wild and contradictory claims and property owners are relieved of yet more money.

NB: props to the person in digital at Newshub who actually reported on the expert opinion. Everyone else seem to have been in no mood to let the facts get in the way of a good story. Anyway, here's Richard Pamatatau from tonight's show:

Media Take: Meth Houses
On tonight's Media Take, Richard Pamatatau discusses the ethics of a methamphetamine clean up company being the expert source in an article on the prevalence of meth contaminated houses.
Posted by Media Take on Monday, March 28, 2016

You can watch the Media Take show here on demand.

And there's also an additional online-only Q&A session with all the panelists here. It's pretty interesting.

William J Ray, 08:51 Mar 29, 2016

Russell, you might want to talk to RNZ reporter Laura Bootham who's looked into the issue of meth contamination testing in-depth. She did a series on dodgy practices at one particular testing company which seem to have disappeared from RNZ's website (not sure why)

Since Mar 2016 • 1 posts Report

Joe Wylie, 09:07 Mar 29, 2016

...the feckless and and often nonsensical stories about "meth houses" and contamination...News stories end up full of wild and contradictory claims and property owners are relieved of yet more money.

Thanks for calling bullshit on this. The way it's been building, the Herald will soon be claiming that these mostly pointless meth exorcisms will be a bigger driver of the economy than the Chch rebuild.

flat earth • Since Jan 2007 • 4593 posts Report

Russell Brown, 12:05 Mar 30, 2016

Last night's show is on-demand here.

And there's also an interesting online-only Q&A session with all the panelists answering questions from Toi and me, and from the audience.

Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report

BenWilson, 12:37 Mar 30, 2016

An industry specialist says 40 per cent of homes he tests contain traces of methamphetamine, known as P.

Wow, I had no idea that upwards of a million NZers are involved in the production of P. That really is a crisis. Or bullshit. Hmmmmm.

Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10657 posts Report

BenWilson, in reply to Joe Wylie, 12:55 Mar 30, 2016

The way it’s been building, the Herald will soon be claiming that these mostly pointless meth exorcisms will be a bigger driver of the economy than the Chch rebuild.

But are they bigger than the burglary epidemic?

Joe Wylie, in reply to BenWilson, 13:19 Mar 30, 2016

All part of the good old broken window fallacy.

Russell Brown, in reply to BenWilson, 13:59 Mar 30, 2016

The best one was the crazy extrapolation on the Meth Solutions website that suggested hundreds of thousands of properties used as meth labs.

Or, several meth labs for every user. You'd think the bloody price would come down.

Rich of Observationz, 14:10 Mar 30, 2016

I've often wondered about these meth testing and cleaning companies.

Those who watch this stuff will remember the storyline in Breaking Bad about a fumigation company that our heroes used as a cover for their meth lab operations. Well, what kind of companies also get to seal buildings and go in wearing protective clothing? Plus, the houses are already contaminated, obfuscating the evidence.

Just a plot suggestion, your honour..

Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report

Ian Dalziel, in reply to Rich of Observationz, 16:19 Mar 30, 2016

I’ve often wondered about these meth testing and cleaning companies.

One also wonders if the tests may be finding something else that might trigger a positive result, and at what proportions?
What other evidence needs to be presented before the expensive 'cleansing process' kicks in?
Who benefits?
...and who do they know, or inform?

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/300181/meth-tests-now-'standard'-property-manager

there only seem to be very loose 'guidelines' and paranoia - some of it laid out here:
http://www.methsolutions.co.nz/what-is-a-safe-level-of-meth/

I'd be more worried about other normal household chemical spills, diesel and black mould in a house - I suspect a good airing and wipe down would more than likely do the job - heck if it's okay for the government to leave sequestered asbestos in houses in Chchch without noting it on the LIM, anything goes, right?

Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7953 posts Report

Russell Brown, in reply to Ian Dalziel, 16:52 Mar 30, 2016

One also wonders if the tests may be finding something else that might trigger a positive result, and at what proportions?

Possible in the case of lead.

But it’s more that the crude tests most of them use in the first instance aren’t actually capable of telling whether the MoH standard has been exceeded. And they’re certainly not telling property owners what the toxicologists told the Science Media Centre – that traces of methamphetamine itself are extremely unlikely to have any negative heath effects, or any psychoactive effect.

It was kind of amazing that the Newshub report on Saturday about the couple spending tens of thousands having their house stripped out didn’t say who told them they had to do that. To be fair, there was evidence their garage had been used for a lab.

Rich of Observationz, in reply to Russell Brown, 17:16 Mar 30, 2016

Lead? Mercury maybe? And there’d be a detectable quantity of that in most houses – somebody will have broken a fluorescent tube at some stage. Maybe they just check for “chemicals” – bound to be some of those around.

(In fact, there are a whole lot of nasties that weren’t recognised when widely used.

Leaded paint, obviously.

Tetrachloromethane was a popular spot remover until the 70s, with a caveat that you shouldn't smoke while using it as the cigarette would oxidise the CCl4 to phosgene.

Not to mention pesticides.

Even good old petrol is 1% benzene, which has been known as a toxic carcinogen for a long time – so if the bikies who lived in the house rebuilt motorbikes in the living room, as is traditional, they probably caused more serious contamination than smoking P).

Hard News by Russell Brown

11 responses to this post