Criticism of police 'undeserved' in autism looter arrest

22 Jul 2011 09:06p.m.

Tane wrote:

The job of the police is to apprehend offenders and put them before the court. Although there are some limited situations where diversion can be offered, BY LAW strict conditions have to be met, including that the defendant must be genuinely remorseful for his actions. If Cornelius Arie Smith-Voorkamp is mentally disabled and cannot control his actions then it is for the Court to decide whether this is a defence, mitigation or not relevant. It is not for the Police to do this, nor would it be appropriate for them to do so. In short - police have no discretion in this matter. The Judge should stop passing the buck and deal with it, Cornelius Arie Smith-Voorkamp's lawyer should act ethically and within the law in his defence of his client and if the public have a problem with this case they should direct their criticism at the law, not the police who have no option but to follow it.

22 Jul 2011 02:59p.m.

jan wrote:

100% agree with wiseacre, and babs. The owners of the lightbulbs dont want him prosecuted.Police apparantly have discresion in some cases, why not this one? Its just the police with a bloodymined attitude.

22 Jul 2011 11:08a.m.

babs (link to moderation guide is kaput in my ie7 browser) wrote:

Any of those saying a not guilty plea is a bar to diversion is, ahem ahem, telling an oh so litty biddy inaccuracy. Was the judge who twice asked for diversion to be considered, therefore incompetent for thinking it was not a good option? In this case the police appear more problem than solution, and are so off the mark with community feeling, you wonder who they work for - not a good look. State funded mental health and tolerance adds on tv, now cause cringes of hypocracy, and should be pulled until the state can take notice of their own adds. It was only a light fitting from a premises that is going to get demolished, and everything in it destroyed anyway - it is not as if the identity of a baby was stolen and used to fraudulently obtain a false passport, and then lied about under oath.
...the police minister does not have the figure, to be wearing no clothes... umm what election?

21 Jul 2011 07:03p.m.

Ruz wrote:

It's interesting that the Judge in the case felt that the Police approach was too harsh and wanted them to deal with it via diversion. Because of that I think it difficult to accept that the Police think that the offender should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, ignoring the mitigating circumstances. The fact that Viv Richards has had to come out to defend his staff probably proves that not everyone is convinced by the Police stance. If it had been one of their own, he would probably not have been prosecuted at all.

21 Jul 2011 09:41a.m.

Brett wrote:

When this guy was first arrested and his face was put on TV everyone was calling for him to be hanged as he like so many others were arrested for looting after the quakes.

In my eyes the Police have handled the matter well, yes he may suffer from autism but that is not a defence to commit a crime, if he expects to live in society then he has to abide by the laws that everyone else lives under or be permanently locked up which would have the PC brigade in anger.

The reason why the Police haven't dropped the charges is because this guy maintains his innocence and entered a "Not Guilty" plea, i guess if he had entered a guilty plea then perhaps he would have been eligible for diversion!

At the end of the day the guy was found in a cordoned off area with his co-offender looting a house, regardless that it was light fixtures... he was still looting!

Would we all be looking at this differently if he was a normal person?

Perhaps we should ask him whether he wants to be treated? like a normal person

21 Jul 2011 08:26a.m.

Wiseacre wrote:

The police handling of this case has been appalling, and going after the media for reporting on their petty, vindictive bloody-mindedness is beyond comprehension. They deserve all the criticism they get over this case. But the police aren't solely to blame; the public have been manipulated into handing over far too much power to the state. For years we have allowed the Sensible Sentencing Trust to dominate the law & order debate, whipping up the NZ bloodlust into a lynch-mob mentality. Now we have the police digging in their heels & refusing to back down on their persecution of Arie; going after the media for exposing their heavy handedness; harassing Mana Party members and union activists; arresting a political activist & trying to shut down his website within days of commenting on Radio about the sentencing of a medicinal cannabis user; shutting off a suburban street to question & photograph everybody that goes through. Couple this with the most disturbing and outrageous attack on our civil liberties in modern history. Removal of the right to silence; right to a jury trial restricted; removal of prisoners right to vote; vast extensions to the search and surveillance powers of the state; property seizure without conviction; restrictions to legal aid. And let's not forget the privatization of prisons for corporate profit. What is going on here? Do we really want to become a corporate prison nation? When did we become a fascist police state? Why aren't the people questioning such outright abuses of power?

21 Jul 2011 07:46a.m.

RolanTheRat wrote:

You cannot have one law for some and one for others.And the police are not doctors so cannot make the call on who has a mental illness if they did they would be hauled over the coals by the PC crowd dammed if they do dammed if they don't.

21 Jul 2011 02:13a.m.

Guillaume wrote:

Arresting a man with a mental disability and formally charging him? The man should be placed in a mental health facility and not prison. It's puzzling to me why the police maintain a position of justification for their actions in these special circumstances.