|
|
Post by fish on Mar 12, 2023 20:28:44 GMT 12
What book would you recommend on the Sounds Murders?
I'm after one that is factual, largely an account of what happened. Not a raving conspiracy theory, which would rule out anything by Ian Wishart. I tried reading his book on it, and just gave up.
|
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Mar 12, 2023 21:51:57 GMT 12
What book would you recommend on the Sounds Murders? I'm after one that is factual, largely an account of what happened. Not a raving conspiracy theory, which would rule out anything by Ian Wishart. I tried reading his book on it, and just gave up. There is in fact no book on the topic of the Sounds murders that is completely unbiased. All published works about the case take a particular stance, whether it be in support of Scott Watson's conviction or questioning the evidence against him. Ian Wishart has written three books. I have read none of them. Apparently one of Wisharts books claims Scott Watson is guilty and that he even had an accomplice. While the other books claimed his innocence. Trial by Trickery by Keith Hunter is definitely worth checking out. It's a book that delves into the case and raises some questions about Watson's conviction. Some people praise it for its in-depth investigation and thought-provoking insights, while others criticize it for being biased in favor of Watson. However, if you want to get a more complete picture of the case and the different perspectives surrounding it, it's worth giving it a read. |
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Mar 13, 2023 8:13:50 GMT 12
Nancy Frey-Hershey went missing in 1997. Despite extensive searches and investigations, she has never been found, and the case remains unsolved. It's utterly irresponsible and downright despicable to throw around baseless accusations without a shred of evidence to back them up. Let me be crystal clear: Scott Watson has never been officially linked to the disappearance of Nancy Frey-Hershey or considered a suspect in that case. Anyone who suggests otherwise is engaging in reckless and malicious speculation. Moreover, labeling someone a "psycho" without any credible evidence is not just harsh, it's downright cruel. It's a classic example of character assassination and stigmatization, and it has no place in civilized discourse. We should all be ashamed of ourselves if we stoop so low as to indulge in such harmful and unproductive behavior. Let's face it, Nancy Frey-Hershey's disappearance is a tragic and unsolved case that has left her loved ones and the community with more questions than answers. To suggest that Scott Watson had anything to do with it is not only unfounded but also deeply offensive to the memory of Nancy and her family. We must all strive to base our opinions and judgments on factual information, not rumors or personal biases. The justice system is based on the principle of innocent until proven guilty, and it's crucial that we don't engage in irresponsible practices such as spreading false accusations or stigmatizing individuals without any factual basis. Let's all show some decency, respect, and empathy towards those who have suffered loss and seek justice in a fair and impartial manner. So if the police can do it on Public Record, why can't we do it on an internet forum? From the link Jim posted: Pope, a Christchurch detective rose through the ranks to become Deputy Police Commissioner – he retired in 2011 in the wake of a damning report into police culture. Police had also led a campaign to smear Scott, including starting a rumour that he was sleeping with his sister and was linked to the disappearance of American woman Nancy Frey-Hershey on Great Barrier Island earlier in 1997, Watson said. You seem to have missed my previous post. Let's see if you can read it this time, to reiterate what I have already said: From that article: Police had also led a campaign to smear Scott, including starting a rumour that he was sleeping with his sister and was linked to the disappearance of American woman Nancy Frey-Hershey on Great Barrier Island earlier in 1997, Watson said.
Did you note the BOLD EMPHASIS this time? The press have quoted and printed a statement that Watson's Father has made, it's not an assertion against the police by the press. The police have never ever made a claim or a suggestion of a connection between Scott Watson and the disappearance of Nancy Frey-Hershey. It is a baseless conspiracy theory perpetrated by Watsons father to smear the police with no credible evidence to support it. While many theories exist regarding her disappearance, the notion that Scott Watson was involved in any way has been thoroughly debunked by authorities and legal experts. Any claims to the contrary is unfounded speculation and misinformation found in the depths of conspiracy theory dungeons. |
|
|
|
Post by eri on Mar 14, 2023 14:44:16 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by armchairadmiral on Mar 14, 2023 14:59:17 GMT 12
I thought that was a joke ! Until I re read it over and over. 5 1/2 years? But no...that's it. If this Judge had been sentencing Watson he would have got Home Detention what with no bodies and no witnesses. NZ clearly has a no justice system now. Soon there'll be vigilantes .The crims can read too (most of them) and know about the small consequences if they're caught so soon we will see people handing out their own justice as night follows day. Maybe Chippy will throw the justice policy on the bonfire too ?
|
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Mar 14, 2023 17:31:02 GMT 12
I thought that was a joke ! Until I re read it over and over. 5 1/2 years? But no...that's it. If this Judge had been sentencing Watson he would have got Home Detention what with no bodies and no witnesses. NZ clearly has a no justice system now. Soon there'll be vigilantes .The crims can read too (most of them) and know about the small consequences if they're caught so soon we will see people handing out their own justice as night follows day. Maybe Chippy will throw the justice policy on the bonfire too ? He was charged with manslaughter, not murder. And he plead guilty which would have reduced his sentence. Watson on the other hand was charged with murder and his sentence was as legislated for murder. So it's completely wrong to say that Watson could have received home detention. There's no minimum sentence for accidentally killing someone. While there is for murder. It would appear that the police didn't consider that a charge of murder would stick in this case. |
|
|
|
Post by sloopjohnb on Mar 15, 2023 8:23:27 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by eri on Mar 15, 2023 8:27:41 GMT 12
‘It starts with shoplifting...and before you know it, you’re shipping meth’ - Police MinisterPolice Minister Stuart Nash spoke to Newstalk ZB’s Mike Hosking this morning about crime in New Zealand - and specifically about gang activity.He talked about retail crime as well, acknowledging that it was a big problem.www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/crime/auckland-crime-police-hunting-offenders-after-supermarket-burglary-overnight/5BQGCLBBQNANDM46RFFXZZ45LA/2 terms in gov. growing the problem and now labour start to admit what we've all always known how many more years before they come up with and introduce workable policies that actually start to shrink the problem back to the size it was when they took office 10?, 20? never?
|
|
|
|
Post by eri on Mar 15, 2023 13:10:11 GMT 12
And now Nash had resigned as police minister
Did he admit the inadmissable on air?
|
|
|
|
Post by armchairadmiral on Mar 15, 2023 13:52:15 GMT 12
hipkins rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It's policy that really counts and that hasn't changed .
|
|
|
|
Post by eri on Mar 15, 2023 14:38:56 GMT 12
Seems it was related to things he said on air this morning....informal chats are not to be shared
|
|
|
|
Post by eri on Mar 15, 2023 21:04:29 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by eri on Mar 16, 2023 6:48:26 GMT 12
Crime has been a thorn in this Government's side. There have been four - soon to be five - Police ministers in the space of less than a year.
|
|
|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Mar 16, 2023 7:26:11 GMT 12
And now Nash had resigned as police minister Did he admit the inadmissable on air? in case you mistakenly believe he loses anything from his resignation, from KiwiBlog Losing a portfolio is not the same as being sacked as a Minister
There is a massive difference between being sacked as a Minister and merely having a portfolio taken off you.
Merely losing a portfolio has basically zero impact on a Minister except they may lose one seconded private secretary from their office.
Here’s what they don’t lose:
They do not have their salary drop by $132,046
They don’t have their perks drop by $9,000
They don’t lose their Ministerial house or have their accommodation payment reduced by $16,000 a year
They don’t lose access to VIP Transport
They don’t lose their self-drive car or cars
They don’t lose 90% of their staff
They don’t have the allowance of up to $395 reduced to $260 a night for accommodation outside Wellington
They don’t lose the meal payment of up to $80 for the Minister’s partner
They still attend Cabinet
So losing a portfolio is more like losing a toenail, than something of real consequence. |
|
|
|
Post by armchairadmiral on Mar 16, 2023 7:30:21 GMT 12
Government competently has been a thorn in this Governments side. Notice how quickly they've dumped the bimbo. But we haven't heard the last of her .Sadly. No policy has changed, they've got rid of some of the kite flying. HC, JA and Heather Simpson are still at the core fermenting reintroduction of the maori takeover should they get re elected.
|
|
