Thats right...blame the teen

Aparently in Tauranga, a 40 year old father is blaming his 15 year old son for his drink driving arrest and subsequent conviction.

According to the New Zealand Herald online "Easton Shane Taikato, 40, beneficiary, told Tauranga District Court he got drunk because his 15-year-old son had not come home the night before".

I think that it has to be one of the dumbest excuses I have ever seen and the judge seemed to think the same thing.

Judge Paul Geoghegan told Taikato it was a "huge concern" he did not accept responsibility for his offending.

His excuse was an extraordinary one and showed "absolutely zero" insight.

"And that makes you a very dangerous person to other road users," said Judge Geoghegan.

Hes now disqualified from driving for 18 months and will spend 8 months in jail.

Now I know disqualifying someone from driving brings heavy penalties in terms of being caught while disqualified, but in the end, someone as mental as this guy is not going to give a toss he cannot hold the plastic fantastic drivers license. He's going to be just as dangerous when he gets out as he was when this happened.

Nice one judge...third times the charm for this clown. Next time don't try and blame your son.

Maybe its because I'm male

Maybe this is something that is simply to do with the fact that I'm a guy, but I just don't really get it.

Today I read an article on the Stuff news website about a couple who were planning a wedding that is not going to happen because of the recession, and the bride to be, has lost her job, and they are now on one income. What I don't get is the price tag on the wedding. $15,000.

Now I know its a big day, has to be nice and special, but the amount of money spent on that wedding is a significant chunk to a deposit on a house. Personally, I would have an issue with any person I went to marry who wanted to spend a five figured sum on a wedding, whether I had the money or not.

Now I'm not saying Valentines is the answer but the idea that having guests pay for coming is not a bad idea. Why on earth should a newly wedded couple pay for the lot themselves?

My wifes wedding dress was custom made. Beautiful dress for a beautiful woman, $175USD. Our reception, all up including a luncheon for distance travelers was just over $1,000 mostly funded by her parents, but some of her own savings. My suits, 4 of them, my grooms party of myself, best man and groomsman, plus my father in law, $360USD, and we had them for 3 days...not too bad considering. We also had a reception here in New Zealand that was an invitation for people to bring some food along as opposed to a gift, $250 NZD. Venue was free. Decorations were from gardens of friends.

Now I have to be honest here, my ring was more expensive than the one I purchased for my wife. That was out of simple ignorance and also, my poor budget...but then, I look on the rings as a symbol of something far more meaningful. Why on earth you would spend a four figure sum on a ring which can be lost, damaged, and eventually not worn for different reasons, work, play, washing, who knows. But then, unless the person respects the institute of marriage, then the ring is just a decoration. If its taken off, then they are single and play like they used too.

When it comes down to it...what is the most important thing? The how? The where? The when? The cost? I mean, what is the point of spending thousands of dollars on a day? I don't see the need for 22 bridesmaids and matching groomsmen, 9 page boys and accompanying girls, a $9,000 dress worn once. 3 stretched hummer limos? Hell, I went to my wedding in a Dodge truck and then from the reception drove a Ford Taurus. First time around I think it was a Nissan Skyline 4-door hatch then home to Wellington the next day in a Toyota HiAce that decided not to work properly and certainly had seen better days.

The wedding is but the smallest and shortest part of the whole event of a marriage. Granted, the day is the day. But should that day cost a five figure sum?

The New Greens

Its quite funny that after 15 years in parliament, as an electorate and list MP that Greens co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons is stepping down to enjoy life after parliament.

I have to give credit where it is due. Shes brought the Greens out from obscurity and into the forefront of politics. Shes been the face of compromise between the bigs and the smalls. She proved that the Greens can be reasonable...for the most part.

But her standing aside does prove problematic. Who takes over. According to their own rules the co-leader must be male and female, and since Mr Russell Norman obviously has the male slot, if you look at the current crop of lady MP's, you either have an MP which is the scourge of most people in the country, and carries very little respect, or a "rising star", who at times herself could be a radical, but also could provide a face that the Greens have never have had to this point. A relative moderate, and a Maori.

The thing is, they dont have to be a sitting MP as demonstrated by Norman's entry as co-leader after the death of Rod Donald, but Norman faced a publicity hurdle by being outside the house and in the shadow of someone more favoured and in the public eye like Nandor Tanczos. So once our resident Rasta left, Mr Norman came into the house.

Now is Bradford Vs. Turei. For me thats enough said. Here is how a Stuff.co.nz poll sees it right now.
Total Votes: 9747 as of 3pm today.
Sue Bradford: 965 - 9.9%
Metiria Turei: 2108 - 21.6%
Someone else: 1260 - 12.9%
This one was amazing though.
"I dont care about the Greens: 5414 - 55.5%.

Personally, I think Sue Bradford at the helm along side Russell Norman will be as useful as a Torpedo in Pearl Harbour and the same effect. She has no ears. She cannot listen to the populous and especially if what the people want is not on her agenda. Case in point for this one is her dog like persistance with the anti-smacking legislation that I hope gets thrown out pretty quickly. The down side to her, other than what I have already mentioned is that she is 56.

If it was a vote between these two alone then current "musterer" for the Greens Metiria Turei would be my pick. By comparison, a little more inexperienced but at the same time, years to offer ahead than behind. She has her passionate issues as any red-blooded politician and is in some areas considered a radical. However, I think she is the more likely candidate to be the face of the leadership with Russell Norman...and thats the thing that needs to be considered with replacing Jeannette Fitzsimons. They need someone who can strike the balance.

So thats my little spin on things. I will be watching.

Like father...like son...Time to end the cycle

I started writing this one the day I read the report on this issue, but stepped back to make sure I wasn't just doing it in the heat of emotion. I think though after some settled thinking, my overall feelings on the matter are the same.

William Curtis, father of convicted Nia Glassie child killer Wiremu Curtis, has now been sentenced to 4 years in prison for his part in this fiasco. He should be thanking his lucky stars he's not serving the same length of time as his son. Honestly, I don't even have to know him to know what kind of father he was and what kind of household he presided over as father...to see that his son proudly followed in his footsteps...all the way to prison.

"In sentencing Judge Phillip Cooper said the violence by Cutis towards Nia was inexplicable and incomprehensible". How could there even be the slightest though of an excuse that this could be explainable or comprehendable, or even in the slightest degree acceptable from anyone in an adult frame of mind.

To be honest, Kevin Rudd's sentiments relating to the perpetrators of the Victorian bush fire is likely the most appropriate for all of those involved in this situation..."Rot in jail". I don't really think there would be any sadness or tears shed for them if they actually never got to finish their sentences and something happened to them inside.

It hurts me to say this being the relatively conservative guy that I am otherwise, but in taking in a young girl into my home who is the victim of neglect, abuse and deprivation, I find very little excuse for someone who can do what was done to this little girl...

Three years old, and for 18 months of that three years put in a dryer which was turned on, hung on a clothes line, sometimes by her arms and swung around, used as a wrestling doll, beaten, especially from your own family...I'm not sorry to say that the world could be rid of these people from gene pool.

When I saw Wiremu and Michael Curtis walking into the court room and one of them did a hand sign of a gang...showed me in that one action they could have cared less about what was about to happen to them. They didnt care they took an innocent babys life...or that they would be spending the next 17 years of their lives in prison. (If they are lucky they will spend 17 years alive in prison).

In reading an article on Yahoo's website it says this.
"Curtis had pleaded not guilty to all the charges. His lawyer Harry Edward says the sentencing is the final chapter in a very sorry saga. He says his client is unremorseful and regards the jury which convicted him a lynch mob". I think he should have considered himself lucky he hasn't faced one before now!!! For lawyer to say his client has no feeling on the issue, makes me sick that this guy is even in the gene pool.

When is enough going to be enough? How many other Nia Glassie's will there have to be? I realise that the sad reality is we will not be able to protect everyone and tragedies will happen. But this is certainly a call for the local community to speak up...something may have been able to have been done to help this little one.

I have to be honest and say that I am thinking that to some degree, this is a call for hard labour, if not capital punishment. The deliberate and willful mistreatment of a child, a toddler, someone who had no defence and was being abused, pounded on, neglected and ultimately killed by her own family. 17 years is a long time, but life, should mean, life.

None of the Curtis family spoken about here will have meaningful lives after prison...imagine seeing that on a CV as an employer. Prison 2009-2026, Cause: Murder, 3 year old. Endearing to potential employers. I don't think this is something that the Clean Slate legislation covers. So...what will happen to them after prison. Benefits? Locked down for years under tax payer accomodation, then after that, back on her Majesty's pay roll? Something has to be done about that.

Anyways...enough, perhaps too much said. Better putting it out there, than stewing on it and taking it out on someone else I think.