An investigation by the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) concluded that a senior police officer unlawfully disciplined his children by striking them with a belt on multiple occasions.
The case came to light in July 2023 when police and Oranga Tamariki were notified of the allegations. While Oranga Tamariki completed a risk assessment and found no ongoing threat to the children, the police investigation was hindered when the officer and his wife refused to allow their children to give evidential interviews.
Without sufficient admissible evidence, the criminal case was closed. However, in an independent inquiry, the officer admitted to using a belt to discipline his children, acknowledging he was aware such actions were illegal.
The IPCA determined that his actions amounted to three counts of assault on a child, as they were for corrective purposes and did not meet legal justifications for reasonable force.
Despite these findings, the police opted not to pursue criminal charges and instead handled the matter through an internal employment process, ultimately censuring the officer for serious misconduct.
The IPCA found this response grossly inadequate given the nature of the offense and the officer’s high rank and responsibility. The report criticises the police’s decision-making, particularly noting that one mitigating factor considered in the officer’s employment sanction was that no criminal charges had been pursued—an approach the IPCA found inexplicable.
The IPCA did not make further recommendations since police had concluded their processes.
For once I applaud the OT decision and the internal police investigation.
Maybe now IPCA (and the other entities) nrealize how they are played by the system.
This is not even the tip of the iceberg.
IPCA: “…accordingly, our view is that the officer’s use of a belt to discipline his
children constituted three offenses of assault on a child.” YOU, ipca, are out of order!
I have never had to physically nor verbally ‘punish’ my children, for they ‘knew’ what is right or wrong, because it is rationalized and explained. I know, that that is quite unbelievable, but my kids will verify that.
At the same time, if u fail to be ‘right there right then’ when guidance is needed (and many police officers ARE on duty for us, the people!), it’s a Sisyphus work to ameliorate your ‘fail’.
I wish that family all the very best to heal from the ‘beast’.
I tend to agree with that decision. My silent question is will the public also avoid prosecution, conviction and be referred to a social worker?
I think not.
As a general rule, the IPCA is soft on police when it comes to punishment. The generally accepted way is no conviction, the accused resigns.
https://nzpca.co.nz/
1) Using an object (eg a belt, a shoe, a stick etc) on a child, in my opinion, is going too far. I don’t condone it, and I’m NOT defending this man’s actions. A stern voice and an open hand are fine, so long as MINIMAL NECESSARY FORCE is used. And it must be done only as a last resort and only when you as a parent are calm and fully in control of your emotions, and NEVER in a moment of anger. It’s a fine line between discipline and abuse, and that line has been shifted back and forth and twisted by the powers that be for so long now, that most new parents are terrified to even think about it too loudly.
2) Contrary to what the police feel, “Corrective Purposes” is a VALID justification. If you love your children, you have a duty to correct their bad habits and poor behaviour. Because if YOU don’t discipline them, someone else will. Whether that’s another child on the playground or a pissed off teacher or a cantankerous district court magistrate someday, someone somehow WILL discipline them, so it’s far better it be done at home by loving parents when the kids are still small and the stakes are far lower.
3) The anti-smacking laws the left brought in are as stupid and pointless as everything else they do. ALL of the scumbags who physically abused children prior to those laws are sadly still at it today (as evidenced by all the sad stories over the past few years, one after the other). They stopped absolutely nothing. Once again it’s only the good, law abiding citizens who suffer and now have to deal with a generation of ill-disciplined and quite frankly feral little brats running around (just sit in any mall coffee shop for 5 mins and observe those around you). Discipline is the realm of the father, over-emotional and overbearing busybody moms need to butt out, as should would-be Marxist governments. Everybody would be far better off, ESPECIALLY the children.
4) OT found there was “no ongoing threat”, which is just a diplomatic way of saying “yeah there’s no actual abuse here, he was just being a Dad” 🤷🏼♂️
Sounds about right. Senior Cuntstable, after a day at work protecting the scum and generally just being a POS, goes home, hits the bottle, then subsequently the kids.
Not what I am about to write will change a goddamn thing, I’ll write it anyway.
A long time ago I knew a man who was charged with an inappropriate historical crime. The investigation discovered he could never have committed that crime. Rather than cancelling the charge, the investigating officer decided to destroy a complainant’s statement and rewrite that statement to match with dates, events and went on to convince the complainant to sign it.
The man lost his job, beloved wife, home, and savings. He was saved from committing suicide.
At the end of the trial, his lawyer said the police complaints authority would never convict that officer. There would never be any worthwhile recompense.
A short time ago a policewoman was killed while on patrol. I wonder if that could have been avoided if victims of serious police crime could be prosecuted just like civilians in a normal court.
Yes, I have heard the arguments, “Government would struggle to attract and retain police staff if we didn’t have a separate court.” But is that really worth the life of an innocent man a policewoman and just so many more?
The police complaints authority has always been dysfunctional. It is not serving the victims of police crime. So-called voluntary resigning is far to light for such offences.
One final thought. Weeds in a garden will always grow. Ignoring them just makes them grow bigger until they overtake the garden.
I see we all forget we had a. REFERENDUN. Years ago. The vote was to ban the law that said we could spank our kids. We were going after the crazy no spank etc law that is sritll in place.
Government totally ignored the 75+ vote.
Here we are.
Lawyers aren’t smart enough to use reference to this etc
Imagine what the offending cop might do to a handcuffed ‘detainee / prisoner’ in his custody;
A fatal beating? tasering until dead, pepper sprayed until respiratory arrest?
& we can all thank Sue Bradford for her Communist minions in the Green (Red) Party for promoting the ‘Anti-Smacking’ law.
NZ First didn’t even raise an eyebrow when this law was brought in NA First had the DVD titled ‘My Mummy & Daddy are Criminals’ based on the Anti-Smacking law.
Everything I see Sue Bradford’s offspring on TV, I cringe in a similar way as to when I see Chelsea Clinton and her antics being passed down by her murderous multi-billionaire …’Mummy’…and emulating the same despite being the offspring of Webb Hubble…