STOP CO-GOVERNANCE

Terry Opines Makes Brilliant Video About Michael Laws And Julian Batchelor Interiew. This Is A Must Watch. Be Sure To Read The Comments

"
Hugh Perrett's Fiery Letter To Police Minister About Police Failure At Levin

Hugh Perrett's Fiery Letter To Police Minister About Police Failure At Levin

Minister Andersen / Police Commissioner Coster, I am writing to express my total disgust at the unbelievably weak police action taken in the situation outlined in the blog below , with regard to a ‘ Stop co-governance meeting ‘ set down to be held at Levin yesterday , Thursday 25 May , at 7 pm .

The details are fully and clearly set out in the ‘blog’ below.

This is just another example of what appears to constitute police discrimination with regard to the way Maori ‘offenders’ are treated as opposed to non-Maori .

Given the period of notice of this meeting given to the police , WHY was police action so inept / weak —- to the extent the organisers were forced to cancel the meeting from starting / proceeding.

I have sent several email letters to you recently Minister , and previously to the former Minister , now PM , Hipkins., to do with your Government’s and the Police’s extraordinarily soft attitude to crime , particularly ‘ hard’ violent crime , drugs and Criminal Gangs —- and here we are now with the same attitude and ineptness with regard to the ‘ radical Maori activist disruption’ of this effectively private meeting .

It is again noticeable that the offender(s) in this case , as is so often the case, was / were Maori. I’m sure if it had been the opposite way around the police attitude would have been much more hard-nosed and would have been ‘ up to the job’.

I have said it before , and I say it again , we New Zealanders have had a gutsful of your ‘soft on crime’ police attitude and , dare I say it , observably particularly Maori crime —- almost to a point of ‘ complicity’.

At the very least an apology and appropriate compensation are due the ‘Stop co-governance’ meeting organisers .

Respectfully,
Hugh Perrett
Auckland 1050

Police Fail At Levin

Police Fail At Levin

Really, it ought to have been simple.
A public hall is hired for a private function.
A speaker is invited.
The invite only guests arrive.
They enter the building.
Outside it’s cold, but inside it’s toasty warm.
The guests find a seat or stand and mix and mingle.
There is pleasant background music.
The vibe is good.
The time comes for the event to start.
The guest speaker starts, and carries on to the end.
The guests are happy.
They got what they came for. And more.
Everyone goes home excited.
A lovely night was had by all.
Free Speech and law and order reigned supreme.

This is how it’s supposed to happen in a Liberal democracy, right?

Right.

But this not what happened in Levin last night. New Zealand is no longer a liberal democracy.  Tribal rule has already kicked in. We are transitioning to a Maori dictatorship.

Just to recap.

Julian was speaking at Levin Thursday May 25, 7pm

The police had been notified of the event earlier in the day so that they could prepare and plan.

This is standard procedure for the Stop Co-Governance Road show organisers now.

Everything was going to plan.

Guests started to arrive at 6:30 and the room filled to capacity by 7:00.

We had security on the door filtering people.

Julian started.

Then there was the scuffle in the doorway and a very large Maori woman dressed in pink barged through the security.

When she entered the room, she promptly took over the meeting, yelling and gesticulating, telling everyone why she should be inside. “This is our land! This is our country! You are guests here!” All the usual.

Then two more Maori protesters followed her inside.

One invited guest rose to his feet, a Maori.

He vigorously addressed the protester “You are making us feel ashamed of being a Maori! You wouldn’t do this on a Marae!” He went on in the same vein for some time. It was a magnificent display of good Maori verses bad Maori.

The packed room watched on. The police were called.

It took quite some time, but they eventually arrived. There was four of them. Three looked like teenagers. The fourth, the leader, was an old European close to retirement age.

It was obvious, he was out of his depth, not knowing what to do. It was the stuff of the British comedy Dad’s Army.

His ‘suggestion’ was to carry on with the meeting because ‘the protesters were now sitting quietly’.

Wrong.

The police were going to reward the law breakers by letting them stay to hear Julian. Hard to believe they suggested this, but it’s true. This is what they did.

The protesters had forced their way into a private meeting, uninvited.

This is akin the having a private party at your house, unwanted people gate crashing, and the police saying “Just let them stay if they don’t cause any trouble.”  Really? 

 OK, back to our meeting.  The protesters had repeatedly been asked to leave by the organisers.

This was a simple case of trespass. The police should have instantly arrested them, and removed them from the meeting. Case closed.

But they didn’t. Why?

The organisers were told “The police felt they did not have the resources to arrest and reject the protesters.”

Three skinny teenage cops with Clearasil poking out of their top pockets,  with their Dad’s Army leader were no match to man handle the very large aggressive lady in pink. She as like a rhino on the charge, an All Black Prop 5m from the opponents try line, ball in hand and going for it.  

The police looked impotent and incompetent.  They simply invited the lady in pink to leave, and when she refused, they accepted her refusal.  

In other words, the protesters last night were able to dictate to the police. This is the new New Zealand.

Why didn’t they call in re-enforcements? They could have. There were other towns nearby.
They didn’t. 

Their poor planning meant anarchy reigned.  They could have turned up at the right time, 6:30 to 7:00 to make sure the law was being upheld.  

We have never asked the police to be our security guards,  All we have asked of them is that they uphold the law.

Some have suggested that because it was Maori who were to be arrested, the police backed off, fearing a media backlash.  That is to say, they were avoiding a George Floyd situation. We now have woke police force. 

Either way, what ever happened to the police in New Zealand simply doing their job?  Punishing law breakers and upholding the rule of law, irrespective of the colour of the skin of the perpetrators? 

Julian made the call to abandon the meeting. He said “Once again free speech has been suppressed. Once again, thugs and tyranny rule. I have been denied the right to speak. The peaceful law abiding citizens, those who were invited, denied the right to hear. This private meeting is like our private home for the night. The protesters have broken into our home. I am calling the meeting off because we don’t reward bad behaviour.”

By this he meant that if he carried on, it would show the protesters that they can force their way into a private meeting, take it over, wreck the rights of others to hear, and Julian’s right to speak, and there are no consequences.

Welcome to tribal rule. Welcome to co-governance.

Sure, there were advantages too if Julian had continued with the meeting. The people who came would have heard the message.  The protesters and the police too. The police said they would stay to monitor the protestors inside.  These are big reasons to have continued. 

But in the end, Julian made the difficult call.  He’s said “If you didn’t get to hear the message, then blame the protesters, not me.”  That’s true. Julian did not feel it was right that protesters could break into the meeting, trespass, spray abuse on the guests, and then sit there like a stars,  being rewarded by hearing Julian speak. 

Were there any consequences for the protesters wrecking a private meeting? Apart from being denied hearing Julian speak live, there were absolutely no consequences. 

So how did the police fail?

In case it’s not obvious, let’s talk about this.

First, the ‘senior’ policeman admitted the police had been advised of the event in plenty of time, but had failed to plan for it.

Second, the police who attended were either too young or too old to respond as they ought, as the peaceful meeting attendees deserved. The lawful attendees pay their taxes to be protected, to have the law upheld.

Third, the protesters should have been instantly arrested and ejected. They were trespassing. The case was clear cut. But this did not happen.

Fourth, the police wafted around. It was obvious they were out of their depth, not knowing what to do.

Fifth, if they did not have the resources to remove the protesters by force, they should have at least taken the name and address of the very large Maori woman dressed in pink. They failed to do this.

They failed to do the same for the other protesters who had entered the meeting illegally too.

Therefore, these people cannot be, and will not be, charged with an offense.

Fifth, reinforcement police from the surrounding areas ought to have been called in to arrest those who breached our security, who were unlawfully inside the building, trespassing, but this did not happen.

The public deserve better.

The police have got to do better.

This can’t happen again.  

I encourage you, if you were at the event, to complain to the police.

 

 

How Much Force Does The Law Allow To Stop Protesters?

"
Hi Julian

Difficult call re Levin, but understandable winding up the meeting.

However it can’t be allowed to set a precedent for disrupters.

From your description the police were pathetic from every perspective. If the police are unable or unwilling to uphold the law and protect private meetings then this is unfortunately effectively a call to ensure there is at least on standby, increased measures of self defence for stop co-governance meetings, particularly on the door.

See: https://www.howtolaw.co/legally-defend-your-property-392240

In particular:

Defence against trespass

“You are justified in using reasonable force to prevent anyone from trespassing on any land or buildings of which you are in possession. This applies also to anyone assisting you or acting under your authority.”

An aim would be to physically block the entrance so that any attempt to force entry would have to involve physical assault, which more clearly entitles the use of reasonable defensive force.

Best wishes

Ron

How Much Force Can We Use To Stop Protesters?