You can break their legs if you’re white

Another case of judge having no idea.   Judge Mary Peters is the culprit in this instance.

Let’s look at the facts:

  • this ‘father’ broke his four month old baby’s legs
  • this ‘father’ caused numerous other injuries
  • this ‘father’ has been walking around free awaiting trial – for a year and a half
  • this ‘father’ has been given a year’s home detention
He’s not a father, he’s a monster.

He is blonde, European and from a good family.  If he’d been Maori and from the wrong side of town would he have got this pathetic sentence?

Easy answer, No. This judge has said it’s OK to beat your kid if you’re white.  Disgusting.


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • grumpy

    Seems really wierd to me. He actually got LESS than his lawyer was asking for…………………
    Perhaps he makes people laugh.

  • Slugger

    It is actually racist as hell that decision
    What it says to me is that Maori children are better protected under the law than non-Maori.

  • Gazzaw

    Twelve months HD – this judge is a worse fucken joke than Philippa Cunningham. The system is a joke. The Crown MUST appeal. Garth McVicar, where are you?

    It’s time for Kiwis to stand up and tell the government that it’s time for a fucken change. We’ve had enough. National, labour, greens, NZ First, Peter Dunne, Hone – get off your fat arses and start setting things to right.

    • anon

      It took them a while, but here is McVicars’s SST release

      Press Release by Sensible Sentencing Trust at 4:06PM, 14 Aug 2012


      Yesterday in the Napier High Court Justice Mary Peters
      failed law-abiding New Zealander’s and a baby girl whose legs were broken by
      her father in five places. At the same time she has raised serious questions
      about her suitability as a Justice of the High Court of New Zealand.

      The case involved a James Hall. He appeared for
      sentencing for the repeated assaults upon his own infant daughter. Make no
      mistake – this was offending of the worst kind against a defenceless baby. The
      crown prosecutor sought a starting point of four years jail. Even Hall’s own
      lawyer sought a starting point of two years jail.

      Enter Justice Mary Peters!

      She started at three years and three months. But wait…
      she then made reductions for Hall’s youth (I didn’t realise adults over the age
      of 18 were youths??) and his early acknowledgement of guilt, and sentenced (if
      you can call it that) Hall to 12 months’ home detention. She what?? Yes –
      apparently you can break a baby’s legs in 5 places, plead guilty and get to
      spend the next 12 months living at home.

      Excuse me Justice Mary Peters but you have to be
      (expletive) kidding?

      Contrary to the ideological belief of Justice Peters, the
      justice system needs to work for the law-abiding, not the law-breaking.

      What has come to pass in recent years has been the
      judicial ideological viewpoint that it is ok to go soft on serious offenders.
      Make no mistake, the criminal justice system is not, and was never intended to
      be, the attempted preventative welfare-style organisation that it has come to
      resemble today. There are already a plethora of government and non-profit
      community groups who are supposed to catch people before they enter the
      criminal justice system. What the criminal justice system does is carry the
      collective stick of society and with it the responsibility for keeping
      law-abiding citizens safe from criminals and to actually punish those who break
      the rules; and in that seemingly straight-forward task, it is failing.

      As for Justice Peters pathetic sentence sending any kind
      of message of deterrence – well forget it.

      It seems the next
      step for her will be handing out merit certificates to offenders… She is a
      disgrace to her position and the New Zealand public should rightly abhor her
      lack of respect for the values of ordinary kiwi’s who DO NOT think it is ok to
      beat their kids.

      Hang your head in shame Justice Peters.

      You should be rightly embarrassed and consider the fact
      that sentences like yours display gross incompetence and just how out-of-touch
      you are with public sentiment on sentencing of child-beaters. Let’s hope the
      crown appeal this sentence to gain justice for the defenceless victim of this
      crime whom Justice Peters essentially let off scott-free.


      • Random66

        Well said.

  • Goldie

    Hall admitted that when alone with his daughter he “grabbed his left foot, pushed it back up so it was bending her whole left leg up behind th ebaby’s back”.
    WTF? I suppsoe the Judge thought this sadist “makes people laugh”, so its OK?
    Crown appeal surely?

  • Joseph

    Initially I thought that you were overreacting, but perhaps you are right:

    She’s only been a judge for two years, lets see how she goes (in terms of sentencing based on race). From my research she seems to be the typical legal type who has come from privilege & as a result has absolutely no idea when some scumbag type is pulling a sop story on her. I completely agree that the wet bus ticket sentence she has given leg-breaker here is woeful.

    • Neil

      It reminds me of a case several years ago where a high school boy was attacked and sobomised with a broom handle in Hawkes Bay – nice white boys got what as a sentence???

      • You mean the nice white middle class heterosexual boys from Napier that sodomised a boy in 2001, or the lovely boys in Taradale who sexually assaulted a boy in November last year? The former got 2 years. Not sure about the latter.

        Then there is the six teens who “terrorised classmates in late 2007, chasing younger boys around the school, dragging them to the ground to remove their pants then violating them with a screwdriver, scissors, branches, pens, pencils and drills.” – again not sure if they got anything other than a smack on the hand.

        • pukakidon

          Sodomising each other. Doesn’t sound heterosexual to me.

          • It is: 80% of men who sexually offend against males, are living in a heterosexual relationship at the time that they offend (MOH data). Thus, their behaviour is more indicative of their propensity to be sexual abusers rather than their sexual orientation, behaviour which would have given off warning signs at some point.

            Just the same as the boy in this post who has abused his baby.

            Happy healthy loved children brought up in a nurturing environment with good boundaries do not grow up to physically, emotionally or sexual abuse others.

          • grumpy

            You got a reference for that?

          • Unsolicitedious

            As per my post MOH. MSD, rape crisis & STOP reference it too. Fairly easy to find. MOH is an easy site to navigated. I have the reports so haven’t needed to look them up online (benefit of having worked in social policy).

          • Guest

            Quick google search also revealed: Rape Crisis & male survivors of sexual abuse stating the same ( and or (e.g.. 3% of males who abuse males identify as homosexual – Jenny et al, 1994)

          • grumpy

            Thanks, I think the problem is not as simplistic as you suggest.

          • Unsolicitedious

            I am not sure how I have suggested child sexual, emotional, physical & verbal abuse is anything but a complex issue. Comments above pertained to puk’s suggestion that sexual abuse of boys is a gay issue. I am saying it is not.

            It, along with the horrific abuse detailed in this post in indicative of mental state and environmental factors where children are brought up with out any empathy for others – whether as a victims of abuse themselves or absent parents who dont have a damn clue.

            The worrying thing is that for every one abuse case of any kind that makes it to the media there are thousands more that dont.

            New Zealanders have a history of tolerating abuse & the abusers – this judge being case and point.

            The only good thing about this case is that it illustrates the white picket fence of middle class NZ is often a dirty gray.

          • grumpy

            Just as well you believe that, otherwise you have a problem…………….

    • Joe Bloggs

      no Joseph – over-reacting is giving this mongrel 12 months home d, for two criminal convictions that carry prison sentences of up to 7 years… each.

  • cows4me

    Shit you can’t smack your kids, the liberals will do their balls. Much better to break their legs and get some time out in front of the tele. The father needs putting out of his misery as for Mary, I despair.

  • Joe Bloggs

    Evidently the will of the nation isn’t enough to sway the judiciary into handing out sensible sentences however I can’t sit by and do nothing so my complaint about the manifest inadequacy of this sentence has just been sent to the Right Hon Chief Justice Dame Sian Elias.

    [email protected]

    85 Lambton Quay, WellingtonDX: SX11224Phone: 0-4-918 8222Fax: 0-4-914 3560

    Next up – a couple more letters to MPs

  • Guest

    It’s a bit like comedians who don’t get jail time for child sex offences because they make people laugh.

    • And then have shared custody of the daughter they abused. Revolting.

  • Random66

    He got home detention – does this mean he is still under the same roof as the child he hurt?

    • Callum

      I got the impression they were no longer together, I expect his partner wants nothing to do with him.

    • No; his former partner did two sensible things; took the child to the doctor who blew the whistle, and gave James Hall the flick.

      • Random66

        Thanks for the update Callum and Inventory2. Good to know.

      • Neil

        You could add a third – she got the judge at least to lift name suppression

    • Neil

      No – he’s not allowed anywhere near them for twelve months

  • This is an appalling sentencing decision from Judge Mary Peters. I would hope that an appeal by the Crown against the leniency of the sentence is already underway.

    But what message does this sentence send to all the other James Halls out there and what message does it send about our shocking rates of child abuse? There is no justice whatsoever for the four-month-old victim.

    • Random66

      I just read the article WO gave us the link to (I didn’t do this earlier) and I can’t believe it. What the hell is this judge thinking. He treated this child as his own personal toy to see what he could do before it broke. ‘Not thinking’ should not be a defence. The law no longer seems to represent justice.

  • Salacious T Crumb

    She took the defendants age into consideration in her sentencing. So in essence if you are a 17 year old, you are obviously not that culpable for your actions. Disgraceful.

  • “if he’d been Maori and from the wrong side of town would he have got this pathetic sentence?”
    Probably – sentences against child abusers are always extraordinarily light when compared to the average GBH on male vs male.

    Women & children dont seem to matter in this country.

    Home D might be okay for light fraud or other relatively minor offenses. But torturing a child – he should get life. One strike and you’re out is the only thing that can possibly be synonymous with zero tolerance (short of bullet).

    Good people do not abuse their children. Bad people do. I’m all for rehabilitating our youth, but such serious violence over the age of 15? I think he is too far gone.

  • Phil

    I dunno, the natives here can murder twin babies and get off scot free

  • While believe this despicable human being should be sent to prison, I can also shed some light on the judge’s thinking.

    I served 12 months home detention when I was 17 for a significantly less abhorrent crime (a fight that got somewhat escalated, the term ‘vigilante justice’ got thrown around, I like to assume they thought I was batman). If I was in my 30s, I would have gone to jail, but at 17, they don’t necessarily want you to go to prison, as they believe you are more likely to re-offend if you spend 2 years locked up in prison (another fun fact, 2 years prison equates to 1 year home d, I don’t know why). That said, I do attribute my white & middle class-ness to my ongoing freedom.

    Like I said, this guy should be in prison, and the stigma for what he’s done follow him for the rest of his life. It’s one thing to harm an adult, but to harm someone who’s life is entrusted to you is unforgivable.

  • Scanner

    read the article, and people want to cut him some slack, the only slack this cunt should get is just as the rope bites into his neck.

  • Mickrodge

    The big losers here are the “SOCK’s” out in society & the Tomcat mentality these bastards have today. Don’t worry if you torture a defenseless child…you’ll just get a year at home on the Xbox & the pipe.

    Now there’s a deterrent.

  • rockyr

    It is a disgrace but by no means an isolated one.

  • steve and monique

    Black,white,pink or yellow.No matter what colour you are.If you do this to your kids,you should get a good time in jail for a couple of years.

    • Replace a couple with 12+ and we can talk.

      • steve and monique

        Sorry My bad,but was calculating the bash/sex he was going to get inside.Could make a good room mate for the Beast,

  • I didn’t immediately realize she was on Hemana’s case; there was something queer about that but she put him away. There was another case recently where the killer’s mummy said sorry for him so he got the minimum. I’ve blogged about this:

  • Rodger T

    Jeepers , what else could he have done to the child to get a 100% discount on his sentence?
    Maybe if he had cried in the dock the “judge” would have sent him home without conviction.

  • worksux

    It makes me want to break Mary Peters legs, if all I’m going to get is 1yr home-d. What the fck with our justice system.

  • Actually the one trend seen in sentencing is that violent offending is treated less seriously than sexual offending. He would have got a few years if he had simply been caught fondling her inappropriately, yet causing physical injury is deemed to be less serious.

    Of course for some time there has been a pretty consistent consensus around dealing with sexual offences against children, but violent offences not so. Perhaps because sexual offences upset people more because it is clear the offender was getting pleasure from it and it seems more grotesque, perhaps also because the proportion of women who get sentenced for violent offences against children compared to sexual is many times higher. I’d hate to think it is that, but it is noticeable that sexual offenders’ registries are all over the Western world, but violent offenders’ ones are not. Apparently breaking a kids’ legs entitles you to a slap on a wrist, a second chance and relative anonymity.

  • Jman

    A disgusting sentence but I don’t see why you need to bring race into it. There are plenty of cases of maori child abusers get off light too.

  • Ruth
    This DISGUSTING behaviour is how Mary rolls! In this article you will see she thinks it’s ok to attack police as well – hang your head in shame and RESIGN immediately!

    • Random66

      The poster above Monique Angel made a comment on her blog that Judge Mary Peters may in fact be intimidated by these crims and giving light sentences may be her way of avoiding any negative repercussions (she could be right) The example you give Ruth is of a well known gang member and it states he got bail – again. The police must be incredibly frustrated when it appears the judge is working against them.