Wednesday, March 2, 2016


Barrie Soper's little bottle of youth elixir demonstrates very publically that by;
Impersonating a Police Officer,  one year jail, $1500 fine,
Creating a document to commit fraud  up to ten years jail,
Obtaining a fire arm when not a valid holder of a current firearms licence, three months jail,
Produced a fraudulent document used by fireams retailers that offers proof to a seller that the purchaser has been vetted and approved by a police person. that he has sighted a valid lawfully held firearms licence,
Using a valid but not lawfully held firearms licence including its unique number in commission of an illegal purchase
She will not face charges from the NZ  Police.

 NZ Police have decided not to charge the airhead with any offences she committed in a ratings boosting stunt that claimed to expose non existent "loopholes in the firearms acquisition laws".

Acquiring a .22 rifle in an expos√© as a stunt to lift the ratings of a re-launched evening infotainment  half hour means little in the big scene, now stealing a shotty, sawing off the stock  and shortening the barrels, that is the sort of illegal arms possession that has relevance in unlawful weapons, such a weapon makes much bigger holes in people than a very hard to carry without being noticed  bolt action .22 long rifle.

Mr Plod at least your investigation should have addressed the serious law breaking involved and issuing a warning to bimbo and a couple of her Media Works enablers is right up there with your ignoring serious assaults on three politicians this year while your officers are at the end of passing lanes photographing speeding drivers who may only be victims of a faulty odometer in revenue gathering is only diminishing any remnants of respect from many of your employers.

I hope David Tipple successfully brings a private prosecution of the stupid girl for her blatant lawbreaking.


Anonymous said...

No point in blaming the Police Dodger. The evidence would have been referred to the Crown law office who would make the decision to lay charges. Some of the questions asked would be... Is it in the public interest to proceed and the likelihood of success?

Probably best for the public purse that this one was binned.

Lord Egbut Nobacon

Johno said...

I got an $80 fine plus 20 demerits recently for "operating a cellphone while driving".

What I was doing in reality was entering an address into my phone's GPS while stationary at a rush hour red light, about 6 cars back from the head of the queue.

Plod jumped out of the passenger seat of a patrol car behind me and in a rather unpleasant tone told me to pull over past the intersection. I asked plod if it would be an offence to use the built-in car gps or phone while actually in motion driving - answer: no. Plod admitted that there was no real safety risk in doing what I did while stationary. Plod admitted that legally operating the car GPS while driving was a safety risk.

Plod caused a safety hazard by getting out of car in a line of traffic. A bicycle could have been coming through in his blind spot.

Plod then took much care to go around the car checking WOF, RUC and rego.

All this just proves once again to me that road policing management are not as interested in safety as they are in infringement notices. They may not get to keep the revenue but it seems pretty clear that they correlate infringement notice counts with doing a good job. They dance on a pin denying there are "quotas" but admit there are "targets".

All respect for road police now gone. This valuable vehicle and its two highly trained and renumerated occupants are simply ticket writers who should be re-deployed to fight crime, protect citizens, or if their management had the intelligence to work out how, improve road safety.


Noel said...

"quotas" but admit there are "targets".

Of course. It's in their KPI's. You know when they are down for the period when stopped for WOF/registration checks and there are a multitude of Police in attendance.

It's queuing for a drivers license check that annoys me.