NZ men go for the jugular.

Started by Sir Percy, Apr 12, 2006, 06:42 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

Sir Percy

Harharhar. Go get 'em lads. New Zealand dads are not sheepish when it comes to targeting the bad guys. Reminds me of the 'Blackshirts' group in Melbourne (Oz) a few years ago who used similar tactics against ex-wives who had screwed them over. That caused a real stir.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=10377016

Men's groups enjoying lawyers' discomfort

11.04.06 4.00pm

Men's groups picketing family lawyers' homes in Auckland are "absolutely thrilled" at the response, and pleased the tactics have been seen as intimidating.

Three protests over recent weeks have targeted family lawyers' homes with loudhailers and placards, causing the Law Society to express concern at the "insulting and abusive attacks".

Jim Bailey, of the Hands On Equal Parent Trust, said his organisation had been a part of the protest.

"It's a range of men's groups, a coalition of fathers. It's not a registered group and never will be. It's a whole lot of us that work in different ways together."

The Law Society's family law section chairman, Simon Maude, said today that the protests, which involved between 20 and 30 people, had intimidated the lawyers, their families and neighbours.

Mr Bailey said he was pleased the protests were intimidating.

"I think it's good -- that's the whole idea. They've destroyed so many families, and intimidated us," he told NZPA.

Mr Bailey said similar protests were planned every three weeks, with a fourth one scheduled towards the end of the month.

"Things are about to expand very quickly -- certainly into Wellington, Hamilton, Christchurch and even conservative little Dunedin. I'm absolutely thrilled at the response."

Mr Maude said although the protest might appear to be "harmless fun", the reality for the lawyers on the receiving end was different.

"They've been subjected to insulting and abusive attacks, much of which has been amplified through a loudspeaker system," Mr Maude said.

The protests had shaken the lawyers involved, he told NZPA, and had been intimidating for their families and neighbours.

"Their children have, in some cases, been frightened and quite disturbed by the experience."

Mr Maude said the family law section did not challenge the group's right to demonstrate to seek changes in family law, but believed they had "misdirected their energies" with personal attacks on lawyers and their families.

He said the protesters seemed to have misunderstood the role of lawyers in the Family Court, particularly the role of lawyers appointed to represent children.

"They may have assumed that lawyers for the children have much greater power and influence than is in fact the case.

"Children's lawyers don't make the decisions about the children, the court does."

Taking action against family lawyers at their homes wouldn't change the system, Mr Maude said.

"It will cause distress to their children and the children of the neighbourhood who, not surprisingly, find demonstrations outside their homes intimidating and frightening."

- NZPA
vil, like misery, is Protean, and never greater than when committed in the name of 'right'. To commit evil when they are convinced they are doing 'good', is one of the greatest of pleasures known to a feminist.

woof

Swweeet.......Thank You !!!!!    :bluegrab:     :daman:
Even a whole village can't replace dad, children need both parents.

dr e

Great idea to picket their houses and neighborhoods.  Why not do the same for the judges.  I loved the comment about the intimidation factor:
Quote

"I think it's good -- that's the whole idea. They've destroyed so many families, and intimidated us," he told NZPA.


Yup.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

PaulGuelph

From what I've heard, lawyers often counsel their clients to lie in court. Perhaps this tactic has angered many fathers.
Men's Movie Guide:  http://www.mensmovieguide.com   The Healing Tomb: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B081N1X145

Laboratory Mike

Quote
The protests had shaken the lawyers involved, he told NZPA, and had been intimidating for their families and neighbours.

"Their children have, in some cases, been frightened and quite disturbed by the experience."


It's always in the "best interests of the children" isn't it?

Anyway, I am glad that we have more guys speaking up, and that you guys are letting lawyers know that they cannot live comfortably while destroying the lives of men and fathers.

The Gonzman

Quote from: "Laboratory Mike"
Quote
The protests had shaken the lawyers involved, he told NZPA, and had been intimidating for their families and neighbours.

"Their children have, in some cases, been frightened and quite disturbed by the experience."


It's always in the "best interests of the children" isn't it?

Anyway, I am glad that we have more guys speaking up, and that you guys are letting lawyers know that they cannot live comfortably while destroying the lives of men and fathers.


Yeah, but not a word about the children deprived of fathers by these worthless mounds of excrement.

Fuck those bastards and their fucking children.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the Shadow of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am the MEANEST son-of-a-bitch in the valley.

devia

I gotta say nope.

Criminal defence lawyers are often called upon to defend those who they believe are guilty, sometimes they are called upon to defend some pretty montrous people. Lots of people call them bad for that they do... but this is the criminal justice system, to defend your party to the best of your ability.

If anyone should be attacked at home let it be the lawmakers. better yet stop voting in the wrong people.

And big nope regarding their kids being harrased, not only do the kids not deserve it it's a huge public relations blot.

Big question, are the family lawyers in question only defending women? What little experience I have my daughters dad and I used the same lawyer (only to draw up the papers, and we split the bill), when I went back to her regarding my son she was already representing my son's dad.

Factory

Quote from: "devia"
I gotta say nope.

...

If anyone should be attacked at home let it be the lawmakers. better yet stop voting in the wrong people.

And big nope regarding their kids being harrased, not only do the kids not deserve it it's a huge public relations blot.


Gotta say I agree here, sorta.  The kids don't deserve it, but there's a big grain of salt that you have to take with these sorts of claims.  I would be truly surprised if there was much more than a "hmm, those guys are weird" sort of response from the kids.

However, it plays well to the media if you say they were upset.  Plays even better if the guy upsetting the children is unrepentant about the whole concept.

devia

If people were picketing outside of your home no doubt it would be more then upsetting to the kids inside.

Regardless of peoples viewpoints regarding lawyers I say it's bad PR because the vast majority of people would draw the same visual picture I do.. people picketing outside of peoples homes... where the majority of people in the home have nothing to do with what's being picketed about.

devia

If people were picketing outside of your home no doubt it would be more then upsetting to the kids inside.

Regardless of peoples viewpoints regarding lawyers I say it's bad PR in general.   The vast majority of people would draw the same visual picture I do.. people picketing outside of peoples homes... where the majority of people in the home have nothing to do with what's being picketed about.

Sir Percy

In most 'English' countries, public officials aren't voted in. They are appointed by various processes which the public cannot affect. Judges, magistrates, Family Court judges etc cannot be voted out of office.

Lawyers do indeed represent the defendant as well as the litigant but again if a lawyer 'knows' in the strict term that a person is guilty of criminal conduct, he has an obligation to Justice first and foremost. The Law isn't a TV show. To deliberately advocate unethical practice to harm another non-client simply is reprehensible, and worse it is done so that the lawyer can steal proceeds from forced sale and imposition, that he/she has gerrymandered. In the family court there are so many rent-taking parasites who care little for right and wrong. As has been said, many family lawyers are shysters, liars, thieves who advocate dishonesty in their clients. Let them rot in hell.

There is coming a day when these people who have lost all right to be treated fairly will come to the hands of the mob. The 'English' sang froid has disappeared under a welter of petticoats. The French 'merde' is coming to the fore and the sans coulottes will soon be outside many more suburban doors.

Yes, I feel for the children of these lawyers. I feel for the fact that their parents live off the blood-suckings from decent men - and women - who are as cash-cows to them. These children need to know it. These children need to feel ashamed of them. A protest with megaphones is hardly a threat to their safety. For the lawyers - or anyone else for that matter, present company included - to consider the actions of the NZ men as a danger to the children is to deliberately hide behind them and use them as a human shield. To use the idea that the children might be 'frightened' is the same pathetic and mendacious excuse that hordes of dishonest women use every day in the courts when they take out restraint orders  when no violence has ever been offered to them. It is mendacity then as it is now when the 'fear' that the childrem might have is used to limit these men's right to protest where it matters.
vil, like misery, is Protean, and never greater than when committed in the name of 'right'. To commit evil when they are convinced they are doing 'good', is one of the greatest of pleasures known to a feminist.

Sir Percy

PS. Fuck PR. Some days I feel like that vulture sitting on a huge Texan cactus thinking " Patience be damned, I'm gonna kill something".
vil, like misery, is Protean, and never greater than when committed in the name of 'right'. To commit evil when they are convinced they are doing 'good', is one of the greatest of pleasures known to a feminist.

BRIAN

Devia Said:

I gotta say nope.

Criminal defence lawyers are often called upon to defend those who they believe are guilty, sometimes they are called upon to defend some pretty montrous people. Lots of people call them bad for that they do... but this is the criminal justice system, to defend your party to the best of your ability.


These aren't criminal defense lawyers they are family court lawyers who breakapart famillies for material gain. They are known for underhanded tactics and coaching clients to lie about things like abuse, sexual molestation and infidelity. These guys are a step below ambulance chasers on the legal food chain. I do not think this is any worse than the idiots protesting outside the Duke University Lacross team house.

Devia Said:

And big nope regarding their kids being harrased, not only do the kids not deserve it it's a huge public relations blot.

Once again you are reading what you want to see. Nowhere in the article does it state that the children of these lawyers where harrased or targeted by the protesters. The direct quote from the story was "It will cause distress to their children and the children of the neighbourhood who, not surprisingly, find demonstrations outside their homes intimidating and frightening."  this came from Simon Maude, an official with the Family Law Society. Of course the target of the demonstration is going to say things like that, the demonstration is making them uncomfortable. It probably makes them as uncomfortable as all the men who have had their children stolen from them by these bastards.
You may sleep soundly at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence upon those who seek to harm you.

dr e

What Sir Percy said.

Professionals have been regulated by their own boards and commissions for years and years and it has generally worked out fairly well.  At this point with some family court lawyers there seems to be no regulation whatsoever.  They openly talk about suggesting illegal tactics and tactics that are obviously hurtful to innocent people.  Where is the regulation?  Where are their peers stepping forward and saying NO!  You can't do that to people.  It is not right.  The trampled are simply exhausted in seeing an unleashed dog chewing away at their other leg while the first sits immobile from unethical and vicious bites from overpaid lawyers who will be billing the bitten person as soon as the court decrees the man should pay.  

Do rabid out of control dogs like to be tethered?  No.  They will squeal like stuck pigs for some time but if no one is going to regulate them in a mature manner then protesting in front of their homes sounds like a winner to me.  I am certain the protestors are choosing the most outrageously offensive lawyers.  

Yes, politicians and judges should get a similar treatment.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

Quasimodo

Doc Evil said:
Quote
Great idea to picket their houses and neighborhoods. Why not do the same for the judges.


In the early 90s, Fathers' Rights Metro, a NYC-based activist fathers' group used to routinely picket the homes of judges and politicians, never lawyers. The demonstrations were usually leafletting during the day and candle-light vigils during the night. The bullhorns were reserved for larger demonstrations at the family courts in the five boroughs. A result was that wearing an F.R.M. button had the same intimidation factor as wearing a N.O.W. button into the court.

I'm not familiar with the NZ system, but I don't see the wisdom of an action against lawyers, unscrupulous or otherwise; it doesn't really make a dent in the system.
axine Waters on the 2004 March for Women:
"I have to march because my mother could not have an abortion." ! ! !

Go Up