‘I didn’t have time to stop myself’

An unidentified male says a brutal rape against a woman yesterday was over in an instant.

The male was travelling along Morrinsville Rd in Hamilton yesterday about 6.30am when he and the female collided at the intersection of Morrinsville Rd and Matangi Rd.

The male, who is in his 30s, held the woman down and forced himself upon her. He estimated he was wearing appropriate clothing for a walk at the time.

“I didn’t have time to ask her permission. It was like one minute,” he told the Herald.

Afterwards he stayed where the woman was lying beside the road and tried talking to her. She blinked twice but was otherwise unresponsive.

A motorist pulled over and diverted traffic as they waited for police and St John to arrive.

It was the first time he had been a rapist. “Everyone is in shock when something happens like that … You can’t remember. Your mind is shut,” he said.

The mans employer, who stated he had been late for work, was carrying out its own investigation and assisting police.

“We are shocked and saddened by the accident.” It was rare for one of their employees to be involved in a brutal rape, he said.

Waikato rape policing manager Inspector Freda Grace said it would be inappropriate to comment about what happened at this stage in the investigation and called for any witnesses to contact police to help them piece together events. “It’s very early days. It’s just a tragedy really.”

She urged women to take care as the rape brought the Waikato’s rape toll to 23 so far this year. “Ensuring safety is paramount in your mind. You are wearing respectable modest clothing, your hair and makeup do not attract attention … you don’t appear over attractive when in public.”

The woman was wearing a long coat and had a rape whistle, but police were unclear whether she was wearing a burka. They expect to release her name today.

The recently defunded Hamilton Rape Crisis Centre representative Jill Hope said Morrinsville Rd was a popular walking route. She did not believe it was any more dangerous than any other in the city.

“There are a number of instances when males are feeling rapey and will risk a woman’s safety in their need for relief or reducing stress.”

>> UPDATE <<

Have been contacted by the Waikato Times about the blog post and been told that the police are not happy with the post. Perhaps they will or have started to see what they have done wrong in blaming and shaming the victims of crime, rather than prosecuting and blaming the perpetrators. Also preparing for a horde of crazed comments on Stuff once the article goes online, not to mention on the Waikato Times Facebook page when they post it. I am very glad that the issue has garnered the attention it deserves. The courier driver is guilty of manslaughter and this rewording of the NZ Herald article purposefully illustrates just how bad it is.

Advertisements

34 thoughts on “‘I didn’t have time to stop myself’

  1. Steven says:

    Although I didn’t write something like you have written here in this blog, I was shocked at the terrible statements by the police (about how cyclists need to be careful) and the herald reporting that the driver was shaken etc. When someone kills a regular person (i.e. not a cyclist), the herald tend to point out that the victims family are shaken, not that the killer is shaken. If the driver said ‘I’m not shaken, I’m fine and will just get on with my life this afternoon’, then that would be worth reporting. And from the sounds of the article, the police haven’t confiscated the drivers license until they’ve investigated, and he’ll be back driving 8 hours a day in a few days, that’s reassuring for cyclists, pedestrians and even other motorists.

    Combine this with the cases in the past few years of repeat drink drivers killing cyclists and getting very light penalties, and it’s a complete joke. I support a european (I think it’s the Dutch) approach, where the driver is assumed guilty in a car vs bike crash, and has to prove innocence.

    • Thankyou for commenting Steven, and you’re spot on. It’s difficult to change the way these things are viewed and reported and I agree that the Dutch method is excellent and seems to work very well for them.

      • Jess says:

        Yes lets do away with an integral tenet of our justice system, the presumption of innocence, and live in a fascist little state where the accused has to prove he is not guilty. I think the Greens dodged a real bullet here.

          • Rob Ueberfeldt says:

            The presumption of guilt does follow some logic in Dutch law, if you’re on a freeway it is not the same as when you are driving in suburbia for instance. If a car has to cross a cycle way or footpath then automatically you are at fault if your car hits a cycle or pedestrian. Car parks are classed as footpaths, the Dutch quite naturally assume if there is no safe area for people to walk then the car (driver) is the one that has to watch out. I take this right in NZ car parks and force cars to acknowledge my space, especially when I’m caring for kids or disabled people.

        • Steven says:

          ”Jess
          Yes lets do away with an integral tenet of our justice system, the presumption of innocence, and live in a fascist little state where the accused has to prove he is not guilty. I think the Greens dodged a real bullet here.”

          Hang on, the whole point of the blog was that the article jumped to the driver being innocent and the cyclist being guilty, with zero facts! So that’s a fine assumption to make, but making the opposite assumption is just wrong?

  2. Jess says:

    By your logic if a pedestrian steps out in front of a cyclist and is hit, the cyclist is at fault and should be found guilty of assault. What a sophmoric and silly piece this is.

    • Not at all and your comment lacks logic and misconstrues the argument, but thats ok we can work with that. As far as your opinion the piece being sophomoric and silly, is very interesting that you would take so serious a subject as victim shaming and blaming and say its juvenile and silly, I suggest you reexamine your concepts and world view

      • jack says:

        Love how you don’t even address the very valid point he raised. If a man jumped in front of your car tomorrow, do you believe that you should be found liable?

        • If you and Jess are using the ole’ “pedestrian jumping on front of car” to compare it to rape, it is deeply logically flawed. How is that even remotely comparable to rape? A rapist means to rape — they do it deliberately. When a pedestrian jumps in front of a car, the driver doesn’t mean to hit them, they don’t do it on purpose. This is nothing like rape, where the rapist meant to do commit the rape. Srsly..

          • jack says:

            You obviously don’t know what’s going on here. There was no rape. This guy copy pasted a tragic article about being hit by a car, and replaced all the words with “rape”. This article is a pathetic attempt to be edgy. Not only is it incredibly disrespectful to the victim of the crash, it’s also very disrespectful to REAL rape victims, which is counter to what he was trying to achieve. I don’t think he gives a shit about that though, he’s mainly looking for page views. Just to be clear, the driver was not at fault, it was just a tragic accident. This guy thinks the fact that we aren’t shaming the driver is similar to blaming victims of a rape. No one is even blaming the cyclist at all, it;s just that no one is blaming the driver either, and that’s why the author of this article is pissed off.

            Here’s an article about what ACTUALLY happened:
            http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11288919

            • Steven says:

              ”Just to be clear, the driver was not at fault, it was just a tragic accident. ”

              Where did you get this from? In the absence of facts in the article you linked, you’re blamed the victim. That is also what the quoted NZ police person did by saying cyclists need to be careful, wear bright colors etc. That was the whole point of the blog article in the first place!!!

      • Jess says:

        The irony of it all is that if the Courier driver is blameless he is also clearly a victim in this and will be affected by it for the rest of his life, which means you have engaged in the exact same behavior you have railed against and blamed the victim by stating he is guilty of manslaughter.

          • Jess says:

            No that’s not even a remotely similar parallel.

            Unless you are a psychopath being involved in an accident that resulted in the death of someone, even through no fault of your own, would carry an immense emotional burden,that certainly fit’s the definition of ‘victim’ and they deserve to be treated as such.

        • Yes, it sure sucks to be accused of something you didn’t do, but you realise that in this context, you’re defending rapists, right? At least, that’s what it looks like. Great job.

          Are you an MRA? Do you also wear a trilby?

              • jack says:

                Funny how she seems to compeltely disagree with you. I think she’s just too stupid to actually realise this article is a complete fabrication. To qoute Cody:

                If you and Jess are using the ole’ “pedestrian jumping on front of car” to compare it to rape, it is deeply logically flawed. How is that even remotely comparable to rape? A rapist means to rape — they do it deliberately. When a pedestrian jumps in front of a car, the driver doesn’t mean to hit them, they don’t do it on purpose. This is nothing like rape, where the rapist meant to do commit the rape. Srsly..”

                Doesn’t sound like she holds much resentment towards the driver of a vehicle.

    • Steven says:

      So if there is a cyclist vs. pedestrian crash, you’re saying you’ll jump to the conclusion that the pedestrian jumped out in front of the cyclist, and the cyclist is innocent? Pesky pedestrians!

      Why don’t the police just say ‘We don’t know who is at fault, and we are investigating’. Then the herald can say how there was a crash, the police are investigating. Leave out the victim blaming comments about how cyclists need to wear bright colors, lights etc?

      • ruthlessraptor says:

        Ever think that perhaps they weren’t “victim blaming”, but simply warning other cyclists so that this shit doesn’t happen again.

        • “warning other cyclists so that this shit doesn’t happen again” – Wow. Your attitude embodies what this whole piece was about, victim blaming and shaming. Warn the women so they’re not raped! Warn the cyclists so they’re not killed!

          One day you’ll realise.

          • ruthlessraptor says:

            Do you really fail to see the difference between a man intentionally raping a woman, and someone accidently being hit by a car? You ignored this question last time so I’ll ask it again. If someone walked out in front of your car today, and you didn’t have time to stop, do you think that you should be found liable and charged?

            • You should always have time to stop, its your duty of care as a driver, its in the road code.

              You should read it.

              Here’s an excerpt:

              “You should create a ‘cushion’ of safety around your whole vehicle by making sure there is a safe distance in all directions between you, other vehicles and potential hazards.

              This will give you and other road users more time and space to avoid any hazards.

              Create a cushion of safety ahead of you by maintaining a safe following distance. Use the two-second rule or the four-second rule when appropriate.
              Create a cushion of safety behind you by maintaining a safe distance between you and any following vehicles. If a vehicle is following you too closely, slow down, move over and let it pass as soon as you can do so safely.
              Create a safety cushion to your sides by keeping a safe distance from any hazards on your sides, such as driveways, parked vehicles, cyclists or children playing on the footpath.”

              I’d draw your attention to the last sentence. You need to have a safety cushion around you at ALL times while driving so that the situation you’re describing should never happen, if it does, you’re not following the road code and you’re liable for manslaughter, or should be.

  3. Steven says:

    ruthlessraptor
    Do you really fail to see the difference between a man intentionally raping a woman, and someone accidently being hit by a car? You ignored this question last time so I’ll ask it again. If someone walked out in front of your car today, and you didn’t have time to stop, do you think that you should be found liable and charged?

    Have you read the link the the original article? Perhaps read it again, then read the reworded article here.

    In your cyclist vs pedestrian example, you state that the pedestrian stepped out in front of the cyclist, so the pedestrian is at fault. In the herald article, the police say they don’t know how it happened, but that cyclists need to be careful and watch out so they don’t get hit. So without knowing who was at fault, they blamed the cyclist, who happens to be dead, and can’t defend themselves. Maybe the cyclist swerved into the road, maybe the driver tried to buzz the cyclist really close … WE DONT KNOW YET.

    So, yes, the cyclist may be at fault and the driver may be the victim, but THEY DONT KNOW THAT. So defaulting to blame a dead cyclist, is akin to defaulting to blaming a woman for wearing ‘inappropriate clothing’. The blog authors point seems to be that it doesn’t matter what the crime/’accident’ is, you shouldn’t blame (or assume who the victim is) victims.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s