New Zealand Killer Trial

Status
Not open for further replies.

h4rm0ny

h4rm0ny

h4rm0ny

Soldato
Joined
25 Jun 2011
Posts
5,526
Location
Yorkshire and proud of it!
So I'm unclear on whether the NZ killing is a forbidden topic on here or not. We had a thread removed (a very interesting one, imo, and I'm not sure why) but I don't know if it was just that thread or not.

Anyway, he will be representing himself in court. The judge is expected to try and prevent him using it as a propaganda event. Another person has been arrested for sharing the video of the attack and faces jail for doing so. His trial is today.

https://www.rt.com/news/454080-nz-shooter-fires-lawyer/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Because somehow, for reasons I dont know people started going "oh i can understand why people kill innocent people, theyre angry"

Thats the general gist of it.

The media will help him with the propaganda I expect. He will want people to listen to him, so dont buy newspapers that print articles on him, dont read anything online about him.
 
Doesn’t matter who represents him, he’s spending the rest of his days in prison.

I think he’s a hell of a narcissist too.
 
I rekon he will get 20-30 years and then a new identy on release like the bulger killer scum if honest.

Hopefully the thread doesnt get hijacked by the arguments as a trial thread could be quite interesting
 
If somebody is on trial for sharing the video, when are we arresting the editors of the Daily Mail for doing the same, plus posting his "manifesto"? (Plus the other ****rag tabloids in this country that posted the video)
 
Thecaferacer said:
There should have been a block put on his name and a blackout on the trial coverage. He will end up being a Messiah to all the little XRW cretins like Brevik is.
Click to expand...

Not only must justice be done it must also be seen to be done.

Hope he goes away for life
 
Cyber-Mav said:
news of this incident is being reported very differently in different parts of the world.
Indian Times has reported it as a counter terrorism operation that led to the death of 49 terrorists!!
Click to expand...

Seriously? Got a link for that?
 
Johno please? said:
Because somehow, for reasons I dont know people started going "oh i can understand why people kill innocent people, theyre angry"
Click to expand...

Understanding, and trying to understand, why things like this happen, is a good thing. People who cannot understand the distinction between understanding and supporting are a problem.

I had similar conversations after 9/11 where any discussion of the attacker's motives would get you crucified. Understanding runs counter to the need of some for simple narratives.
 
Scam said:
If somebody is on trial for sharing the video, when are we arresting the editors of the Daily Mail for doing the same, plus posting his "manifesto"? (Plus the other ****rag tabloids in this country that posted the video)
Click to expand...

I can understand trying to restrict the video. There is the matter of the dignity of the victims and the feelings of their loved ones. I've said before I don't think we can ban the video legally without creating laws that are ultimately harmful. But I haven't watched it myself and I would not share it. It's wrong that people's tragedy should be used by people as entertainment.

What will scare me, and what I suspect will come soon, will be attempts to criminalise sharing or reading of what he wrote.
 
Cyber-Mav said:
news of this incident is being reported very differently in different parts of the world.
Indian Times has reported it as a counter terrorism operation that led to the death of 49 terrorists!!
Click to expand...

I'm guessing it will be an Indian version of Fox News or Daily Express / Mail given the recent Kashmir incidents so they are pushing their anti-[whomever] agenda
 
A little more detail. If it's the same person in both articles, then the person arrested for sharing the video had also shared it with various messages "inciting violence" and supporting the actions of Tarrant.
 
h4rm0ny said:
I can understand trying to restrict the video. There is the matter of the dignity of the victims and the feelings of their loved ones. I've said before I don't think we can ban the video legally without creating laws that are ultimately harmful. But I haven't watched it myself and I would not share it. It's wrong that people's tragedy should be used by people as entertainment.

What will scare me, and what I suspect will come soon, will be attempts to criminalise sharing or reading of what he wrote.
Click to expand...
Completely agree, especially that last paragraph.
 
h4rm0ny said:
I can understand trying to restrict the video. There is the matter of the dignity of the victims and the feelings of their loved ones. I've said before I don't think we can ban the video legally without creating laws that are ultimately harmful. But I haven't watched it myself and I would not share it. It's wrong that people's tragedy should be used by people as entertainment.

What will scare me, and what I suspect will come soon, will be attempts to criminalise sharing or reading of what he wrote.
Click to expand...

I think this is a long overdue wider conversation in general about how we deal with media of a gross offensive nature and how we categorise it.

There's an argument, which I support in this instance, that it is grossly offensive to show the victims of this massacre. There is also the counter argument that it is showing the true nature of the event without influence or narrative which is essential.

The question comes does the footage of this nature inspire or repulse and educate. Holocaust footage has been used very effectively for the latter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom