All posts by Richard

Bayes theorem, Justice, Psycho Killer, Qu'est-ce que c'est?

Rice on a chessboard

4 Comments

The story of Chess ? Povestea jocului de sah

Here’s an old fable, as told in Making Great Decisions in Business and Life by David R. Henderson and Charles L. Hooper.

In a time of hunger, the Emperor of China wanted to repay a peasant who had saved the life of his child. The peasant could have any reward he chose, but the Emperor laughed when he heard the silly payment the foolish peasant selected: rice on a chessboard. The peasant wanted one grain of rice on the first square, doubling to two on the second, doubling to four on the third, and so on. After the Emperor agreed, his servants brought one bag of rice into his court and began tediously counting rice. Soon, he called for more and more bags of rice. Shortly, he realized that all the rice in China would not be enough. In fact, the Emperor now owed the peasant more than 300 times the total amount of rice in the world!

Those who think this lesson is merely about David Bain rice will miss the bigger message …

Guns

Such a nice young woman

32 Comments

2448863

David Bain’s sister Arawa was such a nice young woman. I met her once, in 1993, the year before she died. I was living in Dunedin, and one day Arawa was having a cup of tea in my kitchen, with my flatmate with whom she was friends, and I was introduced. It was a brief encounter.

After she was murdered in 1994, I spoke to my flatmate again. There was no doubt in her mind who the killer was. And there is no doubt in the minds of the extended Bain family who was responsible for the gruesome carnage that took place at 65 Every Street, Dunedin, on the morning of 20 June 1994.

Within days, the police had arrested David Bain, the sole survivor of the slaughter, on suspicion of murder. The following year, after a 3 week trial, David Bain was convicted of the murder of his five family members and sentenced to life imprisonment with a 16 year non-parole period. I figured the police had got the right man, and thought no more of it.

But then there were the appeals. I can’t remember when – I think it was at the time of the second Court of Appeal decision in September 2003 – that I had a sudden, horrifying thought. What if David Bain was actually innocent? What a horrible fate, to return from one’s morning paper round to find that one’s own father had shot dead one’s entire family and then turned the gun on himself – and then to be wrongly convicted on five counts of murder!

Was David Bain just another lying, murdering psychopath or was he the victim of a terrible miscarriage of justice? I had to form my own opinion, and so, with no preconceived opinion, I set about EXAMINING THE EVIDENCE for myself. As I sifted through the evidence, two things happened. I was sickened to my stomach. And the more I read, the more obvious it became that David, not his father Robin, was the perpetrator of this horrendous crime. Quite simply, the mass of evidence points overwhelmingly to David’s guilt.

What I now struggle to understand is how so many people remain convinced of David’s innocence. Someone close to me, whom I will not name, is convinced that David Bain is innocent, seemingly on the sole grounds that David is “such a nice young man”.

He’s not.

Tui

ACT, Dogs, Jihad on Drugs™

A big thanks to John Banks

6 Comments

1283_602115356489941_1520542584_n

Here’s today’s press release from John Banks, and a transcript of his speech to Parliament.

banner-banks-parliamentry

Banks Challenges Greens To Take Stand On Animal Welfare
Press Release By ACT Leader John Banks
Thursday, June 27 2013

ACT Party Leader John Banks today challenged the Green Party to stand by its principles on animal welfare.

Mr Banks says if the Greens truly care about animals, they should make a commitment to vote against the Psychoactive Substances Bill if Mojo Mathers’ amendment to rule out animal testing fails.

“There is simply no justifiable reason for unnecessary drugs to be tested on animals. They are not a lifesaving medicine, or something that will relieve suffering. People take these substances just for fun.

“Evidence shows animal testing is not necessary to prove the safety of mind altering chemicals, yet poor beagle puppies are being bred so these drugs can be tested.

“These puppies will be put in extreme pain, they will suffer and many will die – just so people can take recreational drugs on the weekend. I find that completely unacceptable.

“The Greens have been vocal in their opposition to animal cruelty. The Greens’ animal welfare policy states:

‘Experiments on animals should only be used where they are overwhelmingly beneficial and do not cause animal suffering’ and;

‘Animals must not experience suffering for economic or entertainment reasons’

“Green MP Mojo Mathers’ amendment to rule out animal testing for psychoactive substances is sensible and has my full support. But what if her amendment fails to get the numbers?

“The Greens have not made any commitment to vote against the Bill and may end up supporting it regardless. That’s not good enough.

“I have campaigned for animal rights all my life and that’s why I am taking a stance against this Bill. If the Greens truly believe their own animal welfare policies, they should follow suit,” Mr Banks said.

ENDS

banner-banks-parliamentry

Psychoactive Substances Bill – Second Reading
Speech by ACT Leader John Banks
Thursday, June 27 2013

I rise to oppose the Psychoactive Substances Bill.

This bill is well intentioned and aimed at ensuring psychoactive substances sold in New Zealand are as safe as possible. I want to pay respect to the Minister Todd McClay for his noble intentions with this bill.

However, I simply cannot support it.

I find it totally unacceptable that this bill fails to rule out testing these recreational drugs on innocent animals.

Protecting animals is ingrained in my soul.

I think most New Zealanders will be outraged at the idea that chemicals people use ‘just for fun’ can be and will be tested on harmless animals.

Animals will be put in extreme pain. Animals will suffer. Animals will die.

We must remember psychoactive substances are not a necessity.

Recreational drugs are not something one needs to consume. They aren’t lifesaving medicines or something that will relieve suffering. People don’t NEED to take them.

Their prolific use will cause widespread animal suffering.

There is simply no justifiable reason for unnecessary drugs to be tested on animals, and I for one find it deeply offensive that any Government would sanction it.

Animals will be in pain and will die all in the name of people wanting to take drugs on the weekend. That is simply unacceptable.
Animals must not experience suffering for economic or entertainment reasons.

I know the Select Committee inserted a new clause in the bill to state that animal testing should only be used when necessary, but that is not good enough.

Especially considering the Select Committee refused to hear from organisations such as SAFE and the RSPCA about the impact of animal testing.

Evidence shows animal testing is not necessary to prove the safety of these mind alerting chemicals.

Dr Ian Shaw of the University of Canterbury says non-animal testing can adequately establish whether a substance has unacceptable risks of acute toxicity.

Cell culture, ex vivo and SAR studies can all be used to establish the risks.

Even if animal testing was necessary, and I know the vast majority of New Zealanders will agree with me on this, I say tough luck to the drug manufacturers and their drug dealing distributors.

If you can’t prove your new found drug of choice is safe without putting animals in abject misery, you can’t sell your drug.

If you need to pay more for more expensive non-animal testing, again I say tough luck. That is the price you, who stand to profit from selling these drugs, must pay.

The reality is the bill could well result in drugs being test on animals in place such as China and India where animal welfare is shamefully non-existent.

The statement in the bill that overseas testing must be carried out in accordance with the New Zealand Animal Welfare Act is nonsense because there is no way for us to assess what goes on in the torture chambers of animal testing laboratories in Asia.

Despite assurances from former Minister Peter Dunne, this bill fails to rule to the use of the extremely cruel LD50 test.

These animal testing places test their drugs on man’s best friend – dogs. Or, more specifically, farmed Beagle puppies. These animals trust us, and expect to get care and love. It is obscene.

I also want to comment on the Interim Psychoactive Substances Expert Advisory Committee, and one of its members Bob Kerridge from the RSPCA.

The committee was tasked with advising about the use of animal testing.

Some have said that Mr Kerridge’s place on the committee and the committee’s view that animal testing should be condoned reveals that animal welfare groups support this bill. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I want to place on record what Mr Kerridge said to me:

‘It is a matter of record that I am opposed to any animal testing for the approval of psychoactive products, and my presence on this Committee does not alter or condone it.”

Those who have fought for many years for the rights of animals, such as SAFE and the RSPCA are outraged by this bill and it is disingenuous to say anything different.

Finally, I want to thank Mojo Mathers for her work on this bill. I will be supporting her amendment to prohibit the use of data, collected from testing on animals here or overseas, being used to support an application to get a psychoactive substance approved. It is a sensible amendment which will protect defenceless animals.

But I say to her and her Green Party colleagues, if your amendment at Committee stage fails to get the numbers, you should vote against this bill anyway.

The Green Party has been very vocal in its animal rights stance. If you truly believe your own policies you should be standing against this bill.

We are sacrificing Beagle puppies at the altar of recreational drug use. It is a disgrace to this country.

As the most powerful creatures on this Earth, humans have a responsibility to protect all animals from senseless, worthless and shameless cruelty at all times and in all places.

ENDS

Thanks, John, for speaking out for those who can’t speak out for themselves.

Readers, please support Mojo Mathers amendment. (The most effective way you can do this is by emailing the Maori Party MPs. I’m reliably informed that whether or not her amendment gets included is likely to come down to the votes of the Maori Party.)

Bogus Science, Keeping It Real

Alien civilisation proven to exist on Mars! We are not alone!

1 Comment

15_martan_2

At one time an advanced alien civilisation existed on Mars, evidence suggests.

Space experts today told Eternal Vigilance that a pattern of shadows cast on a NASA photograph of the surface of Mars was consistent with a sculpture of a humanoid face left by an advanced civilisation that once inhabited Mars.

The photograph above is of a small part of the Cydonia region, taken by the Viking 1 orbiter and released by NASA/JPL on July 25, 1976. Blogger Richard Goode, who made the link after reading internet blogs about Mars, believed his revelation was a “game-changer”.

“I can’t explain why anyone would have missed something as obvious as this,” he said.

No other evidence of life on Mars has ever been found.

(See also Firearms evidence points to Bain’s dad)

Corruption, Kim Dotcom, Peter Dunne

Are we Dunne yet?

1 Comment

SCCZEN_A_051108NZHSRIDUNNE03_460x231

Dunne now target of private prosecution

Today Graham McCready laid four changes against Peter Dunne in the Wellington District Court.

Peter Dunne was, until recently, the Minister of Revenue and Associate Minister of Health. He remains in Parliament as leader and sole MP of the ailing United Future Party.

Graham McCready is a retired accountant and Wellingtonian.

Mr McCready is currently taking a private prosecution against John Banks, alleging he knowingly filed a false electoral return over $50,000 in donations from internet tycoon Kim Dotcom in his failed 2010 Auckland mayoral campaign.

He also prosecuted Labour MP Trevor Mallard in 2007 over a stoush with National MP Tau Henare.

Mr Banks denies the charged while Mr Mallard pleaded guilty to fighting in public and was fined $500.

Mr McCready said he was prosecuting Mr Dunne “to take on these wayward people”.

All strength to McCready.

Three of the charges relate to the GCSB scandal, over which Dunne was forced to resign his ministerial positions. They allege breaches against the Crimes Act, but it’s the fourth charge of alleged fraud in particular that I hope succeeds.

Mr McCready told NZ Newswire Mr Dunne continued to receive parliamentary funding of $100,000 a year, despite knowing United Future didn’t have enough members to be registered as a political party by the Electoral Commission.

Specifically, McCready has accused Mr Dunne of fraud by receiving $3846.10 between 30 April and 1 June as a fortnightly instalment of his $100,000 payment as a leader of a registered political party. McCready issued a statement saying

Mr Dunne finds himself in the same position as a welfare beneficiary who has had a substantial change of circumstances, takes no steps to alert WINZ of the change and continues to receive the money when he has no ‘colour of right’ to receive it.

Nor did he take any steps to return the money or hold it in trust.

Is he immune from prosecution? If I don’t advise WINZ of a change in my circumstances they would come after me. Why shouldn’t they go after Dunne?

The analogy holds good, but Dunne’s offending is (at least) an order of magnitude worse for the simple fact that Dunne is (or, thankfully, was) a government minister not a WINZ beneficiary.

Dunne saw fit to “take liberties” with the Parliamentary rules. He granted himself some “leeway” in the uncertain hope that he could persuade enough people to sign up and restore his party’s membership to the minimum of 500 required to stay registered.

It’s a very fine line indeed between Dunne’s behaviour and corruption. So blurry, in fact, that I can’t see it. Corruption in government and officialdom is an insidious evil that must be stamped out.

In most of the African continent corruption is rife at all levels of government. I submit that such corruption is the #1 reason that Africa (e.g.) remains the impoverished shithole that it mostly is. Feel free to challenge me on this, but in my view Graham McCready is a hero and we all owe him a debt of gratitude for seeking to nip this bad behavior in the bud.