• Anti-smacking law insult to Tino-Rangatiratanga

    “That’s some of the reasons why the ACT party stands for the repeal of this anti-smacking legislation, and that’s why I do too,” said Mr Tashkoff Press Release: Friday, 26 June 2009
  • Recent Posts

  • Networkedblogs

  • Recent Comments

  • Christian Blog Topsites

    Christian Blog Topsites
  • Tags

  • Don’t Vote Labour

  • Unity For Liberty

    Anti-Smacking Petition
    Signature Counter

  • June 2021
    M T W T F S S
    « Feb    
  • abort73

    For more information about abortion and what you can do to help, please visit... Abort73.com http://www.abort73.com/
  • Archives

  • Statcounter since February 2008

  • online counter
  • Meta

  • Blog Catalog since May 2008

  • « | Main | »

    ‘Ear flick’ case goes to Supreme Court

    By HEF Admin | July 12, 2010

    ‘Ear flick’case goes to Supreme Court

    One News July 07, 2010
    Christchurch father Jimmy Mason has been given leave to appeal by the Supreme Court. The 51-year-old was sentenced to nine months supervision and ordered to undergo anger management courses after a jury found him guilty of assaulting one of his two children. The case was widely seen as a test of the anti-smacking laws as Mason publicly claimed he’d done no more than flick his son’s ear. The Supreme Court has just announced it will permit him to appeal his conviction on the grounds that combining two allegations in a single count resulted in a miscarriage of justice. The two allegations are punching a child and pulling his ear. READ MORE
    Family First Comment: This is significant because our original concern with this case was that a father who admitted an ear flick may have been found guilty of assault because of the way the charges were applied. We’ll watch this one with interest.

    HEAR Family First’s reaction to the original verdict

    Got a comment on this issue? Email feedback@familyfirst.org.nz

    Topics: News Media/Press Releases | No Comments »