• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Zealand police kill "terrorist" after he stabs 6 people

Artymoon

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2019
Messages
4,782
Reaction score
2,902
Location
U.S.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

Seems like he was well known and they had him under round the clock surveillance. Police were tailing him at the time he went into store and purchased knife, then screamed "Allahu akbar" and then began attacking shoppers. Police were able to intervene and put him down but not before he was able to stab 6 shoppers. I have no idea of NZ laws but I wonder what he did to wind up on 24hr surveillance but not earn a trip downtown?

For me, the is clear example of the evil we can encounter in this world and I fear after recent events, these incidents could be on the rise.
 
Why is he a "terrorist" instead of a terrorist?
 

Seems like he was well known and they had him under round the clock surveillance. Police were tailing him at the time he went into store and purchased knife, then screamed "Allahu akbar" and then began attacking shoppers. Police were able to intervene and put him down but not before he was able to stab 6 shoppers. I have no idea of NZ laws but I wonder what he did to wind up on 24hr surveillance but not earn a trip downtown?

For me, the is clear example of the evil we can encounter in this world and I fear after recent events, these incidents could be on the rise.
You have to be ****ing kidding with that line of inquiry.

My suggestion is go read the book 1984 and dwell on the point of thought crime.
 

Seems like he was well known and they had him under round the clock surveillance. Police were tailing him at the time he went into store and purchased knife, then screamed "Allahu akbar" and then began attacking shoppers. Police were able to intervene and put him down but not before he was able to stab 6 shoppers. I have no idea of NZ laws but I wonder what he did to wind up on 24hr surveillance but not earn a trip downtown?

For me, the is clear example of the evil we can encounter in this world and I fear after recent events, these incidents could be on the rise.
That this occurred in Auckland comes as no surprise. There has been a 63% increase in crime during the first five months this year when compared to the same period in 2019.


Crime all over New Zealand has been on a steady rise, particularly gun crimes. Despite the on-going government firearm confiscations.



 
That this occurred in Auckland comes as no surprise. There has been a 63% increase in crime during the first five months this year when compared to the same period in 2019.


Crime all over New Zealand has been on a steady rise, particularly gun crimes. Despite the on-going government firearm confiscations.



It has not helped that australia has turned to exporting their criminals to new zealand despite those criminals only having a tenuous connection to nz.

It is no coincidence that a rise in gun crimes coincides with gang members from australia being deported to nz.
 
It has not helped that australia has turned to exporting their criminals to new zealand despite those criminals only having a tenuous connection to nz.

It is no coincidence that a rise in gun crimes coincides with gang members from australia being deported to nz.
Sounds like Christmas Island II? Does the NZ govnt. have no spine?
 
A spine for what? Arresting people for thought crime. Which ****ed up country do you come from where people get arrested for thinking about a crime.
There's a distinction between thinking about it, and planning it.
 
A spine for what? Arresting people for thought crime. Which ****ed up country do you come from where people get arrested for thinking about a crime.
Accepting another country's dregs.

It has not helped that australia has turned to exporting their criminals to new zealand
I don't support thought crime investigation occurring in the UK and Common Wealths, and I am from neither.
 
There's a distinction between thinking about it, and planning it.
No there is not. A writer may meticulously plan out a crime for a fiction book but under your idea he could be arrested for planning a crime. Ridiculous.
At best they could arrest a group for conspiring to commit a crime but this terrorist was a lone wolf and a conspiracy requires two or more people.

He was kept under surveillance but as reported he was surveillance savvy so they needed to keep a distance to be effective.

But one thing I would point out. Given the details given so far this is either a case of suicide by cop or a cop who had had enough and took the opportunity to end this problem permanently.
 
No there is not. A writer may meticulously plan out a crime for a fiction book but under your idea he could be arrested for planning a crime. Ridiculous.
At best they could arrest a group for conspiring to commit a crime but this terrorist was a lone wolf and a conspiracy requires two or more people.

He was kept under surveillance but as reported he was surveillance savvy so they needed to keep a distance to be effective.

But one thing I would point out. Given the details given so far this is either a case of suicide by cop or a cop who had had enough and took the opportunity to end this problem permanently.
Part of the planning can include taking active steps to accomplish the plan, but isn't necessary. A writer creating a story has no intent to commit the crime. If you plan a crime (including only writing it) if you intend to commit the crime, that is illegal.
 
Part of the planning can include taking active steps to accomplish the plan, but isn't necessary. A writer creating a story has no intent to commit the crime. If you plan a crime (including only writing it) if you intend to commit the crime, that is illegal.
May not be necessary but until the crime is in progress it still remains a thought crime. There is nothing illegal about buying anything that is for public sale. Having police say they think you might commit a crime with those purchases is still a thought crime.

This is a balance . Choose between the police being able to arrest and prosecute because you are thinking about a crime and that of police must wait until they can prove a crime is being committed. Which society do you want to live in.
 
May not be necessary but until the crime is in progress it still remains a thought crime.
The crime is in progress as soon as they formulate a plan with intent to commit the crime. You can call it a thought crime, but the courts disagree.

There is nothing illegal about buying anything that is for public sale. Having police say they think you might commit a crime with those purchases is still a thought crime.

This is a balance . Choose between the police being able to arrest and prosecute because you are thinking about a crime and that of police must wait until they can prove a crime is being committed. Which society do you want to live in.
Was Dalia Dippolito convicted of a thought crime? She didn't buy anything, but police and prosecutors were able to prove she intended to commit murder.
 

Seems like he was well known and they had him under round the clock surveillance. Police were tailing him at the time he went into store and purchased knife, then screamed "Allahu akbar" and then began attacking shoppers. Police were able to intervene and put him down but not before he was able to stab 6 shoppers. I have no idea of NZ laws but I wonder what he did to wind up on 24hr surveillance but not earn a trip downtown?

For me, the is clear example of the evil we can encounter in this world and I fear after recent events, these incidents could be on the rise.

You can't just arrest someone because they have a weird religious belief. There still has to be an overt act, either via conspiracy, manifesto, or...this.

I think the police involved did the best possible job they could have while remaining in their own legal constraints.
 
The crime is in progress as soon as they formulate a plan with intent to commit the crime. You can call it a thought crime, but the courts disagree.


Was Dalia Dippolito convicted of a thought crime? She didn't buy anything, but police and prosecutors were able to prove she intended to commit murder.
1. True. But if it's a lone nutter, how do you know he has done that? He didn't even bring a weapon, he used a knife from a display.

2. There you had an overt act.

Dippolito was recorded on camera by Boynton Beach police in 2009 discussing plans to hire a hit man with a friend, and then meeting with an undercover police officer posing as a hit man to discuss killing her then-husband, Michael Dippolito.

That's grounds for arrest. Being a religious creep isn't.
 
You can't just arrest someone because they have a weird religious belief. There still has to be an overt act, either via conspiracy, manifesto, or...this.

I think the police involved did the best possible job they could have while remaining in their own legal constraints.
No doubt the guys on scene did a good job in my mind. I was just wondering why he was under round the clock surveillance. Apparently he's been monitored since 2016. That's a lot of manpower for a random crazy person.
 
You have to be ****ing kidding with that line of inquiry.

My suggestion is go read the book 1984 and dwell on the point of thought crime.
Line of inquiry? Someone who's been monitored for 5yrs finally commits a heinous act?
 
The crime is in progress as soon as they formulate a plan with intent to commit the crime. You can call it a thought crime, but the courts disagree.


Was Dalia Dippolito convicted of a thought crime? She didn't buy anything, but police and prosecutors were able to prove she intended to commit murder.
The crime only reaches the courts if and only if the police have evidence of a crime being committed. Thinking about a crime is not committing a crime. The best the law can do is act if a conspiracy is proven. But in this particular case the terorist acted as a loan wolf and a conspiracy requires two or more people.

Dalia was on trial for attempting to hire someone to kill her husband. As I said conspiracy to commit a crime is an offense but it takes two or more people to commit a conspiracy.
 
Line of inquiry? Someone who's been monitored for 5yrs finally commits a heinous act?
He could have never committed a henious act just someone who likes to masturbate about committing a murder. Weird, crazy probably in desperate need a counselling but not in itself a reason to put someone in jail.
A fair justice system waits until their is evidence of a crime not a thought about crime.
 
He could have never committed a henious act just someone who likes to masturbate about committing a murder. Weird, crazy probably in desperate need a counselling but not in itself a reason to put someone in jail.
A fair justice system waits until their is evidence of a crime not a thought about crime.
I never said they should have outright arrested him. But what caught me eye to this story is that he's been monitored for the past 5 yrs and at least of late, being tailed by police 24hrs. I don't imagine most agencies spend that kind of money and resources for someone who is weird. They obviously had something on him and found him a credible threat to go through all that trouble. Otherwise, that would mean your government monitors and spies on people for no reason.
 
No gun? Please, no knives allowed.
 
I never said they should have outright arrested him. But what caught me eye to this story is that he's been monitored for the past 5 yrs and at least of late, being tailed by police 24hrs. I don't imagine most agencies spend that kind of money and resources for someone who is weird. They obviously had something on him and found him a credible threat to go through all that trouble. Otherwise, that would mean your government monitors and spies on people for no reason.
The government does monitor people like that. A known isis supporter and a known security threat. The information on him is slowly coming out.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/auckl...wolf-knife-attack/YJMR4NTEU5Q6DO7NSZP7BGIKDM/
He had only recently been released from prison and was under constant surveillance from police, including an armed tactical team, and national security agencies.

Last year, the Crown had sought to prosecute S under the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002, but a High Court judge ruled that preparing a terrorist attack was not in itself an offence under the legislation.

One of those tricky ones. If he had conspired with others to make an attack he could of been arrested. But as he was a lone wolf an arrest could not be made as he could explain it away as just material for a book he was writing.
 
Some more information is being released.
https://www.usnews.com/news/world/a...leased-new-zealand-extremist-despite-concerns
Police twice confronted him but he kept on posting. In 2017, they arrested him at Auckland Airport. He was headed for Syria, authorities say, presumably to join the Islamic State insurgency. Police searches found he had a hunting knife and some banned propaganda material, and he was later released on bail. In 2018, he bought another knife, and police found two Islamic State videos.
The man spent the next three years in jail after pleading guilty to various crimes and for breaching bail. On new charges in May, a jury found the man guilty on two counts of possessing objectionable videos, both of which showed Islamic State group imagery, including the group’s flag and a man in a black balaclava holding a semi-automatic weapon.
However, the videos didn’t show violent murders like some Islamic State videos and weren’t classified as the worst kind of illicit material. High Court Judge Sally Fitzgerald described the contents as religious hymns sung in Arabic. She said the videos described obtaining martyrdom on the battlefield by being killed for God’s cause.
A court report warned the man had the motivation and means to commit violent acts in the community and posed a high risk. It described him as harboring extreme attitudes, living an isolated lifestyle, and having a sense of entitlement.

But the judge decided to release the man, sentencing him to a year’s supervision at an Auckland mosque, where a leader had confirmed his willingness to help and support the man on his release.
The judge said she rejected arguments the man had simply stumbled on the videos and was trying to improve his Arabic. She said an aggravating factor was that he was on bail for earlier, similar offenses and had tried to delete his internet browser history.
Fitzgerald noted the extreme concerns of police, saying she didn’t know if they were right, but “I sincerely hope they are not.”

Unfortunately the judge got that one wrong.
 
Back
Top Bottom