if it wasn't clear, this blog is on the topic of freedom of speech, and the apparent seachange which has occurred in this genre of freedom in New Zealand over the past few yearz. the less i say, the better.

todays. dealing with the word rapist:

rape1 /reɪp/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[reyp] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, raped, rap·ing.

• 5. Archaic. the act of seizing and carrying off by force.

–verb (used with object)

• 8. to seize, take, or carry off by force.

–verb (used without object)

rap·ist (rā'pĭst) Pronunciation Key
n. One who commits rape.

[Origin: 1250–1300; (v.) ME rapen < AF raper < L rapere to seize, carry off by force, plunder; (n.) ME < AF ra(a)p(e), deriv. of raper]
(from dictionary.com)

the relevant article is here

http://stuff.co.nz/4381027a12855.html

so he called the police officers rapists. police officers in turn raped him for doing so. the judge chose one interpretation of the word's meaning over and above the others. and enforced that definition as the intended. can see why Hansen is called Justice. numerous questions emerge here.

here is one. say for example the guy had a speech impediment meaning all his 'r's are pronounced as 'w's could Judge Hansen still accuse Mr Evans of 'implying that the two constables would personally indulge in such illegal behaviour, aggravated by kidnap and brutality.'

Waped

\Waped\, a. [Prov. E. wape pale, v., to stupefy, akin to wap to beat. Cf. Whap, and Wappened.] Cast down; crushed by misery; dejected. [Obs.]

i have no problems with the legal system prosecuting people for resisting police officers, or even insulting them, but when judges start getting into intended specific definitions. whole thing gets a bit sticky.

according to this model, of prosecution based on specific words, it seems that they are encouraging the use of foreign languages.

if mr evan's had called the officers violeur. they may have assumed he was calling them a musical instrument. yet his intended meaning and sentiment would have been exactly the same. which is a strong case against using lexicon as justification for prosecution over and above something more objectively quantifiable, such as 'attitude'

cos when i refer to Justice Hansen as being master of a cirque.
you can get what i mean.
there's a context there
just as if somone were to be refusing to leave a bar, and arguing with officers
you could understand the justification for prosecution
but not when the state is justifying that prosecution on defendant's having called officers 'swad's; with all the intended bigoted, racist and facist babykilling overtones that 'swad' exudes.

did he not try to say "all police are rapists' worsts enemies" but was interrupted mid sentence?
or was he simply searching for the right word before continuing?
what is the right word?

all police are language police?

it's like you go to a doctor
and he prescribes antibiotics, for your ailment
and when you ask him why
he tells you it's because you used the word 'malaise'

http://stuff.co.nz/4381104a11.html

noticed that stuff today headlined Shane Bond as a 'Mercenary'
a sometime member of the police force
described as a mercenary
someone who kills people for money without discretionary nationalism,

what's the difference between the publishers of this headline and the man being fined?
context.
why is justice Hanson wantonly embarrassing us, making this about name calling
when it's about respect?
because Justice Hanson is in Invercargill.

if language is to be taken in this way. in that Mr Evans was actually 'meaning' to insult police by insinuating something so preposterous that 'all police are really rascistrapists.'
then on what grounds is this insulting?
it's only insulting because some policeman are rapists
in the last few years
it's come to light that more police than the general public would perhaps like are in fact rapists
and it's a bit of an in joke amongst the non police
because we're all too aware that police are the last resort against rapists,
if not the only

so basically the guy is getting vicitimized by the state
for airing a complaint
for exaggerating a criticism
exagerrating
and the state is going on record
through the voice of judge hanson
stating it's that this exaggeration is a relevant factor
in processing Mr Evans as an offender against the state of New Zealand.
and taking a months rent from him.
for the insult.

why was no investigation made into marc ellis's claims that he was sweating 'like a rapist'?
surely a confession of such magnitude, should be investigated,
and partied through the system
in much the same way as this
because who else but a rapist sweats like a rapist?

suggested phrase for police training manual:

"eh? yes, some of us are, we apologize for tthe crap service, we'll endeavour to do better sir, u can finish your drink... watch who you call a rapist these days, it's an offence;) have a nice day."