Police fail to act against abuse of drunk girls

The failure of the police to charge offenders who deliberately got young girls drunk, took compromising photos and posted them online is very disappointing.

NZ Herald reports: Warnings for Roast Busters II

“The boys had a competition where they would get young girls drunk and they would dangle their genitalia over their faces and take photos,” he said.

“The competition was how many girls you could get into those compromising photos.”

“The police were involved. The boys involved received a warning and weren’t prosecuted.”

It may be that the schoolboys involved have been thought to have been dealt with adequately outside of the courts, but this sends a terrible message.

And if one of my daughters or grand daughters was abused like this and it appeared that the offenders were let off lightly I’d be very annoyed.

If the police ever do decide to send a message and prosecute appalling behaviour like this the offenders may be unlucky to have been chosen to be example setters.

But it’s far worse for past and future victims if this sort of behaviour is swept under society’s carpet.

New Zealand Secondary Principals’ Association executive member Patrick Walsh, chairman of a high-powered Government group to counter cyber-bullying among school students, is dismayed no one was prosecuted.

Walsh, who declined to reveal the school involved, was told of the incident by the principal of the teens’ school.

I think the school was revealed in initial media reports when this story broke.

“What they are doing is criminal and totally unacceptable. In my view they do need to be charged, convicted and a message [sent] to teenagers across the country that this is totally unacceptable.”

I agree.

Police would not comment on the case but said: “We take all allegations of sexual misconduct and assault very seriously and investigate them appropriately.”

That’s not how it looks here.

Walsh said the the cases backed disturbing findings from an earlier survey that showed the Roast Busters case was not an isolated incident.

He said the time had come to stop a destructive teen culture, adding there was a hardcore group of schoolboys who thought they were entitled to harass, bully and intimidate others using technology.

“I don’t think they should go to prison. [Instead] fines, community work and compulsory attendance at programmes to address their attitude should be part of the penalty.”

Parents and schools have a responsibility to make it clear to children and pupils that abusive behaviour like this is totally unacceptable.

Auckland University law lecturer Dr Bill Hodge said there was scope under the new Harmful Digital Communications Act to put the statute to the test in incidents like those.

“This seems worse than bullying but it would seem to fit into that and would be something worth exploring,” said Hodge.

But it needs the police to actually act appropriately and deal to behaviour like this.


  1. kiwi guy

     /  8th November 2015

    “And if one of my daughters or grand daughters was abused like this and it appeared that the offenders were let off lightly I’d be very annoyed.”

    Annoyed at who? Yourself for not keeping proper tabs on what your kids are up to?

    Annoyed at the trashy pop culture the kids model their behaviour on?

    Below is pop star / ratchet hoe Nicki Minja with a huge teen following:

    “Walsh said the the cases backed disturbing findings from an earlier survey that showed the Roast Busters case was not an isolated incident.”

    What study? No link from the useless NZ Herald reporter of course.

    There is no rape epidemic or rape culture in NZ, you need to go to some Third World dump or a Western country with a huge 3rd World migrant problem to find one ie Sweden.

    Roast Busters occurred 2 years ago, if there was an epidemic shouldn’t there be one of those discovered every virtually every week?

    • Probably partly annolyed at myself, yes. But far more annoyed at the abusers and the police.

      Sexual abuse and alcohol abuse are both major problems in New Zealand, especially when combined.

      People like you making excuses and blaming victims and their families is a part of the problem, because it sends a message of support to abusers and potential abusers that it is acceptable if they can get away with it.

      It’s totally unacceptable, as is your victim blaming and denial of major problems.

      • kiwi guy

         /  8th November 2015

        Your the one in denial of major problems. The culture is rancid, yet you can’t even face that fact.

        There is no rape culture, the fiction was invented by a radical feminist LESBIAN – one Ms Susan Brown Miller who published a propaganda piece “Against Our Will” – ever since Feminist have been using it as part of their MO to get their extremist demands met eg “Guilty until proven innocent.”

        Pete, you are old enough to remember the Satanic Ritual Abuse and Rape hysteria of the 1980s, 1990s, driven by an unholy alliance of Feminist “Political Lesbians” [ That’s what they called themselves ] and the God Squad. Many innocent men had their lives destroyed, families ripped apart and the Political Lesbians walked away from it laughing.

        Now you are their fool again a generation later, “RAPE FEAR RAPE FEAR FEAR RAPE RAPE RAPE!”

        Lets take a look at what the girls are up to having been “empowered” by 3rd Wave Feminism to “break free of the shackles of Patriarchy”:

        • I disagree. You’re effectively excusing and supporting a ‘rape culture’ (I’m aware that’s a loaded phrase that can mean different things to different people).

          • kiwi guy

             /  8th November 2015

            “I’m awar that’s a loaded phrase that can mean different things to different people”

            That’s because it is nothing but propaganda so of course its meaningless.

            Like I said before, research the term’s origin – the psychotic scribbles of a radical feminist lesbian.

            • The origin is irrelevant, as is the origin of every other word or phrase, it’s what it means in the contect it’s used now that matters. I prefer to avoiud using the phrase because people like you use it as a diversion fromn the issue being discussed.

    • “Roast Busters occurred 2 years ago, if there was an epidemic shouldn’t there be one of those discovered every virtually every week?”

      Sexual assaults and related offences for the 2014.15 fiscal year:
      – charged 5,144
      – convicted 2,672

      That’s about 100 charges per week, and about 50 convictions a week.

      And it’s well known that the majority of victims of sexual assault don’t report the alleged offence or don’t press charges.

      • kiwi guy

         /  8th November 2015

        I don’t know where to even start with that:

        How about you stop repeating everything the Feminists claim like it is the gospel truth. Start looking at it with a CRITICAL MIND:

        eg the rape stats, remember it was 1 in 5 a while ago, then it was suddenly 1 in 4, then suddenly its 1 in 3, recently I saw some Lesbian twitterati muppet wail about a 1 in 2 statistic, LOL.

        Pete, you have a duty not to climb on the Rape Hysteria band wagon.

        As for the sexual assault stats we all know that’s tied up with broken homes and ethnicity, but its buried because the target of the witch hunt is straight white guys and the traditional family.

        Feminists hate the traditional family, they LOVE solo mum families who are dependent on the state, they don’t want anyone looking at the stats on the massive level of abuse in single mother homes.

        • I don’t know where to even start with that, so I won’t bother, except to say that I strongly disagree.

          And I’ll also say that trying impose ‘a duty’ on me to roll over for your crap is not going to work.

          • kiwi guy

             /  8th November 2015

            What’s my crap?

            Pointing out bogus abuse/rape stats.

            Pointing out stats that get buried because they don’t fit the crazy Feminist narrative.

            Warning about rape hysteria and how we have BEEN HERE BEFORE AND MANY INNOCENT LIVES WERE DESTROYED and the instigators walked away laughing.

            • “Pointing out bogus abuse/rape stats.”

              There’s a difference between claiming it (as you’ve done) and substantiating it (I’ve quoted some actual stats that don’t look good).

            • Is there irony in saying “That’s because it is nothing but propaganda so of course its meaningless”, asking “What’s my crap?” then stating, “Feminists hate the traditional family, they LOVE solo mum families who are dependent on the state, they don’t want anyone looking at the stats on the massive level of abuse in single mother homes”?

    • jaspa

       /  8th November 2015

      Young men behaving in this way is not the fault of the girls’ parents, kiwi guy. 😡

      • kiwi guy

         /  8th November 2015

        You remind of that mother whose daughter got her teeth knocked out after being pushed to the ground by police breaking up yet another out of control booze and drug fueled teen party.

        She wailed about the treatment but nowhere did the good for nothing mother show any shame or embarrassment that she did not know where or what her teenage daughter was up to at 2 am Sunday morning.

        And I get the impression you would be just as incompetent and shameless.

        • Jeeves

           /  10th November 2015

          If anything that you say is true- then the only way they’ve got away with it is because they were up against narrow minded misogynistic simpletons like you – easy-beats. And the best you can do is offer up your own brand of meaningless propaganda like your bile filled story above.
          At the end of the day I’d rather have a pint with any of those women you mention than you.

    • Mike C

       /  8th November 2015


      Thank you for putting up that photo of Nicki Minaj 🙂

      Sorry that I didn’t read what you wrote … because I was too busy wondering how such a huge arse can look so sexy. LOL.

      • kiwi guy

         /  8th November 2015

        I knew you would be a big fan. She does lap dances with her fans, so maybe you could get lucky if she ever comes down here for a concert 😉

        • Mike C

           /  8th November 2015


          Actually … I am quite a fan 🙂

          She is quite unique in the way she talks and she doesn’t mind when people jokingly take the piss out of her.

          I’m afraid my lap dancing days are over though. LOL.

  2. J Bloggs

     /  8th November 2015

    Pete – I agree that the behaviour described is despicable, but, based on the article you linked to, what would have you charged the boys with? And how likely do you think you’d get a conviction on that charge? Remembering that in order to get your conviction, you have to be able to PROVE the facts beyond reasonable doubt? While you (and the police) can make lots of assumptions, there is probably enough doubt for a good defence lawyer to get the boys off scot-free. I suspect the Police decided that a warning is about the best they could do under the circumstances.

    • That’s possible, but without knowing the details impossible to know whether it was pragmatic or letting them off lightly.

      And a difficulty with sending a warning signal is that young offenders get suppression and cases involving sex crime victims get suppression.

      So perhaps the message needs to be done differently – perhaps the police saying generally that this sort of behaviour is despicable and they will prosecute if they have sufficient evidence.

  3. @felixmarwick

    Labour’s @NgatiBird wants police to take a tough line on teen boys who abuse girls & post pic’s.

    says police should have thrown the book at them

    Kelvin David made a commitment to fight against violence and sexual abuse when he won Te Tai Tokerau.

  4. kiwi guy

     /  8th November 2015

    • That looks bad. Unfortunately this sort of thing isn’t uncommon.

      Most people seeing something that would probably ignore it, or make an uncomplimentary remark and walk past.

      Some would see if they could help ensure wellbeing and safety.

      And some would see it as an opportunity to take advantage of someone incapable of defending themselves and try to sexually assault. Why anyone would see that as attracting sexual involvement baffles me but some do.

      While the potential victim has engaged in risky behaviour (even leaving oneself open to having their drink spiked is risky behaviour) their is no excuse at all for predatory sexual behaviour – it’s the pits.

  5. kiwi guy

     /  8th November 2015

    I guess men and their “Rape Culture” are to blame for this too?:

    Horde of 5,500 ‘drunk and fornicating’ teens drive shocked families from sun-kissed beach

    “Fights broke out on the packed sands of Troon, Ayrshire, while Class A drugs were seized, and families were forced to watch on in horror at youngsters’ activities”


    • That’s a stupid and largely irrelevant diversion, it’s about cultures of alcohol abuse and promiscuity on the other side of the world.

      • kiwi guy

         /  8th November 2015

        Sure, because we don’t get out of control teenagers with access to drugs and booze and raised on trashy pop culture.

        Its exactly to the point, these kids are out of control and they’ve been raised to it.

        “Rape Culture” is a Feminist boogeyman that gets them media attention in their crusade to “smash Patriarchy”.

        • Teenagers are well known to engage in a variety of risk behaviours.

          That in no way excuses sexual preadtors and abusers who deliberately target compromised victims.

          • kittycatkin

             /  8th November 2015

            No, but who’s compromising a drunk person ? They are. Everyone knows that drunk people are vulnerable. The only person who can stop them being vulnerable because they’re drunk is them. Shifting responsibilty onto others will do nothing to stop the consequences of drunkenness.

            I think that Kiwi Guy’s missing the point, though. What a surprise. He makes some valid points then completely undermines them. Again, what a surprise.

            • Getting drunk is putting yourself at risk (male or female for that matter) but it isn’t an excuse for sexual predators.

              Going to bars without intending to get drunk is also a (lesser) risk. Going out at night is also a risk. Walking the streets at any time is a risk.

              The only way they can stop being vulnerable is to stay locked up at home. As long as no males are with them.

              At what point is a sexual predator responsible for their actions?

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  8th November 2015

              The best way to stop being vulnerable is to choose your friends carefully. I know my friends would look after me if someone spiked my drink. Would theirs?

            • jamie

               /  8th November 2015

              That’s good advice Alan, unfortunately it’s also something that can take young people a while to learn.

  6. Pete Kane

     /  8th November 2015

    It still leaves me cold that none of the ‘roastbuster’ creatures haven’t appeared in Court.

    • kiwi guy

       /  8th November 2015

      Why should they appear in court?

      A bunch of unsupervised kids with access to booze.

      Put the parents of ALL the kids on trial for incompetency.

      • Pete Kane

         /  8th November 2015

        You and I went to different law schools Mr Kiwi – amongst other differences.

        • kittycatkin

           /  8th November 2015

          I would like to see the irresponsible idiots who buy the liquor for underage kids charged-they can be. What kind of fool does this ?

    • @Pete Kane I’m not left cold that none of the Roast Busters ended up in court. What leaves me cold is the indifferent nature of the investigation into the complaints.

      Seems to me that Police acted too slowly and ineffectively in looking into the alleged activities. A proper investigation early doors may have seen them in court for a fair trial.

      Unfortunately the investigation was haphazard and the stench of not wanting to look too closely because one of the boys involved had family connections to the Police lingers.

      Who knows – there may not have been sufficient evidence of wrong doing to prosecute with a high chance of conviction

      • Pete Kane

         /  8th November 2015

        Regrettably Dave, I can disagree with little you have posted. A sad reflection on our policing, I must concede. (And that means more from me than you may imagine.)

        • Standards have been dropping in the force for a long time Pete [I assume you served or had/have family in the force]

          A well run, independent, disciplined and uncorrupt Police force is essential to the health and well being of our representative democratic system.

  7. kittycatkin

     /  8th November 2015

    If one removes all responsibility from girls and women who get drunk and shifts it onto boys and men, that seems to me to saying that females are helpless victims who are in the power of males. It’s a sad fact that when someone is drunk, they have poured the liquor down their own throat. One seldom, if ever, hears of a boy or man’s drunkenness being blamed on someone else. I wonder how often the news that some drunken man has been run over is greeted with sympathy-poor fellow, someone ‘got him drunk’ and now he’s dead. It’s more likely to be the more fool he for being in that state.

    The only person who can ‘get you drunk’ is you. This is not victim-blaming (which to me is often a red herring) it’s the truth.

    Obviously people should not ‘take advantage’ of others who are drunk, but saying that won’t change anything. I’d like to see the message that if you don’t get so drunk that you lose all control of yourself, others won’t be in control of you.

    If we want equality, we must learn to take responsibility for our own actions. Saying that this, that and the other shouldn’t happen won’t make them not happen. I was in a bus recently when the driver’s quick thinking averted a crash when someone with a load of planks backed out right in front of her. The driver shouldn’t have done that, but the bus driver didn’t bleat that he shouldn’t have, she took evasive action-and she was obviously aware that these things CAN happen, even if they SHOULDN’T-and dives accordingly.

    • Thanks for posting that Kitty. As a male I can’t say that sort of thing before the “victim blaming” card is played and I’m told I have a problem. Large element of truth in what you say.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  8th November 2015

      Very well said, kittycat. The victims culture has done nothing but harm to women’s liberation and justice as well. Now we have the same thing happening to boys with numbers of them certainly old enough to know better bleating about being seduced by female teachers. I have exactly zero sympathy for them.

    • I’m not trying to remove any responsibility from girls and women who get drunk. But that some girls and women make poor choices should not remove the responsibility of others to not take advantage of their increased vulnerability and abuse them.

      This isn’t an either/or issue, there are responsibilities and risks all round.

      • kittycatkin

         /  9th November 2015

        The predators are responsible, but if someone knows that being blind drunk means that they are likely to be abused by such vile people, then it is up to them not to drink so much that they are vulnerable to such things. The only person who can stop you getting drunk is you. I am sceptical about drink spiking, especially in pubs. There was a great fuss about it in the Waikato a few years ago, but the blood test results showed that in all but three cases, all that was in the body was alcohol, and in the three ir was inconclusive. Needless to say that this was not on the front page.Saying that men should not take advantage (and I am glad that in the Roastbusters all that seems to have happened was them waving their dangly bits; nasty as that is,we were given the impression that this was a gang ot rapists) is naive. It’s like saying that men should be able to drink until they pass out and know that they won’t have their wallets taken by someone taking advantage of this.

        • jamie

           /  9th November 2015

          I think you’ve mixed up two stories. The “roastbusters” were a bunch of rapists, self-admittedly. The ones waving their dangly bits are another bunch altogether.

          I remember a friend who would regularly claim to have been spiked when she was pretty obviously just very drunk. I used to say “Isn’t it odd that it’s always your 20th drink that gets spiked and not your third?” 😀

          Still, leaving your door unlocked doesn’t mean it’s your fault that there are burglars.

  8. tealeaves

     /  8th November 2015

    People get raped when they’re sober.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  8th November 2015

      And non-smokers get lung cancer. But this story is about abuse of drunks.

      • tealeaves

         /  8th November 2015

        “Drunks” or drunk people? Drunk teenage girls. Not “drunks”. It’s such a waste of time participating in this.

      • tealeaves

         /  8th November 2015

        I thought it was about Niki Minaj’s fat arse?

  9. I have to repeat this because I sort of don’t believe someone thinks it:

    “As for the sexual assault stats we all know that’s tied up with broken homes and ethnicity, but its buried because the target of the witch hunt is straight white guys and the traditional family.”
    I suppose the implication is that we go to the high schools and get the young people subject of the story from broken homes and the ‘wrong’ ethnicity, whatever that or those are, so we can protect the straight white guys from the traditional families of the right ethnicity..

  10. Frank Jackson

     /  8th November 2015

    Our under age daughter was victim of sexual crimes by a child sex gang (comprising adult employees of St John ambulance) in Auckland. However our child’s school took our daughter to Youth Law to gag her family in order to prevent us doing anything about it. The school ensured that our daughter lived in a very vulnerable situation so that she could continue to be abused.

    • Robby

       /  8th November 2015

      Wow! So why are you not before the court on a murder charge?

    • Kevin

       /  9th November 2015

      What happened is that your 14 year old daughter got with some older guys. Her choice, but don’t get me wrong, I still think the guys were ratbags and should have gone to jail for statutory rape. You’ve tried to do the right thing and protect your daughter from these scum bags but she’s seen it as you intervening. Also, I did work for Youth Law way back and they are a youth advocacy service – they act for the child not schools. In order to get a gag order against her family they would have required her say-so and gone to the court as your daughter’s advocate.

      • Frank Jackson

         /  9th November 2015

        Just as the child sex gang could not legally get “consent” from our under age daughter before having group sex with her, so too Youth Law could not legally get “consent” from our teenage daughter to harass her family.

        You are correct – the child sex gang members are ratbags – however your disgust is misdirected, the biggest villains in our family’s experience are those who illegally harassed our family after the sex crimes.

        Our son died – Youth Law and others who took advantage of a vulnerable child sex crime victim to cause considerable damage on an innocent family – they have blood on their hands.

        All societies have child sex criminals, however the real measure of the level of civilization is society’s response to child sex crimes. Our experience shows NZ at the very lowest level of that measure.