Finally, there is going to be a judicial review of a judge’s decision to let a comedian away with no punishment for sexually assaulting his four-year-old daughter.
This was a case that absolutely disgusted me for so many reasons: that a father could do that to his own child, that he could somehow think being drunk excused the behaviour and, most of all, that a judge could even suggest that his losing a a bit of work was so much worse that what he did to his little girl.
The “man” admitted his guilt so whether or not he was drunk wasn’t an issue, and his choice of career certainly should not have been an issue, either.
That he was discharged without conviction for a crime he admitted — a crime that is without doubt one of the most disgusting a father could commit — makes me both sad and angry.
Obviously, Judge Philippa Cunningham believed she her reasons for making that call back in August but it seems there isn’t a lot of support for her decision based on the fact that the father-of-the-year candidate (yes, that was sarcasm) had the ability to make people laugh.
“He’s a talented New Zealander. He makes people laugh, and laughter’s an incredible medicine that we all need a lot of.”
Stuff reports that Christine Rankin, a family commissioner, but speaking as a child advocate separate from her official position said the comedian may have been given credit for making people laugh, but the court’s decision to allow him to walk free without even a conviction “made people cry”.
We have far too many child victims in this country and surely the first step in reducing the number of children being abused, both sexually and physically, is to ensure they are treated fairly.
That little girl was sexually assaulted: her father’s career choice should have had no bearing on the outcome of the court case.