If you were to open a browser this morning and jump over to Herald.co.nz you would see this heading;
“Paroled killer’s lavish new life”
with this layout;
Now, I’m not sure about you, but I was drawn to the headline and the image (a very common internet behaviour to scan the page), and by association, I was assuming some very lavish lifestyle changes for the convicted killer in question. Was Bailey Kurariki the owner or guest on some luxury yacht?
Background: Bailey Junior Kurariki was convicted of Manslaughter (not murder as commonly and painfully implied by the media) in 2002 and sentenced to seven years imprisionment. He was 12 years old at the time of the attack by Alexander Peihopa and Whatarangi Rawiri. I am not in any way defending the guy. However he is now out on parole under house detention. These are the laws of the land, but according to many on the right and in the media this young man is now the focus of rigourous and speculative attention.
He recently had his 19th birthday for which he received gifts – shock horror!
This from the Herald “Since being released a fortnight ago the 19-year-old baby-faced killer has had KFC, Burger King and pizza delivered most nights to the secret Auckland address where he’s staying”.
Baby Faced Killer is a bloody provocative and inflammatory statement to make, considering he wasn’t the killer. He didn’t wield the bat that killed the 40 year old victim.
I’m not sure of the laws of NZ, but the last time I looked KFC, Burger King and pizza weren’t domains of privilege for certain members of society only.
For his birthday he got “180 pair of shoes, a stereo and a PlayStation console.”, which according to the victims Mother is a “bitter pill to swallow”. I am very sorry for the victims mother for which has happened to her family, however her social values of gifts have no bearing on the issue. She claims he should be earning the items? He can’t leave his property, and one would assume that if they boy was earning money, there would be a reporter telling us how the “Killer” was doing well or some how profiting from being on the outside world.
I thought this piece of journalism and the editorial decision to go with this article was shoddy and pathetic, not to mention inflammatory, incorrect and verging on Vigilantism.
We do not have the right or need to know what he has been eating and receiving for birthday presents. The rest of the piece went on to question weather he had changed, painting a doubtful picture.
One thing is for sure, this sort of shitty vigilante journalism will undoubtedly sell papers and sensationalise the topic, however as long as this sort of journalist and this newspaper believe that they some how own the rights of this young man, there is bugger all chance of him starting a life for himself.
He is not the convicted murderer. He was convicted for Manslaughter, in that he was one of the gang in which a murder was convicted.
Please do not buy into this cheap vigilantism and do not buy this newspaper while they run this line of journalism. It is not your right to know the personal life of this man, any more than it is your right to know the personal life of me. This person is not public property. He may still be the responsibility in part of the state, but that is not for you or me to poke our curious noses into.