Murdered by Kelston's Neanderthal rugby culture -   May you rest in peace Stephen -

The murder of Stephen Dudley at Kelston High Auckland New Zealand – an LF investigation

Murdered by Kelston's Neanderthal rugby culture -   May you rest in peace Stephen -

Murdered by Kelston’s Neanderthal rugby culture – May you rest in peace Stephen.

NZ Police get NZ Media to sell Killing in NZ Schools as legitimate, but unfortunate for the upset killers.

Kiwi media and NZ Police give green light to the Kelstons culture of bullying being upscaled to getting away with murder.  This is to set a precedent where other 17 year old men can kill other students as along as it was done in a “moment of madness”. Remember this is a school that has been no stranger to sport related violence and abuse:

Further reading:

Auckland Rugby Union launches investigation into semi-final brawl

Top schools in ugly rugby match brawl

Now this youth, someones beloved son and brother, Stephen Dudley is dead.  He is dead because he was subjected to a brutal beating that was, and make no mistake, premeditated and involved one boy and a 17 year old man beating and kicking Stephen Dudley to death in a “moment of madness”.

It seems to us however that the school concerned could well have a number of serious problems with the way in which it has continued to educate it pupils and the values it has installed in its pupils, especially in and around the disgusting use of violence.

The principal offender – the two killers mentor and Kelston Boys Highs attack coach – Principal Brian "kill them for Kelston" Evans – did he instill the kill or be killed mentality?

The principal offender – the two killers mentor and Kelston Boys Highs attack coach – Principal Brian “kill them for Kelston” Evans – was he and his staff responsible for instilling the kill or be killed mentality?

The NZ Police have stated the following as their reasoning for not believing that the intent to murder Stephen was present at the time of the savage beating was handed out with relish;

They threw the fatal punches in a “moment of madness and they will have to live with the consequences for the rest of their lives”

What fucking consequences LF ask’s [?]: – given that these thugs have gotten away with murdering another smaller boy?

The New Zealand Police also report through a “supportive media” the following;

Detective Inspector Bruce Scott said a pathologist had completed a physical examination of Stephen’s body but was still doing some toxicology work. He said he could not comment on the autopsy results.

Based on the evidence presented to police thus far, neither of the accused teenagers would be charged with murder, Mr Scott said.

“There are certain intents that you have to prove for a charge of murder and I don’t believe in the circumstances as we know them at the moment that we would have those intents, or be able to prove those intents to the court.”

It seemed like “a moment of madness, and they’ll have to live with the consequences”.

According to the media Stephens family reported that the fight was pre-arranged between Stephen and another younger boy of Stephens age.  Now if it was pre-arranged as a fight how can the other 15 year old boy be charged with common assault, which is the charge that both killers face at present.

LF cannot understand the name suppression issues regarding the general public as a simple inquiry of a number of students would give away the names of the killers.   LF is set to make that inquiry and make a decision as to what is the best for the Global public.   What’s the background of the two killers?

What the Police are hiding from the Global public.

During the fight various possible scenarios occurred.  The more likely is that during the pre-arranged fight the smaller Stephen was unexpectedly getting the upper hand, and that was when the other 17 year old man “stepped in” and administered the fatal blows in a savage onslaught until Stephen was incapable of responding.  Then again it may have been that Stephen was getting a hiding and the 17 year old man decided to have some fun.  That’s right reader’s, one of Stephens Killers was deemed a man under the Crimes Act 1961, not a boy.   Further the 15 year old killer is old enough to face a murder charge – section 22 of the New Zealand Crimes Act stipulates;

“No person shall be convicted of an offence by reason of any act done or omitted by him when of the age of 10 but under the age of 14 years, unless he knew either that the act or omission was wrong or that it was contrary to law”

Whilst it is alleged that the fight was pre-arranged; LF asks was the 17 year old killers intervention and the severity of the beating premeditated as well?  After all it was an arranged fight was it not.

Stephen Dudley is dead and so he cannot give evidence as to how the fight came about.   When the term pre-arranged is used there are numerous possibilities.

Was Stephen bullied and humiliated in the social media of the school students and felt that he would make a stand to protect himself?  If that is the case, would Stephen have been killed as a result of the fight being between the two 15 years olds?.

LF feels that it is clearly arguable that the intervention of the 17 year old man resulted in the killing, and that further this decision is a matter of the normal process of a trial of 12 of his peers.

There exists no excuse of compulsion relating to the two killers actions, and even if there were, section 24 of the New Zealand Crimes Act stipulates at sub section (2)(e) that murder [section’s 167 and 168 of the New Zealand Crimes Act 1961] cannot be excused by compulsion.  Murder in New Zealand is defined in the following terms that apply to what is alleged to have occurred when Stephen Dudley was killed;

“S167 Murder defined

(1) Culpable homicide is murder in each of the following cases,


[b] if the offender means to cause to the person killed any bodily injury that is known to the offender to be likely to cause death, and is reckless whether death ensues or not.


[d] if the offender for any unlawful object does an act that he knows to be likely to cause death, and thereby kills any person, though he may have desired that his object should be effected without hurting anyone”

LF legal researchers argue that the charge of assault being laid against the killers imports sub section [b] in that they both committed an unlawful act, and that act resulting in the homicide.

Which international student will be killed next "when the moment of madness" comes again again to Kelston.

Which international student will be killed next when another “moment of madness” strikes again at Kelston, all parents should be very concerned.

Equally LF legal researchers believe that the fact that the Police have stated that the killers committed the homicide in a “moment of madness” imports sub section [a] in that if the killers were capable of comprehending prior to the fight that the savagery could have lead to the death of Stephen Dudley, then the threshold for murder has been well and truly passed.

In the event that the Police want to protect their options to get the right charge they could charge the killers in the alternative of manslaughter, and let the jury decide.  This would mean that the killers would be charged with murder and manslaughter in the alternative if the jury decided that there was reasonable doubt as to intent to cause death, but sufficient evidence that the killers acted negligently causing death.  Homicide is defined in the New Zealand Crimes Act at section 158;

“Homicide is the killing of a human being by another, directly, or indirectly, by any means whatsoever”

Our legal researchers clearly believe that the facts as depicted in the media to this time indicate that Stephen Dudley was involved in an arranged fight where death would not have occurred, but for the violent and overpowering intervention of a 17 year old man which allowed the application of such reckless forces to Stephens head and neck area that the death of Stephen was likely to ensue immediately, or at such later time, [as a result of the injuries caused by direct correlation to the severity of the attack].

Self defence is nowhere present – in fact Stephen was killed because he could not defend himself against the severity of the attack committed by his killers in what appears to be a callous and inhumane manner.  Did the two perpetrators attend to Stephen’s care or was it others.  It appears that this has been answered by eyewitness accounts.

LF assumes it is not normal for such attacks to occur in New Zealand Schools, but the New Zealand Police talk of such behavior being commonplace at Kelston High School.

Stephen  Dudley was murdered by two rugby team mates on the killing fields of Kelston Boys high – and the NZ Police unlawfully legitimised the murders.

Stephen Dudley was murdered by two rugby team mates on the killing fields of Kelston Boys high – and the NZ Police unlawfully legitimised the murder.

Manslaughter is a culpable homicide not amounting to murder.  In simple terms the killer is liable for the actus reus of gross negligence resulting in the death of another human being that is somehow excused as being less than reckless.  In common parlance the difference is becoming less certain and a number of alternate charge prosecutions are run to let the jury decide.

Probably the most famous such prosecution resulted from a report written by Civil Rights and Justice Campaigner Dermot Nottingham that promoted “one law for all”.  Nottingham argued that the Police Officer Killer Constable Keith Abbott had numerous alternatives to using a gun, but chose to shoot Steven Wallace 5 times, three in the back, to insure that Wallace was killed.  Wallace had been smashing windows along the main street of the New Plymouth district town of Waitara, Taranaki.

Nottingham’s report went virile and received over 700,000 views in a few days after its release.  Nottingham’s website also displayed the picture of the Killer Constable Keith Abbott which the media had refused to name.  Subsequent attempts by the Police Association [headed by intellectually invalided Greg O’Connor] to have name suppression imposed were defeated by Nottingham in defended High Court proceedings.   Nottingham’s report has since been translated to over 10 languages inclusive of Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Russian, German, and Dutch.

Nottingham’s report disagreed with the findings of an alleged independent report of a senior police officer and severely embarrassed Greg O’Connor and Inspector Bryan Pearce.

The Police Associations lawyers defeated the charge of murder at depositions but then the Wallace family were successful in overturning that decision by order of High Court Justice Sian Elias, who on the first page of her judgment spoke of a private individual who would promote further criminal proceedings if these proceedings would not follow what would be the normal course.  That person was, LF believes, Dermot Nottingham, who had indicated as much, when being interviewed by the New Zealand media.  Elias’s decision was in essence it was not up to anyone but 12 jurors to decide.

The face of the 19 year old cop killer Carlos Namana who killed Constable Stretch  in "a moment of madness" when reacting  to being  beaten over the head by constable Stretch for stealing chippies and lollies and punched Stretch in the head killing him – sentenced to 16 years for murder. In New Zealand cop killers get the entire bible thrown at them.

The face of the 19 year old cop killer Carlos Namana who killed Constable Stretch in “a moment of madness” when reacting to being beaten over the head by constable Stretch
for stealing chippies and lollies and punched Stretch in the head killing him – sentenced to 16 years for murder. In New Zealand cop killers get the entire bible thrown at them.

Further Reading: Crown: murder accused cried, ‘I hope he’s dead!

The matter went to trial and the Killer, Constable Keith Abbott, was found not guilty on both counts.  The Wallace family, [to this day], believe that the trial was rigged and LF agrees.

As an example of this improper behavior the Police had at times 20 senior uniformed police officers in the Court who were not involved in the proceedings.  That was like having 20 Mongrel Mob members unrelated to the proceedings being allowed to wear their patches to influence the jury.

But no matter the outcome the Killer Constable Keith Abbott had his day in Court to prove the doubt.  It should not be up to Police Officers to decide what a killers intent [relating to causing a violent death], was at the time of the homicide.

In law we are told that;- If murder is not a “moment of madness” what is?  Is not madness recklessness, lack of care, getting carried away etc.  

The two killers lawyer John Munro made this obtuse statement to the New Zealand media;

“They are very upset for everything.  They’re just upset all round and they are taking sometime to settle down and reflect on things”

What a completely moronic thing to say about two killers using reckless force to end the life of a very much loved 15 year old son, brother, nephew, and friend.

That statement by lawyer Munro, and the Polices position, are farcical for the following reasons.

The actions of the two killers are similar to a boy driving a car in a pre-arranged race against another boy, and then one of the boys being assisted by another boy to drive their cars at very high speed into the other boys drivers and passengers doors “in a moment of madness” and the other boy dying as a direct result of their respective “moment of madness”.

If a jury found the drivers guilty of murder how would you think the trial judge would confirm his beliefs as to their actions being anything but premeditated and murderous deserved of little mitigation.   Of course most killers are remorseful after the event, but that remorse is no excuse for the crime; – it is to be evaluated when confirming sentence.   Even a jury would be directed to ignore any statements about remorse.  What occurred directs findings on facts and thus guilt or innocence.

Is a kelston High School 17 year old, a man or a litle boy incapable of the intent of murder – you our readership should decide and let LF know:

Is a kelston High School 17 year old, a man or a little boy? A human being incapable of the intent of murder – you our readership should decide and let LF know:

When looked at in general terms how are the actions of the two killers that took Stephen Dudley’s life different to those of Clayton Weatherston. 

Sure Weatherston stabbed his victim Sophie Elliot 216 times but it was most likely that her injuries were fatal within the first 5 to 6 stabs, as her mother reported screaming for a short period.  As for the other 200 or so wounds that goes to the severity of the attack “in a moment of madness”.

As a direct result of the prosecution of Clayton Weatherston, and his defence lawyer arguing the defence of provocation, the Crimes Act was amended to repeal the defence of provocation.

This means that the two killers of Stephen Dudley cannot rely on the second killer, the 17 year old man, “opting in” to beat Stephen because of anything Stephen did.  Stephen is in the clear but LF expects the New Zealand Police and the media to “paint a different picture” of Stephen if the call for murder –manslaughter charges mount.

Equally the 17 year old killer could have intervened to stop the fight, as indeed could all number of other boys that were present.  

A clear decision was made at some point by the 17 year old man to “opt in” in order to apply reckless force against a much smaller 15 year old boy whilst the smaller boy was defending himself against another 15 year old.

Anyone can say that the force they used was not the force that was intended, but that is a defence for a jury to hear and decide.  Again the New Zealand Police Service are acting as Judge and jury and this is a breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.  Section 28 [in Part 3 Miscellaneous provisions] of the Act states for the avoidance of doubt;

28 Other rights and freedoms not affected

An existing right or freedom shall not be held to be abrogated or restricted by reason only that the right or freedom is not included in this Bill of Rights or is included only in part.

The right to a fair trial is not just for the accused.  A fair trial of events is the entire process from when certain facts are alleged to have occurred, and the Police have sufficient evidence that those facts may be sufficiently proven to have occurred.

As already stated it has been allegedly established that whilst a pre-arranged fight was occurring a 17 year old man entered the fight to assist a friend or even a relative [LF believes that the identity of the 17 year old man is suppressed because it would likely also identify his accomplice].

As a result of that intervention both men continued the attack and used such reckless abandon of force that the force applied killed Stephen.

Interestingly the Police allege that Stephen died in hospital as a result of his injuries.  But the eyewitness account’s of fellow students does not support this Police statement;

“There was just a bunch of boys having some fights up there … I came back and he was on the ground, gone. So me and my mate gave him CPR. It was too late.”

The shite tabloid the New Zealand Herald alleged the following occurred in the same article [tp://] where the eyewitnesses account that Stephen was dead at the scene was also covered.   It would appear to us that the two killers had exited stage left leaving Stephen cold dead as a direct result of their actions;

Stephen died in hospital on Wednesday night from injuries he received in the fight after practice had finished”

LF accepts that the two eyewitnesses were not experts at resuscitation, or determining whether Stephen was “dead”, but it says a lot that it appeared to them that Stephen was gone.  Normally this can be determined by various methods inclusive of feeling for a pulse for a prolonged period of time, whether the eyes are open and the pupils fixed, there is no breathing, the person passes bowel and bladder contents, the body loses temperature and becomes pale, and suffers rigor mortis.

LF believes the NZ Herald and the Police have concocted a story relying on the medical certificate as to the time of death being “at hospital” when a doctor was satisfied that Stephen was dead in that he could not be resuscitated, and had no brain activity.

One of LF’s researches is a medical intern and she has clearly indicated that she believes that Stephen was likely dead at the scene [as a direct result of the actions of the killers] when the eyewitnesses failed at resuscitation and would have gone through the normal processes of checking for breathing etc.

LF awaits the pictures of Stephens injuries and the pathologists report on the extent of the injuries suffered as a result of the killers.  LF’s medical intern believes that Stephen may have suffered a severe fracture to his cervical spine causing the crushing or complete severing of the spinal cord.

It is understood that some offending causes the perpetrator to also become a kind of victim, but prosecuting such offending is not just about the conviction being obtained – sometimes it is about deterrence to the greater audience, and sometimes is just about due process.   Stephen Dudley did not die by accident –both killers admit to their lethal actions being a “moment of madness”, and unfortunately for them, that amounts to murder and not manslaughter.

(As an aside: As a group LF have spent many months researching, collecting and collating evidence that we will soon be bringing our readers, granting an in-depth incite that looks at the New Zealand police force. Specificly a select group of officers’s and their targeting of individuals for reasons, given the facts we have received, could only have been executed on the basis of a personal grudge. We will then look at the very serious consequences that this corrupt practice has so often seen unfold; often with the implicit consent of senior commanding officers:

Napier siege: Gunman found dead

Related articles

Enhanced by Zemanta

Categorised in: , , ,

No Comments

  • You may want to look up how to correctly use an apostrophe if you’re going to post articles that want to be taken seriously. You don’t just use them in any word that ends with s.

    • Thanks for the critique “Hans”, no doubt it’s your “genuine” mission to improve the grammar contained in blogs all over the web, we’ve met dumbfuck’s like you before. Your myopic focus on what really matters is quite outstanding; having said that the world’s also full of spelling Nazi’s like you “Han’s”, but does it not bother you that your petty agenda is never well executed, being so completely transparent. Sorry about the stray one hitting your moniker.

  • Take no bullshit says:

    these cunts knew exactly what they were doing, so take the age factor away and set it straight. and to say that it was a school yard fight? please shut up judge. in a school yard fight both parties “are able to walk away”. and it cant be called a fight if Stephen wasn’t fighting back. set it straight and play it how it is.

  • seek the truth says:

    its about time the absolute truth came out about this situation,these boys had finished rugby training and left the field, then came back, stop blaming the police, school, government – get your facts right. Its easy to be sensational, harder to tell the truth

  • kelstonsgay says:

    fuck kelston, Massey WHAT!!!

  • viasollertia says:

    If the Police, Judge, School, MSM etc. can be co-opted to “bury” the matter, then a Coroner adding the finishing touches of a report which points to a heart defect (really?). but not to a broken neck from a vicious blind side punch to the neck boy the older boy, is not beyond belief – come on folks, this is just one more in a long list of State sanctioned and sanctified sacrifices. Outrage is basically useless, I am going to pray that every bent cop and judge and coroner and parliamentarian and bureaucrat is struck down by horrible diseases and astonishment of heart (they will go mad) and their families are attacked without cause and that all the crap they have colluded to heap upon the people of this nation will come back on them. Grace if for the gracious – these folks need to have some whirlwinds in their lives – they think that they can get away with this sort of thing because they are “beyond reproach” or above the Law…after all, they are the Goodies, yes? Flag the Tui, give me a Whiskey…

  • Michele M Main Gerbic says:

    Our justice leaves us feeling empty inside of the unfairness of it, once again the victim not served properly , who’s child will take to be killed or raped before justice is properly served in this country, it’s a laughing stock, new-comers are constantly in disbelief, we can murder and get away with it in this country.

    • christine says:

      The Judge is out or order and out of touch. She completely stuffed up. The 17 year old made the decision to interfere in this so called school boy fight. Once he entered into it, it was no longer a school boy fight. He walks away a free man. A kick in the guts for the family with this decision. More homicides, murders, assaults happening by young men every day here in N.Z. They don’t care about the consequences/ law because if they get convicted and thats a bif IF they get very little time in prison .

  • Brent McKenzie says:

    With the news of the sentencing today (7/08/2014) for the older defendant being “discharged without conviction”, this story takes a turn that should have all NZer’s and parents alarmed and enraged. Firstly the defendant pleaded guilty to the charge so it was left to a judge to pass sentence. Sadly no input from a trial by peers.

    What I find most disturbing is the judges comments that this should be treated like 100’s of school yard fights and therefore below some threshold of violence that she deems exists it law. Assault is assault whether it happens in school, church, workplace or on the street. How can we accept that is ok for someone to join a fight, make the fight 2 on 1, use brutal force and contribute to a death and walk away free?

    I can, at a stretch, understand why the younger 15 year was discharged. If there is an argument that it was just a normal school yard brawl then maybe, just maybe this was justice.

    But when someone not directly involved joins in a fight, is older, bigger and throwing serious punches and by all accountants attacking from behind with repeated blows, then this is and must be treated in law as aggravated assault.

    I am not a right wing conservative. I am a father of 6 who feels the pain Stephen’s family must be feeling. Surely a conviction with no custodial sentence, community time and counselling against violence would have been a balance between law and compassion.

    What this judge is saying is that our kids can be assaulted in or around school activities and this is acceptable. Shame on her!

  • I believe justice was not served.
    Heart condition or not. Arranged fight or not. Play fighting should NEVER be till death, and never be uneven; Never include kicking someone when they are down.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: