Linking Pornography and Sex Attacks
Friday 9 August 2002
Linking Pornography and Sex Attacks
Police were reported yesterday to be hunting for a man they said is “a dangerous sexual predator fixated on Asian women” (Dominion-Post 8/8/02 p. A8). He was named as Richard Clarence Hunia and “is wanted for an alleged sexual attack on a Chinese women, 24 at his New Lynn, Auckland, flat on Saturday.”
Hunia, 41, who has been using the alias Joe Jones, is alleged to have lured the woman to his home by placing a personal advert in a Chinese-language newspaper, a copy of which was shown today on TV One midday news (9/8/02). She had only been in New Zealand for two weeks.
Police took the unusual step yesterday of naming Hunia and issuing his photograph in an attempt to try and catch him and warn the public that he is a danger to women.
When police entered Hunia’s room after the attack on the asian woman they found pornographic videos and magazines of Asian women. They say she was lucky to escape from the room after he beat her around the head and threatened to kill her if she did not perform oral sex on him.
The Society for the Promotion of Community Standards has been trying for 30 years to warn the public that the ready availability and promotion of pornography via films, videos, television, the print media and more recently the internet, poses a real danger to women and children. Its message has largely been ignored by the “experts” in the Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC), headed by Mr Bill Hastings, and the members of the Film and Literature Board of Review.
The Society’s recent appeals against classification decisions made by the OFLC which granted restricted R18 release to films like “Baise-Moi”, “Visitor Q” and “Bully” have sought to focus public attention on the “objectionable” contents of these and hundreds of films and videos being classified R 18 each year. Chief Censor, Bill Hastings has personally endorsed all three of these films as having artistic merit. He described “Visitor Q” as “accomplished and funny” on Radio 95BFM (27/3/02). These publications include gratuitous depictions of sexual violence (including rape), necrophilia (sex with a corpse), extreme cruelty and degrading sexual conduct (use of excrement), drug taking and serial killing.
The Dominion-Post reported today (9 August) that Hunia was a “convicted rapist” and that he “has been found dead in Auckland after police issued a photograph in a bid to catch him”. We are now told that he was sentenced in 1993 to 10 year’s jail on charges of rape, abduction and threatening to kill. A report at the time said the offences were committed while he was on parole for an earlier rape.
Henderson police issued a photograph of Hunia on Tuesday, with a warning that he was a danger to women. He had recently been released from jail before he served his full 10-year term for the rape committed in 1993. This early release came about when he won a High Court case in Wellington in which his lawyer argued that the Parole Board had wrongfully ordered him to serve the full 10-year term, instead of being eligible for parole after two-thirds.
If the High Court had ruled against his early release the Asian women would not have been attacked as he would have still been in prison. If he had not been released on parole after his first rape he would not have been able to commit his second rape. If he had not been feeding his mind on pornographic videos and magazines of Asian women he may not have tried to commit a sexual offence on a young Chinese woman. One thing is sure, if he had been in prison he would not have had the “freedom” to feed his mind on pornography.
The High Court decision was not able to be
appealed by the Crown. However, the Crown took another case
to the Court of Appeal to make sure the decision which led
to Hunia’s early release could not be used as a precedent
for others. The Court of Appeal ruled that the High Court’s
decision regarding Hunia’s case was wrongly decided. And yet
he remained free… free to commit further rapes, degrade
woman and give vent to the “freedom of expression” so
artistically presented in films like “Baise-Moi” and
“Visitor Q”. He like any other convicted rapist, paedophile
or sex pervert, who has served his time, or any potential
sex offender in any one or more of these “sexual
orientation” categories, is free to attend the next film
festival screening films depicting gratuitous scenes of
sexual violence and graphic violence, or view this
corrupting material in the privacy of his own home.