Matua Kahurangi
Just a bloke sharing thoughts on New Zealand and the world beyond. No fluff, just honest takes.
One of the headlines in the New Zealand Herald reads: “Tauranga assault case: Man pleads guilty to attacks, harmful posts.” At first glance, the story seems simple. However, what’s missing from the article is crucial context and, once again, it seems that a predator is being protected by those in power.
The article explains that during a case review hearing in Tauranga District Court, a young man pleaded guilty to one charge of common assault, two charges of injuring with intent and one charge of posting harmful communication. What the Herald fails to mention is the background of the alleged victim, a popular TikTok creator, who has built a significant following.
What the Herald didn’t report is that this TikToker was caught in a sting operation. A group of young men created a fake profile on Grindr, a gay dating app, posing as a 15-year-old boy. The Tiktok famous bloke matched with the profile and arranged to meet the supposed minor for sex. When he showed up, instead of meeting a 15-year-old boy, he was confronted by the group who had set up the sting.
The young man who appeared in court was one of those involved in exposing this TikToker. He pleaded guilty to assault charges related to the confrontation, but what's left out of the Herald's report is that the alleged victim was planning to meet a 15-year-old for sex. Under New Zealand law, the age of consent is 16, which makes his actions both illegal and fucking disgusting.
Instead of the person attempting to meet a 15-year-old for sex facing the consequences, it is the group that exposed him who is now in court. The Herald article briefly mentions that the young man was one of three arrested in a police investigation into a vigilante group targeting adults who were allegedly contacting minors online. However, the Herald fails to mention that those being targeted by the group, including the TikToker, were indeed attempting to engage with minors.
This raises the question: why is this person attempting to meet a minor for sex not facing charges? The Herald focused on the assault, leaving out key details about the actions that led to the confrontation. The public is left with a distorted view of the situation, where the predator is protected and those who tried to expose him are now facing legal consequences.
The case shines a light on how selective reporting can distort the public’s understanding of justice. Shouldn’t the person trying to meet a minor for sex be the one facing the charges? Instead, the media has chosen to focus on the assault charges, ignoring the far more serious issue of adult predators targeting minors. This case is more than just about an assault: it’s about the dangerous practice of protecting those who attempt to harm children and punishing those who try to stop them. The Herald’s failure to report the full context of this case is a disservice to the public and it’s time the truth is told in its entirety.
This article was originally published on the author’s Substack.
