In the Tuesday March 21 Northland Age story reporting last weekend's "rampage" by youths in Kaikohe, I was interested to learn "just five police officers were on duty (at 1am Saturday) in three patrol cars across the Mid North, two officers in Paihia and two in Kerikeri, dealing with incidents related to St Patrick's Day festivities, leaving a Sergeant in Kaikohe."
We've already been informed "the weekend's trouble (in Kaikohe) started on Friday", with youths stealing 10 boxes of beer. The police knew their exact location, but with adults at the party "defending the youths" and "just two officers ... there was little they could do."
By strong implication this same address (actually named as being in Shaw Street) is where Saturday morning's youth rampage emanated from. I call that fairly predictable.
By comparison, the "incidents related to St Patrick's Day festivities" in Paihia and Kerikeri were entirely unworthy of being reported. I saw no other mention of them.
Crimes had already been committed in Kaikohe. Police were too intimidated to act. Despite this prior knowledge, four-fifths of available police personnel were sent to Paihia and Kerikeri.
That's really interesting. Why is that? Especially given that St Patrick's Day is virtually an excuse for public drunkenness? Perhaps lives were in danger in the east coast towns. But surely anything that serious would be reported? Or was only property in danger, same as in Kaikohe?
