Peter Zohrab, New Zealand wrote on 29.May. 1999:
The Minister for the Police
Parliament Buildings,

Dear Mr. Simich,

The unreliability of forensic DNA evidence has recently been prominently in the news in New Zealand. The following information has been brought to my attention, in my capacity as Secretary of the NZ Men for Equal Rights Association. The issue is a scientific one, and I do not and cannot vouch for its accuracy. However, you will have expertise available to you to look into the serious allegations involved.

The issue is the technical ease with which false positive DNA evidence may apparently be manufactured and planted. When the forensic chemist grows DNA up for fingerprinting, if there is a large amount of added DNA present, this will dominate other DNA present and produce a false positive. The procedures described are relatively simple and are well within the capabilities of any reasonably competent science student, I am informed.

The probable procedure for fabricating positive DNA evidence is as follows:
(1)Break into your proposed scapegoat's house and take hair from his or her comb.
(2) In the laboratory dissect a hair off.
(3) Break the hair bulb down and grow up its DNA, using a standard DNA polymerase kit.
(4) Isolate the DNA
(5) Suspend the DNA in solution.
(6) Add appropriate surfactants and treat to prepare liposomes containing DNA.
(7) This liposome suspension could then be planted wherever desired.

In addition, the same source informs me that corporations have used false allegations of child molestation to discredit individuals who they consider to be a threat. The victims of the allegations may be innocent of any crime other than knowledge which if made public would be damaging to the corporation.

Naturally, both these allegations are of serious concern to the New Zealand Men for Equal Rights Association, as men are the usual victims of false allegations of a sexual nature. False accusations, especially of child sexual abuse (because of the hysteria whipped up by Feminists on this issue), are extremely traumatic for the victim. We would be very grateful if you would be kind enough to look into:
How easy it actually is to manufacture false DNA evidence;
What evidence there is that corporations (or anyone else) has actually planted false DNA evidence in New Zealand.


Peter Zohrab
Secretary, New Zealand Men for Equal Rights Association (Sex Lies & Feminism) (NZMERA Manifesto) (alt.mens-rights FAQ).

Peter Zohrab, New Zealand wrote on 6.Jun. 1966: 

Response to article in Law Talk

Dear Madam and Madam, I write in response to Elisabeth McDonald's article "No Defence of Battered Woman's Syndrome" in Law Talk 507, 5 October 1998, which you kindly sent me a copy of. Although Elisabeth McDonald does not look or sound like a man-hater, and her article seems pleasantly "revisionist", in the context of Feminist domestic violence dogma, it does not go far enough, as far as I am concerned.

I would like to point out that I am fairly expert in Sex War issues, though I am a layman as far the the law is concerned. She, like most lawyers, is a layperson as far as Sex War issues are concerned -- relying on what the system is pleased to call "expert witnesses" for their knowledge, on the whole. I know that she is a layperson, because she explicitly defends the use of such "expert testimony" to inculcate into the minds of juries the standard Feminist line on female victims of domestic violence -- she quarrels only with the use of the term "syndrome" in such cases. This means that she has not read the plethora of studies (eg. by Straus and Gelles at the University of New Hampshire) which show that women hit men just as often as men hit women -- and they use weapons, and they also commit psychological abuse (a fact which totally escapes Feminist writers on domestic violence). It is quite clear from the relevant paragraph that studies such as those by Straus and Gelles do not feature in the so-called "expert testimony" that is usually presented in New Zealand law courts. It is symptomatic that Ken McMaster, who makes a living from teaching men that they are always at fault for domestic violence, chairs the Family Violence Advisory Committee, which provides self-styled "independent" policy advice to the Minister of Social Welfare.

The fact is that, internationally, it is quite common for men to be thrown out of police stations if they make accusations against women. In addition, men know that they will be laughed at or treated with contempt if they complain about being hit by a women -- so it has to be extremely serious for them to risk this sort of humiliation.

Indeed, I was told last night of a couple of cases where men have complained of being hit by their female partners/wives in New Zealand, and the police then started investigating the matters as being cases of domestic violence by the men on their female partners !!

The police are taught Feminist propaganda on domestic violence as part of their training, and the rest of Society similarly subjected to a less formalised brainwashing process via the Feminist media. The time is long overdue for the legal establishment to start looking at men as people in their own right -- not just as machines to be turned on and off by women, and thrown into jail if they do not switch off at the exact instant desired by some woman.

Peter Zohrab

http://gidday.howzitgoing.com (Sex Lies & Feminism) (NZMERA Manifesto) (alt.mens-rights FAQ).

Autor: Peter Zohrab, Neuseeland
Erstellungsdatum 06.06.1999 G*A*B - Datum: 10.06.99  Mail: Peter Zohrab / NZ
Letzte Änderung: 
© G*A*B; Überarbeitet am: ; Adresse der Webseite: