Sunday, January 29, 2006


What can be said about Jill Tito? She spills the beans to the Sunday Star Times on her sorry, sordid story.

At the root of it all, she said,was low self-esteem, a problem she had face all her life. "I'm too easily influenced, I trust people too easily. I don't get to know them properly," she says.

She dropped out of school and left home at 16. Now 24 she has never had a job, but has five convictions. She once took a bar-tending course in Hamilton, but dropped out on the first day to go drinking with her friends. She gave up her first son, born when she was twenty. His new caregivers abused him and the boy is now in CYF care. She has not seen him for two years.

She says she was a good mum before meeting Harley Wharewera, letting him and his mate move in and repeatedly beat her two year-old son almost to death.

The community say she was a bad mum. "(The child) stank, he was dirty."

A number of questions come to mind. Who filled her head with all the stuff about "low self-esteem"? What wider effect does getting paid by the media to further your notoriety nation-wide have on people with bad motivations? Does anybody know, or care, who the father and grandparents of the beaten child are? And, have you and I been paying this pathetic creature to subsist?

Tito has been advised, in order to move on she should "forgive" Wharewera and Tawa.

They don't deserve forgiveness and neither does she.


Anonymous said...

What do you do with a creature like this? To herself and perhaps many other bleding hearts she will be a "victim", and it will continue unabated until we claim back personal responsibility.

Anonymous said...

Hear, hear! Personal responsibility is the key issue.

Oswald Bastable said...

Somebody has filled her head up with this self-esteem bollocks. It's quite obvious that head was previously totally empty.

Anonymous said...

This is a woman who will never learn fuctionality as long as her dysfuctional views of the world are subsidised by the state and she should not be allowed to raise children. She is incapable of being mother other than in the physical sense.

Anonymous said...

So often we here of the children of solo mums, almost always on the DPB, being abused by the boyfreind or flatmate of the child's mother. A solution I propose is that it is a condition of receiving the DPB that no other adult is allowed to live with the mother.

Anonymous said...

Let them starve...

Bomber said...

You people are nasty little barbarians who seem to have only the capacity to condemn. What are your answers to problems such as this apart from starvation?

You say that the state should keep out and personal responsibility is important. Indeed, it is so important your commentators parrot it without any thought. When a person can't handle their situation then what happens (apart from your condemnation)?

It seems from the report that she lacked any friends or family who would back her up and support her. Does her family not have a responsibility to do something also? And failing all that isn't it CYFS' responsibility, indeed, it's mandate, to do something? Not all mothers are successful - that is an obvious fact. For those few mothers, for example those intimidated by gangs and perhaps socially isolated, what ought to be the response? To send them a letter with the words "personal responsibility" on it a hundred times doesn't sound like it will be very effective.

I'm not hearing any constructive solutions from any of you. I'm just hearing an echo-chamber of finger-wagging ideologues in here.

Would you replace CYFS? Compulsory sterilization?What's the agenda?

Bomber said...

Mark V. - I didn't mean to say that you had no solutions. It might be even more isolating if they could not share the burdens with another adult in the household. But I note your suggestion.

Lindsay Mitchell said...

T Selwyn said "It seems from the report that she lacked any friends or family who would back her up and support her. Does her family not have a responsibility to do something also? And failing all that isn't it CYFS' responsibility, indeed, it's mandate, to do something?"

One of the questions I asked was where is the father and grandparents? After the mother, who has day-to-day care of the child, yes they have the primary responsibility to do something.

CYFS were involved in this case. The two-year-old child had been picked up wandering the streets in the early hours of the morning just weeks before the culmination of the abuse. They failed.

The point here is the collective responsibility of the state will not keep children safe. But because it is now so entrenched in people's thinking they have absolved themselves from any individual responsbility.

Anonymous said...

T Selwyn, it might be more isolating, but at least there won't be someone in the house who abuses the child. There are friends neighbours and numerous people and agencies in the commmunity the mother could talk to.

It is rarely the mother who abuses a child, usually some other adult living in the house. And if there is another adult living with the mother it raises the question is she actually solo and should she therefore be on the DPB.

Anonymous said...

u cant blame her family, there mayb circumstances that we dont know about anything could have happened there. she decided to keep this precious boy therefore jill should have stepped up. as for Low self esteem well if she knew that she should have done something about it! 6months is bullshit! telling this boi to stop following her or shell get "them" to give him a lag whats wrong with this bitch judge giv this bitch her lag and make her fucken undastand. i went to school with jill and she always was a scatterbrain cunt and if people went around there and she didnt feed or bath her son why not report it earlier! this behavior is appauling and sickening... all i can say to help resolve issues like this is to advise the commuinity to speak up... my heart goes out to her precious son and i hope and pray he is able to forget the torture he has indured and live a beautiful nourishing life!!!