We can all see it. Our Government can see it. They’ve made legislative changes, but the judiciary digs in. Our justice system bends over backwards for offenders while the people they’ve terrorised are told to “trust the process.” Officials love to talk about “risk management” and “rehabilitation,” but for victims, in particular women living with the consequences of male violence, those phrases are code for one thing: he’ll keep getting second chances until he kills someone.
The case of Nathan Boulter is a damning example. His history runs like a textbook of coercive, stalking, domestic violence, kidnapping and assault, and culminates in murder.
Nathan Boulter in 2011. Photo: JOHN SELKIRK
In 2010, after his ex-partner Nortessa Montgomerie fled his abuse, Boulter tracked her across the country to Great Barrier Island, broke into her home, and hid under her bed. When she returned home he assaulted the man she was with, kidnapped and assaulted her, and terrorised her for 38 hours.
The sentencing judge in this case flagged his “inability to empathise” and the high likelihood he’d reoffend. That right there should have meant serious measures would be taken to keep him from harming anyone else.
However, eight and a half years in prison didn’t fix a thing. It just put a violent man on pause. Nortessa Montgomerie begged the Parole Board not to let him out. She said, “I beg you not to put my life in this man’s hands again because this time I know he will take it.” He was released in September 2018.
Nortessa Montgomerie is taken to the Westpac chopper after her kidnapper Nathan Boulter was caught. Photo: Lawrence Smith
Not long after getting out of lock up, he set his sights on another woman. She was a friend of his sister and he became obsessed. She told him to leave her alone again and again, and like so many men who believe women are theirs to control, he refused. Between February 3rd and 16th 2020, Boulter sent more than 1300 communications to his victim. She responded to none and so he showed up at her house.
Boulter’s sister was also at the address and tried to defuse the situation, but he threatened to return with a sawn-off shotgun. His sister called the police and it was only when they arrested him that they learned of another incident a month earlier. Boulter had come to her house that time as well. He had verbally abused her before turning violent, punching her in the back of the head and kicking her in the back. He threatened “I will gut you like the little pig you are”.
This is what happens when a justice system is built to comfort offenders instead of protect victims. Men who should not be in our communities are released from prison. Our courts and parole processes are soaked in an offender-centric worldview. One that talks endlessly about “reintegration,” “second chances,” and “restorative approaches,” while the women left behind live in fear or end up dead.
Boulter was locked up again in July 2020, this time for just over two years for seven charges of threatening to kill, contravention of protection order, assault with intent to injure and causing harm by digital communication. But prison walls didn’t stop him from offending. Boulter told a guard he planned to kill his sister’s friend when he got out and he breached a protection order by sending her a letter.
Nonetheless, in March 2023, the New Zealand Parole Board decided to let him out early. He had proven himself to be dangerous, openly threatened to kill a woman upon his release, and our system still thought he could be “managed in the community.”
The Parole Assessment Report noted that “Mr Boulter has positive behaviour, and he has said that he is determined not to do this again…He knows when he is unwell and the impact on his behaviour.”
The Parole Board’s written decision really reads like a case study in offender-first ideology. So confident they were that Boulter “now has insight into his offending” and “any undue risk Mr Boulter poses can be met by way of special conditions.”
The Board’s faith in “managed risk” borders on delusion and within months it was shattered. Boulter breached conditions, escalated, and finally, he murdered a woman.
Nathan Boulter forced himself into Chanelle Waring’s house on the 20th July 2024 armed with a knife. In the two weeks prior he had called Waring 581 times despite her telling him to leave her alone. He stabbed her 55 times in front of her two teenaged children. He was arrested the next day and two days later pleaded guilty to murder.
Offender-first culture meant he was out and about living among potential victims as he meandered along on his rehabilitation journey holding a grenade with the pin pulled out. It’s the same warped empathy that sees judges wringing their hands over “the offender’s background” and doling out home detention and sentencing discounts, while victims are expected to forgive, forget, and stay silent. The balance has been broken for decades.
To be fair, this Government has begun to fix this. Important reforms are underway to put victims at the centre of our justice system. They’ve brought back Three Strikes law, brought in new stalking and harassment laws, and given control to victims when it comes to their offender’s name suppression.
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith received petition for stalking law with cross party support. Photo: RNZ / Lillian Hanly
But there is resistance from the judiciary and the Parole Board. They lecture us about “judicial independence” while presiding over a system that keeps letting dangerous men walk free. Their independence has become insulation from reality. If they don’t sort it out there will need to be more legislative intervention.
The uncomfortable truth is that our justice system is simply built around the offender. Parole hearings focus on what the prisoner says about their “rehabilitation journey.” The state invests in reintegration plans, counselling sessions, and drug programmes… all good things, in theory. But where is the same energy for the women who live in fear? Where is the protection for those who know that, sooner or later, the man who hurt them will be back on the street with a “risk management plan” and a ticking clock?
The Parole Board gambled on Boulter’s compliance. They trusted he would take his meds. They wrote conditions that assumed he’d avoid triggers and stay sober. They told themselves that an ankle monitor and a probation officer would be enough. It wasn’t. He was a known danger to women, and yet the system treated him as a man ready for another chance. Again. The result was catastrophic.
When a released offender kills, there must be independent, public investigations, not the usual internal whitewash. The public deserves to see who made the decision, what information they had, and why they ignored the warnings. Because at this point, these are conscious choices.
Right now, our justice system comforts itself with forms, checklists, and paperwork. “Assessment done.” “Conditions set.” “Release granted.” When a known violent offender is freed and another woman dies, it cannot be framed as an unavoidable tragedy. It’s a result of the decisions made and red flags ignored.
If we are serious about justice, it’s time to flip the balance. Parole decisions must start with one question: will this release endanger the community? Will this offender be a threat to every woman he encounters? Not, “is he ready to reintegrate?” but “can the public, and particularly women, actually be safe from him?”
We need recall powers that are immediate and decisive. We need stalking and harassment treated as the deadly red flags they are, not as minor nuisances. We need a justice system that sees coercive control for what it is; the prelude to homicide. And above all, we need accountability when Parole Boards and agencies get it wrong.
The Government has drawn a line by prioritising victims. Now the judiciary needs to catch up. Judges and Parole Board members must stop treating justice like therapy for criminals and start treating it like protection for citizens. Nathan Boulter’s name should haunt every policymaker, judge, and bureaucrat who still talks about “managing risk” instead of stopping it. Chanelle Waring’s name should remind us what’s at stake. Because as long as our justice system keeps centring offenders, women will keep paying the price.
Ani O'Brien comes from a digital marketing background, she has been heavily involved in women's rights advocacy and is a founding council member of the Free Speech Union. This article was originally published on Ani's Substack Site and is published here with kind permission.
Nathan Boulter in 2011. Photo: JOHN SELKIRK
In 2010, after his ex-partner Nortessa Montgomerie fled his abuse, Boulter tracked her across the country to Great Barrier Island, broke into her home, and hid under her bed. When she returned home he assaulted the man she was with, kidnapped and assaulted her, and terrorised her for 38 hours.
The sentencing judge in this case flagged his “inability to empathise” and the high likelihood he’d reoffend. That right there should have meant serious measures would be taken to keep him from harming anyone else.
However, eight and a half years in prison didn’t fix a thing. It just put a violent man on pause. Nortessa Montgomerie begged the Parole Board not to let him out. She said, “I beg you not to put my life in this man’s hands again because this time I know he will take it.” He was released in September 2018.
Nortessa Montgomerie is taken to the Westpac chopper after her kidnapper Nathan Boulter was caught. Photo: Lawrence Smith
Not long after getting out of lock up, he set his sights on another woman. She was a friend of his sister and he became obsessed. She told him to leave her alone again and again, and like so many men who believe women are theirs to control, he refused. Between February 3rd and 16th 2020, Boulter sent more than 1300 communications to his victim. She responded to none and so he showed up at her house.
Boulter’s sister was also at the address and tried to defuse the situation, but he threatened to return with a sawn-off shotgun. His sister called the police and it was only when they arrested him that they learned of another incident a month earlier. Boulter had come to her house that time as well. He had verbally abused her before turning violent, punching her in the back of the head and kicking her in the back. He threatened “I will gut you like the little pig you are”.
This is what happens when a justice system is built to comfort offenders instead of protect victims. Men who should not be in our communities are released from prison. Our courts and parole processes are soaked in an offender-centric worldview. One that talks endlessly about “reintegration,” “second chances,” and “restorative approaches,” while the women left behind live in fear or end up dead.
Boulter was locked up again in July 2020, this time for just over two years for seven charges of threatening to kill, contravention of protection order, assault with intent to injure and causing harm by digital communication. But prison walls didn’t stop him from offending. Boulter told a guard he planned to kill his sister’s friend when he got out and he breached a protection order by sending her a letter.
Nonetheless, in March 2023, the New Zealand Parole Board decided to let him out early. He had proven himself to be dangerous, openly threatened to kill a woman upon his release, and our system still thought he could be “managed in the community.”
The Parole Assessment Report noted that “Mr Boulter has positive behaviour, and he has said that he is determined not to do this again…He knows when he is unwell and the impact on his behaviour.”
The Parole Board’s written decision really reads like a case study in offender-first ideology. So confident they were that Boulter “now has insight into his offending” and “any undue risk Mr Boulter poses can be met by way of special conditions.”
The Board’s faith in “managed risk” borders on delusion and within months it was shattered. Boulter breached conditions, escalated, and finally, he murdered a woman.
Nathan Boulter forced himself into Chanelle Waring’s house on the 20th July 2024 armed with a knife. In the two weeks prior he had called Waring 581 times despite her telling him to leave her alone. He stabbed her 55 times in front of her two teenaged children. He was arrested the next day and two days later pleaded guilty to murder.
Offender-first culture meant he was out and about living among potential victims as he meandered along on his rehabilitation journey holding a grenade with the pin pulled out. It’s the same warped empathy that sees judges wringing their hands over “the offender’s background” and doling out home detention and sentencing discounts, while victims are expected to forgive, forget, and stay silent. The balance has been broken for decades.
To be fair, this Government has begun to fix this. Important reforms are underway to put victims at the centre of our justice system. They’ve brought back Three Strikes law, brought in new stalking and harassment laws, and given control to victims when it comes to their offender’s name suppression.
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith received petition for stalking law with cross party support. Photo: RNZ / Lillian Hanly
But there is resistance from the judiciary and the Parole Board. They lecture us about “judicial independence” while presiding over a system that keeps letting dangerous men walk free. Their independence has become insulation from reality. If they don’t sort it out there will need to be more legislative intervention.
The uncomfortable truth is that our justice system is simply built around the offender. Parole hearings focus on what the prisoner says about their “rehabilitation journey.” The state invests in reintegration plans, counselling sessions, and drug programmes… all good things, in theory. But where is the same energy for the women who live in fear? Where is the protection for those who know that, sooner or later, the man who hurt them will be back on the street with a “risk management plan” and a ticking clock?
The Parole Board gambled on Boulter’s compliance. They trusted he would take his meds. They wrote conditions that assumed he’d avoid triggers and stay sober. They told themselves that an ankle monitor and a probation officer would be enough. It wasn’t. He was a known danger to women, and yet the system treated him as a man ready for another chance. Again. The result was catastrophic.
When a released offender kills, there must be independent, public investigations, not the usual internal whitewash. The public deserves to see who made the decision, what information they had, and why they ignored the warnings. Because at this point, these are conscious choices.
Right now, our justice system comforts itself with forms, checklists, and paperwork. “Assessment done.” “Conditions set.” “Release granted.” When a known violent offender is freed and another woman dies, it cannot be framed as an unavoidable tragedy. It’s a result of the decisions made and red flags ignored.
If we are serious about justice, it’s time to flip the balance. Parole decisions must start with one question: will this release endanger the community? Will this offender be a threat to every woman he encounters? Not, “is he ready to reintegrate?” but “can the public, and particularly women, actually be safe from him?”
We need recall powers that are immediate and decisive. We need stalking and harassment treated as the deadly red flags they are, not as minor nuisances. We need a justice system that sees coercive control for what it is; the prelude to homicide. And above all, we need accountability when Parole Boards and agencies get it wrong.
The Government has drawn a line by prioritising victims. Now the judiciary needs to catch up. Judges and Parole Board members must stop treating justice like therapy for criminals and start treating it like protection for citizens. Nathan Boulter’s name should haunt every policymaker, judge, and bureaucrat who still talks about “managing risk” instead of stopping it. Chanelle Waring’s name should remind us what’s at stake. Because as long as our justice system keeps centring offenders, women will keep paying the price.
Ani O'Brien comes from a digital marketing background, she has been heavily involved in women's rights advocacy and is a founding council member of the Free Speech Union. This article was originally published on Ani's Substack Site and is published here with kind permission.
2 comments:
Nathan Boulder needs to humanely euthanised NOW.
I don't disagree, Ani, but juxtapose the likes of Nathan Boulter with Scott Watson. There's something wrong with our system and those that analyse and administer it.
Post a Comment