Mallard pleads not guilty

December 3rd, 2007 at 11:12 am by David Farrar

NZPA reports:

Trevor Mallard entered a not guilty plea when he appeared in the dock of Wellington District Court today to face a private assault prosecution

A status hearing has been set down for December 18. Also bail in the end was not opposed.

I’m surprised Mallard pleaded not guilty. I would have thought he wants it over and done with. On the other hand by pleading not guilty he forces the prosecution to prove their case, and if there are no first hand witnesses, then it may get thrown out.

As I have said before, I regard the private prosecution as a waste of court time. But citizens have the right to do these things.

mallarddock.JPG

This photo sent in by a reader.

UPDATE: The photo appears to in fact be taken by Kent Blechynden of the Dominion Post. It would be appreciated if in future people do not e-mail me photos taken from media websites, but just e-mail me the link. That way I know who to credit.

Tags:

94 Responses to “Mallard pleads not guilty”

  1. kehua (225 comments) says:

    A world first “the duck comes before the beak”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Graeme Edgeler (3,283 comments) says:

    citizens have the right to do these things

    Not in all that many other jurisdictions.

    bail in the end was not opposed

    I suspect bail was treated as it was so that the matter would be brought before a judge, in open court, instead of on a registrar’s list with no-one around.

    On the other hand by pleading not guilty he forces the prosecution to prove their case, and if there are no first hand witnesses, then it may get thrown out.

    If only there wasn’t also a televised confession.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Nick C (336 comments) says:

    I disagree, someone need to do something about the double standard that exists over the Labour party and physical assults. There was no point in opposing bail as Labours new laws got Chris Kahui bail, so Mallard would have had no trouble.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. tlkpnt (22 comments) says:

    You can almost guarantee that nothing will come of this trial – it is an absolute waste of time – Henare isn’t going to confirm anything in court and national wouldn’t risk letting him – it is a waste of time and a waste of money – if only the politicians were left alone long enough to run the country – and maybe if they weren’t pestered so much they would pass such ludicrous laws!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    “But citizens have the right to do these things.”

    which is exactly why it was done…. while citizens still have rights.

    Unfortunately for the minister, even if the EFB gets passed he will still have to face the charges since they were filed b4 the bill.

    I would think Helen would’ve ordered the case withdrwn on grounds of a election year if it was possible. I could see how this bill could supercede powers of the court.

    The PM would be almost absolute dictator in an election year.

    Which is why I don’t believe John Keys would have it completely killed.

    Lets remember reality and human nature.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. ghostwhowalks (377 comments) says:

    Double standard ?

    Remember the person assaulted by gerry brownlee didnt get any comfort from the police.
    He too took action in the court and got $6500 damages.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Johnboy (16,059 comments) says:

    tlkpnt Says:

    “Henare isn’t going to confirm anything in court”

    ” if only the politicians were left alone long enough to run the country – and maybe if they weren’t pestered so much they would pass such ludicrous laws!”

    I thought if called as a witness one was reqd. to tell the truth, silly me, that was before Liarbore started legislating.

    Sounds like the socialist dream: “Leave us alone to make all the laws that rule you serfs and we promise not to make silly ones”.
    Law of Common Sense perhaps. What planet are you from tlkpnt?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Johnboy (16,059 comments) says:

    Johnboy Says:

    What planet are you from tlkpnt?

    Silly me the red planet of course.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    Why don’t socialists just go to the red planet where they belong.

    I suspect there will be many upon many in the red place!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. BeShakey (405 comments) says:

    “Unfortunately for the minister, even if the EFB gets passed he will still have to face the charges since they were filed b4 the bill.”

    Can you explain to me what exactly the EFB has to do with this? What would have changed if this had happened after the EFB had been passed?

    “I would think Helen would’ve ordered the case withdrwn on grounds of a election year if it was possible. I could see how this bill could supercede powers of the court.”

    Helen can’t order cases withdrawn on any grounds. I’m sure the opposition and/or the media would be interested in any evidence you have of her doing this. On your second point, I’d be interested in hearing how this bill supercedes the powers of the court more than other bills have.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. ZenTiger (425 comments) says:

    Of course Mallard should be in court. Sue Bradford declared that when Police come around and investigate a parent for an alleged smacking incident, and the parent goes to court and gets found “not guilty” then the law is working.

    The fact that they get dragged away from work and the social stigma of being accused as a child abuser is irrelevant. The fact that time and resource is wasted compared to working through the backlog of serious offences is irrelevant. The law is working.

    Let’s get Mallard in front of the court for hours on end for his alleged abuse.

    In the words of Sue Bradford: “The law is working”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Craig Ranapia (1,915 comments) says:

    I’m surprised Mallard pleaded not guilty. I would have thought he wants it over and done with.

    … along with any chance of Helen letting her faithful attack-poodle return from the (well-appointed) dog house? Yeah right!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. george (388 comments) says:

    HELEN CLARK: “I just say that with something like this, I think everyone in public life – whether they are media personalities or a politician or whoever – we’re all vulnerable to someone deciding they will try a private prosecution and I think that is an issue of some concern,” she said on TVNZ’s Breakfast programme.

    In other words, someone has done something she doesn’t like and which could hurt her government – so we better change the law to stop it happening again. Can’t have people doing things that could lead to criticism of the govt.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. tlkpnt (22 comments) says:

    Firstly – I am not from the red planet – nor have I ever visited.
    The reason this case has been taken civilly is because the police can’t change someone if they have a reasonable belief that the case won’t end in conviction – obviously this was one of those times.

    MPs do have a job to do – let them do it – you have the chance to decide whether or not you like what they are doing at an election.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. george (388 comments) says:

    Further, a private prosecution is only heard if the court thinks it has merit, so what Clark is saying is “an issue of some concern” is courts deciding to hear a case they think has merit, when her own pro-Labour goon sqaud, led by Labour activist Howard Broad, decides it is not in the “public interest” (ie, Labour’s interest) to take a prosecution. Better make Howard Broad the sole decision-maker about what goes to court and what doesn’t. And given her govt consists mainly of criminals and potential criminals, better do it quick!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. george (388 comments) says:

    tlkpnt, don’t be naive. The reason Broad didn’t charge Mallard is because Mallard is a senior member of the Labour Party. This is the same reason Broad hasn’t charged Len Richards with assault with a megaphone.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. tlkpnt (22 comments) says:

    Len Richards maybe – but they majority of evidence available on Mallard is hear-say – I agree that the police don’t prosecute Labour members – this is reinforced by the fact that one Phillip Field left suddenly he was open to prosecution.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. nigel201065 (38 comments) says:

    Didn’t the ‘Ghost who walks’ tell everyone there was a witness or was that just a little white lie, but hay it’s just anoter one to add to the list

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Adam Smith (890 comments) says:

    I do not understand how Mallard , who has previously admitted biffing Henare, can plead not guilty, especially as Henare has previously been reported as denying he struck the first blow. So unless everyone involved including the population of New Zealand has suddenly developed collective amnesia, Mallard is guilty and has now by denying guilt been economical with the facts in court, when previously he only did that in Parliament.

    Perhaps he assumes that as an MP, a member of the highest court in the land, per one M. Cullen, he is somehow imune.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    “you have the chance to decide whether or not you like what they are doing at an election.”

    Uggghhhhh.

    They do so much damage btween the elections.

    The effects of their ill legislations perpetuate long after they’ve gone.

    I think tlknpnt you have been around 5 mins and your political analysis is just as deep.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Johnboy (16,059 comments) says:

    Before EFB: Mallard whacks big Tau, found guilty of common assault, first offence, diversion, sentenced to having to listen to John Keys DVD 100 times.

    After EFB: Mallard claims as a politician he had adopted a stance where his fist was attacked by big Tau’s nose. McCready found guilty of adopting a stance opposing Mallards stance without registering. After going to the Supreme Court when all other legal avenues were exhausted McCready fined $10,000, costs of $500,000 and bill for legal fees totalling $2,000,000.

    Yep sure is a great law that EFB.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. tlkpnt (22 comments) says:

    “You have the chance to decide whether or not you like what they are doing at an election.”
    – and I agree that they do so much damage between elections and that they impact of the bills that they pass extend far beyond a parliamentary term – however the above statement is correct – you do decide at an election – you vote for the policies that best suit your political views.
    – I wouldn’t vote Labour – and after seeing the mess this term I don’t think anyone should – they have really screwed up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Johnboy (16,059 comments) says:

    Adam Smith Says:

    “So unless everyone involved including the population of New Zealand has suddenly developed collective amnesia”

    Amnesia seems to be endemic among the Liars party, rest caught it from the boss I guess.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    Beshakey,,

    If that doesn’t answer your q , I never can.

    Refer now to Zen tiger.

    Take some deep breaths then count back from 5 to keep your mind occupied.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    Thuis pic of a leading parliamentary minister in court reeks of one word,,

    Accountability.

    Sure to send a shiver up the backs of every politician in this country.

    what a great picture of democracy in action.

    Just hope its not one of the last.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. ghostwhowalks (377 comments) says:

    Would there be a private prosecution of Key over his statuary declaration of living at Waimaku for the purposes of the electoral act.

    Chances of it succeding may be slight, but hey we get the money shot of him standing in the dock

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Johnboy (16,059 comments) says:

    tlkpnt Says:

    “- I wouldn’t vote Labour – and after seeing the mess this term I don’t think anyone should – they have really screwed up.”

    Hallelujah brother (or sister as the case may be) wellcome to the BLUE PLANET.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Bevan (3,923 comments) says:

    Would there be a private prosecution of Key over his statuary declaration of living at Waimaku for the purposes of the electoral act.

    Well if you want to bring a Private Prosecution, then go for it. It will be funny to see your case fall on its arse when they call the Clerk of the House as a witness…….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,887 comments) says:

    I take it Mallard is the one without the bullet proof vest?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    wonder if this was a press pic.

    who is legally allowed to photograph in court ?

    Is this restricted to television and the press.

    Are cell phones still permitted in court?

    I thought not after gang members photographed threatening pix of jury members.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Craig Ranapia (1,915 comments) says:

    I do not understand how Mallard , who has previously admitted biffing Henare, can plead not guilty

    I’m sure Mr. Edgeler will correct me if I’m way off base here but he can do so quite easily. A not guilty plea isn’t an assertion of innocence, but a specific answer to the charge for the purposes of a legal proceeding. If I’d received advice that there was a high probability that the case against me would collapse like a house of cards in a hurricane, you bet your arse I wouldn’t be pleading guilty either.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. big bruv (13,718 comments) says:

    Did anybody else notice Klark’s comments “the public bringing private prosecutions against public figures is of concern”

    Ladies and Gentlemen there is another law change coming.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. kisekiman (219 comments) says:

    If Mallard is guilty of cracking Tau on the, then he should take his lumps in court like anybody else would have to. Then these pricks will start to realise the laws they make are for EVERYONE.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. kisekiman (219 comments) says:

    If Mallard is guilty of cracking Tau on the jaw, then he should take his lumps in court like anybody else would have to. Then these pricks will start to realise the laws they make are for EVERYONE.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Adam Smith (890 comments) says:

    Ah silly me, so I can still plead Not Guilty whether I did it or not, on the presumption of innocence. Thank heavens some semblance of law still exists.

    Until that is Blessed Leader takes unto herself the role of deciding who may be prosecuted for what, as indeed the amendment to the TSA does as regards who is a terrorist. Helen gets to designate who is on the list. No doubt she has a little list. I am sure we’ll not be missed.

    Let us not forget my freedom fighter may be her terrorist. So under the amended TSA organised anti EFB protest could be deemed Terrorism!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Kimble (4,432 comments) says:

    CAPTION CONTEST!!!!!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    ok,, I’ll start.

    he’s thinking,,,,

    Wish the judge would look up so I can give him my evil EFB threatening stare.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. BeShakey (405 comments) says:

    “george Says:

    December 3rd, 2007 at 11:59 am
    tlkpnt, don’t be naive. The reason Broad didn’t charge Mallard is because Mallard is a senior member of the Labour Party. This is the same reason Broad hasn’t charged Len Richards with assault with a megaphone.”

    Really george? Do you have any evidence of this, or are you simply accusing a senior public servant of corruption without any evidence, in between complaining of the lack of respect shown by Labour for the independence of the public service?

    “After EFB: Mallard claims as a politician he had adopted a stance where his fist was attacked by big Tau’s nose. McCready found guilty of adopting a stance opposing Mallards stance without registering. After going to the Supreme Court when all other legal avenues were exhausted McCready fined $10,000, costs of $500,000 and bill for legal fees totalling $2,000,000.”

    Sorry hinamanu and Johnboy, I didn’t realise your opinions were supposed to be taken as a joke.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    “Duck with ruffled feathers or angel with missing wings? You be the judge”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Insolent Prick (417 comments) says:

    “I know I should be in handcuffs, but David Benson-Pope is borrowing them.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    Guard: “He better give my bloody toupee back!”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. george (388 comments) says:

    BeShakey: the pattern of behaviour, when it comes to prosecutions with a political angle, by the police since Robinson and Broad were put in charge (by Clark) is strongly suggestive of corruption, but you used the word not me. There was no justification for the police waiting until the statute of limitation applied on the pledge card issue, before declaring they wouldn’t have prosecuted Heather Simpson for corruption anyway BECAUSE THEY FEARED THE PROSECUTION WOULD HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL! They failed to even INVESTIGATE Phillip Field until Helen Clark indicated her “work” was done and they should start theirs, which just happened to be after Field criticised her for the first time. Now they have not charged Mallard with assault, even though the courts clearly think the charge has merit. Your use of the word corruption is probably spot on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. paua pattie (5 comments) says:

    you all may have been over this ground before – but i’d be interested to know the political leanings of the guy taking the prosecution .
    Also , while i am no fan of mallards ( the faux working class accent which tries too hard to say ” i’m just an average bloke) i think absolutely that henare probably deserved a smack on the kisser – he’s a smug arrogant bully boy…also.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. barry (1,317 comments) says:

    Re evidence. Mallard is on record in the Hansard that he did whack henare. No if he is deny this statement in court then he must be in breach of misleading parliament.

    Whatever happens over his guilty or not guilty plea, he is – I suspect – in the shit.

    And as anyone who has kept ducks – they are dirty filthy animals that crap all over the place.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. alli (5 comments) says:

    *Trev is religiously thinking* WWHD? … What Would Helen do? Hmm, well since I can’t legislate to make it all better, I suppose I’ll stick with deny, deny, deny…..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Inventory2 (10,291 comments) says:

    Sheesh – I hope that judge isn’t a Brethren!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. george (388 comments) says:

    Inventory2 – Surely the judge won’t be a brethren? According to Klark and the rest of them, the brethren shouldn’t be able to participate in civil society in this country. They are “chinless scarf-wearers” you see, and shouldn’t have the same civil rights as everyone else. They need to be silenced and abused.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. burt (8,232 comments) says:

    I smell some retrospective bashing validation being passed under urgency.

    Time for a snap election to end all of this nonsense. The govt is sham and should seek a fresh mandate if it wants to continue having one rule for them and another for the rest of us.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Johnboy (16,059 comments) says:

    BeShakey Says:

    “Sorry hinamanu and Johnboy, I didn’t realise your opinions were supposed to be taken as a joke.”

    Apology accepted BeShakey, we liberals realise how difficult it is for poor socialist cannon fodder such as you who have been through the liarbore indoctrination process to admit the error of your ways. tlkpnt has recanted and now you. What a great day.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. redbus (106 comments) says:

    Does anybody else think that the cop looks like Tau Henare, and the forehead in the foreground looks like Nathan Guy with glasses?????

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Buggerlugs (1,592 comments) says:

    I think the dock quite suits him.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    The cop looks like he’s got the EFB evil stare down to perfection.

    If it gets paessed Mallard may well assume this change to his features on a daily basis. Will go well with the new black uniform he is probably brushing down for 2009.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. democracymum (648 comments) says:

    And we thought Philip Field was going to be the first MP in the dock…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. tom hunter (4,729 comments) says:

    Really, it’s the photo we’ve been waiting for – just needs a little Photoshop work to put some others in beside him……..

    WHALEOIL. Copy. Now!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. BeShakey (405 comments) says:

    George – I used the word corruption to highlight the seriousness of the claims you were making, particularly given the apparent lack of solid evidence.

    In terms of the pledge card, remember that other parties, including National, fell foul of the same legislation, and none were charged. You may think that it was handled badly (I for one think lots of things about that situation could have been done better), but it is a big jump from doing a bad job of something, to active corruption.

    My understanding of the TPF situation was that he was being investigated at the time you claim he was not. Again, even if this is wrong, it is a big claim (without any evidence) to say the police were corrupt. The Nats may have alluded to Clark giving the police orders, but they haven’t done anything about it. Do you think they would hold on to any evidence they had of Clark giving the police orders not to investigate a Labour MP? If you insist it was badly investigated thats one thing (although he has been charged so it’s hard to see how you claim the investigation was that bad), but corruption is another.

    In the Mallard case you make a number of misleading comments. The police didn’t charge him, but I suspect there are any number of similar cases that don’t involve an MP where charges aren’t laid (e.g. there are few witnesses, the other party doesn’t want to lay a complaint). The court hasn’t made a statement about the merit of the case. It has agreed to hear it, which is a different thing.

    Again, if you have any real evidence of corruption I’m sure that the Nats (or any other opposition party), the Police, the media, and people here would be interested to hear them. So far you have simply thrown accusations around without solid evidence to support them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. ben (2,375 comments) says:

    He sure looks guilty.

    That cop looks like he’s waiting for a left hook at any moment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. ben (2,375 comments) says:

    David, isn’t the value of private prosecution that it is a check on government power? It is surely desirable that a lawbreaker who is well connected still faces the threat of prosecution even if the sitting government has instructed the police not to prosecute?

    Perhaps you see this particular case as frivolous, rather than generally.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. bwakile (757 comments) says:

    “I hope Mum turns up with the bail”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. democracymum (648 comments) says:

    Well given the state of free speech at the moment under labour it won’t be me!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. redbus (106 comments) says:

    He sure looks guilty.
    – HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

    OH MY GOD! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

    You look at a picture, and because he doensn’t look happy, he must be guilty!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. GPT1 (2,116 comments) says:

    Craig said:
    If I’d received advice that there was a high probability that the case against me would collapse like a house of cards in a hurricane, you bet your arse I wouldn’t be pleading guilty either.

    Quite right. The Informant is going to have to get its act together in order to advance this matter and I suspect from the prompt status hearing date that the Judge thinks there is not a lot going for the prosecution (either that or Wellington is unusually blessed with Court time).

    I was interested that there was no (or not successful) argument against allowing Mallard to be photographed in the dock especially given Taito’s argument about the powerful imagery of being photographed in such a way. Not the greatest picture for the campaign trail.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Johnboy (16,059 comments) says:

    Heard Helen has instructed Micky to pay Trevs legal bill from the cash mountain. Headline is: DUCK BILLS PARTY PURSE

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Johnboy (16,059 comments) says:

    Sorry spelt it wrong headline was: DUCK BILLED PARTY PURSE
    That scans better!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    DPF,,

    Demerit REDBUS.

    Apart from being utterly facetious he is hypocritically stating his belief in a higher being which contradicts communism.

    He knows very well only the perfect state is capable and worhty of being worshipped.

    I am sure his comrades would agree he needs disciplining.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. davemc (102 comments) says:

    It’s hardly a reader’s picture David. Unless the photographer, Kent Blenchyden of the DomPost, counts as one and sent to you the same one he put on the Stuff website.

    [DPF: I had no idea it was from Kent and the Dom Post - it was just emailed to me. I will credit.]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Inventory2 (10,291 comments) says:

    George said “Inventory2 – Surely the judge won’t be a brethren?”

    George – my comment about the Brethren was intended as an entry in the unofficial caption contest. I know the concept of an EB on the bench is inconceivable, but wouldn’t it be a Labour minister’s worst nightmare?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    “Not the greatest picture for the campaign trail

    GPTI,,

    Fantastic statement. He wil have to appear in the dock again in election year !!

    This after he had already been demoted. There’s simply no way he will win his seat back.

    After Saturdays turn out in Auckland I doubt Labour will win many seats there either. Hamiltons already lost. Winston won’t gain Tauranga back.
    The greens can’t be trusted in taking parents sovereignty off their children. (Which is a lesser step to NZ losing sovereignty).

    The reality is, National simply has no PR or credibilty damage what so ever.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. davemc (102 comments) says:

    It is surely desirable that a lawbreaker who is well connected still faces the threat of prosecution even if the sitting government has instructed the police not to prosecute?

    Just to rein this back into something approaching reality, in New Zealand the government can neither instruct the police not to prosecute anyone, nor instruct the police to prosecute. Nor can it instruct the police to investigate anyone, or not investigate. And this is as it should be.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Inventory2 (10,291 comments) says:

    DPF – thanks for the piccie – I’ve already posted it at http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/ and borrowed Kehua’s opening line for a heading. Hopefully other like-minded bloggers will use this image – after all, a Labour MP in the dock is not only newsworthy, it’s barely believable! In fact, one could argue that it’s “not in the public interest” NOT to circulate this image as widely as possible!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. Johnboy (16,059 comments) says:

    davemc Says:

    “Just to rein this back into something approaching reality, in New Zealand the government can neither instruct the police not to prosecute anyone, nor instruct the police to prosecute. Nor can it instruct the police to investigate anyone, or not investigate. And this is as it should be.”

    Subtle suggestions, raised eyebrows, tut tutting on the media of course are a different matter. NOT that any of our police would take the slightest notice of course!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Whaleoil (767 comments) says:

    Someone wished it and lo! The Photoshop provided.
    http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/?q=node/5413

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Frank. (607 comments) says:

    Johnboy: “in New Zealand the government can neither instruct the police not to prosecute anyone, nor instruct the police to prosecute. Nor can it instruct the police to investigate anyone, or not investigate.”

    You are incorrect, if in terms of the government, you include the Office of the Minister of Police instructing the Office of the Commissioner to file allegations of corruption among police

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Inventory2 (10,291 comments) says:

    WhaleOil’s onto it – there’s a much better piccie here!!!!

    http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/?q=node/5413

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. baxter (893 comments) says:

    Well it is a waste of time and thousands of dollars but I can’t see why status hearings are required whatever that is… All thats needed is to subpeona TAU, require him to relate what happened, that should establish a prima facie case which the Trev has to answer, and the Judge decides whether it fits the definition of assault, all the rest appears to be procrastination.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. george (388 comments) says:

    Johnboy – get into the real world – of course there are informal relationships between the beehive and the police which have been used to influence police operational and prosecution decisions. do you not understand how small and interlinked wellington is, especially under the current government

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Frank. (607 comments) says:

    Whaleoil: “The dinkum oil”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. dad4justice (8,137 comments) says:

    Haha, a duck in the dock , where is Donald when you need him ? Anybody got the camera footage , simple, verdict by lunchtime sir , next case please , time is tax payers money and all that crap , you know . Can’t wait for duck shooting myself and I will knock the bastards out with steel shot – f##k the tree huggers utopian creeps .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. davemc (102 comments) says:

    Well it is a waste of time and thousands of dollars but I can’t see why status hearings are required whatever that is…

    That’s right. In fact why bother with any court hearings at all. The mob has decided he is guilty, so just string him up

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. dad4justice (8,137 comments) says:

    Hang him – wonder how Helen is feeling today ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Johnboy (16,059 comments) says:

    Frank. Says:
    “Johnboy: “in New Zealand—”

    george Says:
    “Johnboy – get into the real world—”

    Read my post again guys I was quoting davemc the socialist in his 2.23 post.
    HE believes that the Government is above reproach.
    I believe they are riddled with corruption.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. cubit9f (356 comments) says:

    The photo says it all.

    A NZ cabinet minister in the dock in court. This is not a good look for NZ.

    It does, however, say something about the man. He must be sailing very close to the wind. What does he have to do to get the “don’t come Monday letter” following on from “the interview with out coffee with the leader.”

    The problem is that these people (and their sycophants) just see politics as a game whre point scoring is actually more important than governing.

    Oh for some real people to govern us. But I guess that they are just too busy doing real things.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Inventory2 (10,291 comments) says:

    cubit – if Dear Leader ever fires Mallard, it won’t be face-to-face – he’ll get the “Don’t come Monday” txt!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. dad4justice (8,137 comments) says:

    No the spelling on the text will read , hi clev trev dnt cum bac -bi -bi

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    all a mystery really.

    He apologised for his assault, then claims not guilty.

    Such a vivid picture of political hypocrisy. How can Helen seriously stand by him when he’s shot himself so publicly in the foot.

    No doubt planning his career options in the dock.

    Wopuld be the only honest thing he’s contemplated in a long time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. go NZ (59 comments) says:

    What is Clint Rickard doing in the dock beside Mallard.We’ll,it looks like him anyway.

    A Cabinet minister In The Dock–about time after 9 long years.

    Next up; Tennis Balls and Aunty Helen

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. bearhunter (853 comments) says:

    I think you should credit kent for his pic. Before the Dom decides to drop on you from a height, as they are wont to do when their pics are used and unattributed. And I suppose the same would go for all the other people uploading it onto their own blogs. I couldn’t give a rat’s arse what happens to Mallard, just worried that a great photograph might go uncredited.

    [DPF: I have now credited him. The people who e-mailed it to me (got it from two different people) did not say where it was from. I always credit where known and have asked people in future to e-mail me a link rather than just the photo so I can credit]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Grant McKenna (1,159 comments) says:

    kehua- your quip that “the duck comes before the beak”- nice one.

    But the civil prosecution way is something that I am familiar with- in South Africa it was only by civil prosecutions that the police were held legally accountable for killings.

    The claim there was also that there was no reasonable prospect of a conviction.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. davemc (102 comments) says:

    I think you should credit kent for his pic. Before the Dom decides to drop on you from a height, as they are wont to do when their pics are used and unattributed.

    Lots of blogs link to newspaper articles. Where this photo steps over the line is in David claiming it came from a reader. Unless the reader was Kent, that is demonstrably wrong.

    Even if some “reader” stole Kent’s photo from Stuff and emailed it to David, I would have thought David would know that only the media are allowed to take photos in court — any member of the public who tried to take a photo would be stopped by the judge in a flash.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. barry (1,317 comments) says:

    I have decided to send McCready $100 to support his actions (- and frankly everyone should do the same)

    Does anyone know the practice he is in – then i can find the adresss myself from there.

    Cheers,

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. toby1845 (194 comments) says:

    kehua – that was great! Take a bow.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. grumpyoldhori (2,362 comments) says:

    Why no screams for all politicians who have
    ever stolen money say over the last twenty
    years to be in the dock.

    Now lets see, Clark, Brash, Key , must all
    be guilty.
    So who is in favour of treating all politicians all
    the same as the public?

    Equal rights for religious cults, oh yes , I am
    in favour of that, no more not paying their
    share of the rates.
    Should the EB have responsibilities as well
    as rights?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Dazzaman (1,138 comments) says:

    Good fuckin’ job!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. davemc (102 comments) says:

    UPDATE: The photo appears to in fact be taken by Kent Blechynden of the Dominion Post. It would be appreciated if in future people do not e-mail me photos taken from media websites, but just e-mail me the link. That way I know who to credit.

    David you weren’t born yesterday. Only the media are allowed to take photos in court. It was obvious where the photo came from.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. freethinker (688 comments) says:

    Perception can be more powerful than fact. There is growing public perception that The Labour led Govt is corrupt, the Police are politicised and probably corrupt so these people need to put their side of the argument in a convincing way, that they have failed to do so strengthens the perception of corruption. QED.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.