- Applying for a passport in the name of a dead child is a seriously bad thing to do – even for someone in their 20s. I myself had some well known legal problems in my 20s, but was never this stupid.
- It was 26 years ago. By itself it does not make himself ineligible to be an MP, or even a law & order spokesperson.
- The decision by the court in 2005 to discharge without conviction was in my opinion correct, but the granting of name suppression was wrong. There should have been some consequences for the offending.
- David Garrett was right to disclose this to the ACT Party when he sought nomination.
- It was a incredibly bad call to not disclose it publicly prior to him entering Parliament – even more so considering his high profile on law & order issues.
- Thinking it would not eventually come out, reflects bad political judgement on behalf of both Hide and Garrett.
- As far as I know, a defendant is able to breach his own name suppression, and reveal his or her own court experiences. Using name suppression as a reason not to have revealed this earlier is a cop out.
- This, along with the Tongan assault conviction, seriously undermines Garrett’s ability to continue as law and order spokesperson. I’d put Heather into that portfolio, and move Garrett into other areas where he has a strong background such as industrial relations.
- Again, if this had been disclosed in 2008, I doubt it would have received more than a passing “Wow what a stupid thing to do when you were young”, and it would not be hurting ACT today, when they least need this.
228 Responses to “My thoughts on Garrett”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.