Previous post hidden
October 5th, 2010 at 5:03 pm by David FarrarI named in the previous post the two men charged with electoral fraud offences, in relation to the Auckland Council elections.
Since that post was done, they have appeared in court. They applied for name suppression and the Judge declined it.
They then appealed that decision to the High Court. As is usual, they got interim name suppression for 48 hours so the appeal can be heard. While I understand this is normal, I think in this case it is a bad call as another 48 hours of voting will carry on, without people knowing the identities of those charged – something which could affect how they vote. By the time they are named, it will be too late to post your vote in probably.
Those online will know, as they probably read it before it was deleted. But those watching the TV News tonight won’t get to find out who it is, and those reading the Herald tomorrow morning won’t get told the identity either.
However I don’t want to share a cell with Whale Oil, so I am respecting the law and have hidden the previous post and comments. I will make them public again once name suppression is lifted.
Very ironic that this happens on the day the Government announces it will be harder to get name suppression.
Related posts:
- The Singh electoral fraud trial
- Ex MP charged with indecent assault
- Previous pledge card funding
- Beware the lawyer’s words
October 5th, 2010 at 5:04 pm
Thank God then for The Whale
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:05 pm
Given the strong public interest in naming the accused, surely the High Court can expedite a hearing?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:06 pm
I’d happily share a cell with Whale on this. My father risked his life to defend the democracy these bastards are trying to pervert, it’s not asking much of me to risk my freedom. But I don’t have my own blog and will respect your right to retreat, DPF.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:07 pm
This is an outrageous politically motivated fraud.
How can a judge allow name suppression so close to an election??
If this was Chicago maybe.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:07 pm
No Right Turn has redacted their post….
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:12 pm
No Right Turn has redacted their post….
Which never named them (that was on twitter, which has also been redacted). But I too would prefer to be careful.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:12 pm
NRT will be breaking out the bubbles tonight to celebrate another lefty perversion of democracy in favour of the Labour party.
[DPF: On the contrary NRT has condemned the actions of those involved several times - regardless of their affiliation]
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:16 pm
So, suppose the guy is ultimately found guilty. What happens then? I assume he would be kicked out of the council (if he made it in), so is it just tough luck for everyone who voted for him? Or would they hold a new election?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:17 pm
@Redbaiter: Like it or not, (and I certainly don’t) the accused exercised their legal right to appeal to the High Court. Yes, I’ll be pissed off if these two run out the clock and deny thousands of voters who might not want to reward (alleged) electoral fraudsters with their votes but I’d also prefer the judiciary don’t make up the law as they go along.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:18 pm
The Judge has carried out the wishes of his paymasters
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:19 pm
Why pull a post that doesn’t name them?
And these guys are actually innocent untill they are duely found guilty. My only concern is will i have enough pocorn to watch this splash all over labour with the mess being bigger the longer they try to hide it.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:19 pm
A good post on American attack ads over at http://whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:19 pm
lastmanstanding thats a very silly comment. The judge has follwed the law. As much as you might not like it, thats his JOB.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:21 pm
The imminent election is grounds for the appeals judge to refuse name suppression.
What about the VOTING PUBLIC’S right to know???
Disgraceful.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:23 pm
And the appeal to the high court automatically gets them 48 hours. Or would you prefer that the judge just makes the rules up as he goes?
Red, less cafine more regard for the law.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
The Judge has carried out the wishes of his paymasters
District Court Judge Heather Simpson most certainly has — she’s got four million “paymasters” who should expect her to apply the law, not pull it out of her arse. BTW, Justice Simpson declined the applications for name suppression but their lawyer was instructed to appeal to the High Court. As they’re entitled to do, and she can’t just turn around and say “fuck off, numpty.”
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
By trying to make information that is already in the public realm retroactively-secret, the judge is doing his best to bring the law in to disrepute. Can he be charged with contempt for his own court?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
What’s disgraceful about following our current laws? It may be unfair on the electorate, but it’s within our laws so has to be accepted. The judge is doing the job he is supposed to do.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:26 pm
“And the appeal to the high court automatically gets them 48 hours.”
I doubt it is fully automatic. There would be grounds for an exception and there is no better reason for an exception than in this case.
(PS- Go away George you non-comprehending bandwidth wasting moron.)
[DPF: 10 demerits. Calling other posters morons turns threads into flame wars]
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:26 pm
Left or right it makes little difference to most of you. You just get pissy when you don’t get the result you want.
Grow up.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
Unjust laws should not be accepted.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
CORRECTTION; According to Checkpoint one accused was granted name suppression, the other had his application declined and is appealing.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:30 pm
Bannana a law is NOT unjust because you didn’t get your desired result. One day you might be unfairly on the recieving end of the justice systems complete and undivided attention and you’ll pray to god that the judge does follow the law and you get to be innocent untill proven otherwise.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:34 pm
So if somebody stumbled on Osama bin Laden living in some awful hellhole like Wainuiomata or Palmerston North and the police paraded him at a press conference then he could go to court and apply for name suppression. And then appeal and be granted automatic name suppression for 48 hours and it’d be illegal for anyone to talk about his arrest? And absolutely illegal for any NZ based web site to continue to host material that suggested that he might have anything to do with 911?
Once information is made public it is stupid to try and suppress it. It just makes the law look like an ass.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:35 pm
Murray- to say the imminent election has no bearing on this case is drawing an extremely long bow. By you and any real judge.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:36 pm
Murray says:
We’ve already seen the perfectly reasonable defence of provocation denied an accused person simply because one defendant used it in an unreasonable way and the protofascist government (slightly less protofascist than the last one, but not so as you’d notice) used it as a convenient excuse to dismantle part of our law which helps ensure a fair trial.
Let’s not let them use the gaming of the system by these loathsome fraudsters as an excuse to chip away another piece… though it seems like the aptly-named suburban solicitor Power needed no excuse anyway.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:37 pm
How much fraudulent activity is required before the Minister for Local Gummint can declare the vote to be ultra whatever and set up a new election? Just for the Auckland region.
Now wouldn’t that get the Lyen Brown crew wailing and gnashing their teeth?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:39 pm
I wonder if Phil Goff will release a statement shortly stating his outrage at how John Key has let us down again…
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:41 pm
What would be very interesting to know is who funds their legal expenses. Any chance the mother ship will help them out (no doubt standing behind an “innocent until proven guilty” line if found out)? Is there any way to find out?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:43 pm
Is the accused’s relationship to a major political party also suppressed?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:44 pm
“[DPF: 10 demerits. Calling other posters morons turns threads into flame wars]”
How about some damn consistency then so we know where we stand??? I will refrain from using any insulting terms if the penalties are regularly applied. Look at what passed without comment or penalty earlier today.
Example 1) Heh…Shouldn’t you be checking on your daughter and six fingered grand kids locked in the basement ?
Example 2) Bro…I couldn’t give a shit about your cracka ass ancestors, but if they ever clear felled native trees for farming then their muthafucking white asses raped the land as far as i’m concerned… and you can stick your racist bigot shit right up yo arse ya dumass redneck bitch.
Did anyone complain about my post? Who was it, because whoever they are they’re damn politically motivated frauds. Especially if it was Pete George who makes a specialty of calling everyone a liar without any kind of reason..
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
Are there certain things we can’t comment about now? I posted a link to a story on TVNZ last night in the GD thread and it wouldn’t accept it because it was “spam”. I know it was the link because I did a trial post whci was then not accepted when I added the link.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:47 pm
Adolf Fiinkensein asks:
A Minister with the power to declare an election outcome ultra vires? No thanks! Can you imagine what H1 and H2 would have done with that?!
And besides, why subject the many hundreds of honest candidates to weeks more electioneering expenses? Simply declare all votes for Mr ____ (for his supper) invalid and count the rest. It’s not like a general election, where that would entirely invalidate the vote of a person who’d ticked Mr ____ (for his supper) as their other choices would still stand.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:47 pm
“[DPF: 10 demerits. Calling other posters morons turns threads into flame wars]”
And Trevor Mallard can brawl in Parliament without demerits. FFS this is beyond belief.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:48 pm
[DPF: 10 demerits. Calling other posters morons turns threads into flame wars]
WTF????? 10 demerits for calling someone a Moron????
Gee how many were you planning for these:
1. Bro…I couldn’t give a shit about your cracka ass ancestors, but if they ever clear felled native trees for farming then their muthafucking white asses raped the land as far as i’m concerned… and you can stick your racist bigot shit right up yo arse ya dumass redneck bitch.
2. Throw a bucket of shit on him and his car as he left the TVNZ car park, film it and youtube it.
3. Heh…Shouldn’t you be checking on your daughter and six fingered grand kids locked in the basement ?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 5:49 pm
This whole mess is just getting worser and worserer.
New Zealand Police and D.S. Gutry are the only parties deserving credit and our thanks so far.
OK. I assume the mongrels who have rorted our system have also rorted the election of the
mayor of the new super city as well as the local representative.
In light of the suppression and the fact that some voters, in their ignorance of the parties concerned,
will still be voting for someone they would never dream of supporting had they been aware, and unless
we can be sure that all rorted votes have been deleted, this election should be abandoned and the whole
thing run again in an honest manner.
I trust most New Zealanders will realise how serious this matter is and that if convicted, these mongrels
Vote:will get a lesson they, and all of us will never forget.
October 5th, 2010 at 5:50 pm
David needs scapegoats just look at the demerit board. Where is big bruv Farrar? pete george is sickening.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Rex Widerstrom –
“I’d happily share a cell with Whale on this. My father risked his life to defend the democracy these bastards are trying to pervert, it’s not asking much of me to risk my freedom. But I don’t have my own blog and will respect your right to retreat, DPF.
Rex try –
https://www.blogger.com/start
“We’ve worked really hard to make it really easy for you. Just click the link below, and you can be part of the phenomenon that’s transforming web and media to a participatory activity in less than five minutes. Seriously.
Vote:What will happen then? Who knows. It might be fun, though. [Well, maybe]
And remember: Blogger is totally free, and if you have trouble, [most likely!] just click the Help button from any screen, and you can find the answer you’re looking for [maybe not] —or even ask our dedicated support staff.”
October 5th, 2010 at 6:21 pm
Heh. TV3 shows a photo of a man, with a thick beard, and turban, with his face blurred standing next to Len Brown…
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:24 pm
TVNZ had a particular artful way of getting around the name suppression.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:27 pm
who knows, they might be innocent.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:35 pm
I read your now hidden post and as far as I can remember you didn’t state he was one of the was arrested only that you had heard that he was. Given name suppression has been granted how can you possibily be able to confirm you named the right person ? You probably are liable for slander if you have it wrong but that doesn’t change just because you have hidden the post. To my way of thinking you have a very solid defence until crown law or who ever is responsible informs you that it is the person you have named. At that point you would have to hide the earlier blog. Given my total lack of legal training I am not recommending this, would love to hear from a lawyer over this.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:38 pm
excusesofpuppets stop it, this isn’t a humour post.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:45 pm
Yvette:
Bah… I wasn’t really ready to commit to this (blogging I mean) despite having a platform ready, because the main site to which it’s attached is a fair way from readiness to launch. But as you’ve called my bluff, I shall take a deep breath, and…
http://shiftfocus.com.au/blog/2010/10/some_things_are_worth_fighting_for/
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:46 pm
Excuse me for saying this but
a) when will Labour stop molesting democracy?
and
b) when will voters stop rewarding Labour with their votes for doing so?
It is an outrage that anybody gives their vote to a party that so disrespects it.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
Rex W>Simply declare all votes for Mr ____ (for his supper) invalid and count the rest.
It’s a multi-part election. You might disqualify the candidate but would that still allow hundreds of fraudulent votes for Len Brown and other Labour Party candidates to stand? I think it would be safe to find and disregard the ballot papers for all people falsely registered at the addresses in question. But how deep does this corruption run in the Auckland Labour Party? Have the Police managed to find all the falsely registered voters?
According to the media, Brown is likely to win the Auckland mayoralty. I really don’t understand why voters would take South Auckland Labour Party values, such as KFC bribes, fraudulent voter registration, rorting of expenses, and immigration favours in return for bribes and make these the values that the supercity will be built on.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:52 pm
b) when will voters stop rewarding Labour with their votes for doing so?
When its becomes illegal to offer blatant bribery under the guise of an electoral promise.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:53 pm
davidp:
Good point. I was talking about votes from people who are real, who really live in the electorate, and who are really entitled to vote. The unqualified votes would need to be weeded out.
Oh, totally. But doesn’t it go deeper than that? I can’t imagine they’d risk getting caught for 20 or 40 or however many pretend people they thought they could get away with saying lived in one house.
Simple. We come here and debate and we see rightys and leftys alike putting forward all sorts of justifications for their positions and we delude ourselves that that’s what is happening beyond the blogosphere. But the sad fact is that most people stand in the polling booth and their over-riding question is “what’s in it for me” and the answer to that question guides their pencil, regardless of who it is they end up voting for
Bevan:
At which time voter turnout will plummet…
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:53 pm
There will be crooks who get involved with all political parties. We in the Greens try to screen them out, and I am sure all others do too (ACT possibly excepted, given Garrett being parachuted into No 5 despite his hypocrisy).
But Parties can’t check everything. At this stage it looks like Labour may have been stung by a crook in their midst. They also had Taito Phillip Field. National had Roger MacClay, and (although he was never convicted, but as he is dead now, I can say it) Ray La Varis.
This should not be a party political discussion, as some have chosen to try to make it, but a campaign to root out and discard crooks in all political parties.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:54 pm
Judge and Jury online via blogs. The perfect world. Think of the taxpayer savings.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:58 pm
“a campaign to root out and discard crooks in all political parties” would leave nobody in the debating chamber in the beehive. Silly toady.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 6:59 pm
” a campaign to root out and discard crooks in all political parties.”
Given the Watermelon party’s involvement in the Climate Change fraud, they’d be completely out of business.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:00 pm
At which time voter turnout will plummet…
Good.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:02 pm
James Stephenson said
That’s already been disclosed by the president of the party with which one accused allegedly has a relationship. I wonder if the police will visit Mr Little in the dark of night as they did with Cameron Slater.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:05 pm
Not according to http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2010/10/previous_post_hidden.html#comment-748023
TV media in particular are very loose with images of suppressed people.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:06 pm
Rex
Do our laws of name suppression reach to Australia. Good on you standing up for democracy – and the right of disclosure. Seeing as Yvette challenged Rex to rival Whaleoil for a spot in the jail cell, he as responded with –
http://shiftfocus.com.au/blog/2010/10/some_things_are_worth_fighting_for/
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:08 pm
David – I hope you werent indicating anything about the cultural and or racial aspects of these two guys. I mean in the light of some racial questions yesterday we can no doubt see many complaints coming form the race relations office and all those hand wringers who will no doubt ignore the corruption thats is normal where these two come from………….
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:08 pm
I wonder what Fred Astair would make of this – probably break into song……
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
Murray.
I wasn’t referring to Mr Unseen in particular but it raises a question in my mind, should all people receive name suppression untill found guilty? or should people be free to write what they please even if it is the most vile untruthful lies.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
shady:
Thanks. They reach here if the NZ Police get an extradition order, which I’m sure the Australians will be delighted to co-operate with them over. After all they worked hand-in-hand over the last set of bogus, politically motivated charges they hit me with.
As I said in the post you’ve kindly linked to, I hope the next cell has a privacy screen by the toilet, specially if I’m sharing with Whale… the last one didn’t
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:14 pm
From Auckland? Or, you’re not making assumptions about them being born somewhere else are you? And if they were where that would be, and what corruption may be like there?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:14 pm
@ Grumpy; I think it was actually Gene Kelly who was Singing in the Rain … not Fred Astaire
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:19 pm
I2:
Meh, Kelly was okay but I tend to like the Capenters. Remember their hits? I specially like the one that goes:
Sing, sing a song
Sing out loud
Sing out strong
Sing of good things, not bad
Sing of happy, not sad.
Often hum it to myself as I smile benignly at the 40 relatives I have living in my mailbox.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:23 pm
Minor technicality… I believe Rex’s blog is outside of jurisdiction and so unfortunatley no chance for him to share a cell with Whale, BUT posting the link on a NZ based site might be considered publication in NZ and so DPF might be up for it! Not entirely sure on the law though…
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:26 pm
More bloody name suppression!
I’m completely sikh of this!
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:29 pm
Hagues…
Whale’s blog is, I think, hosted in the US (I could be wrong… no doubt he’ll be along to correct me). It does mean they have greater problems getting an order to get it shut down or the post deleted than if it were in NZ, but as for charging the publisher, they can do so and then seek an extradition warrant.
Or, judged by their form when I become a nuisance, they won’t pursue the actual case but will concoct something else entirely. They’ve already tried just about every indictable offence in the statutes… which means you should expect me to be charged with murder at any moment
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:35 pm
Well done anyway Rex. Gutsy.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:36 pm
I can relate Rex. The keystones are coming bad boy
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:37 pm
David, you might want to sort out your RSS feeds. It’s still accessible through Google Reader.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:38 pm
This Pete George has got to be a piece of work doesn’t he ?
Vote:Check out his post at 7.14
His modus operendi is always the same pittifull game. Drag a red herring, then either,
comment on it himself or ask inane questions about it.
So far he has 7,439 tries.
Each one more pathetic and laughable than the one before.
I ‘ve got to say its actually quite funny.
Question is, why would he bother ?
I expect he will now report me to big daddy for being nasty to him.
October 5th, 2010 at 7:40 pm
big daddy thinks pete george is a test tube experiment gone wrong.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 7:46 pm
Shady at 7.06.
Vote:It is contributions like your’s that make this the best blog. Good on yer, mate.
October 5th, 2010 at 7:50 pm
I see a postal worker had a panic over the workload with ballot papers and destroyed the mail.
I can see how stuffing 90 ballot papers in a singhgle letterbox could create issues there.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 8:08 pm
shady – Seeing as Yvette challenged Rex to rival Whaleoil for a spot in the jail cell
You loosely throw my name around – but I just indicated where Rex could in 5 minutes acquire a blog, since he didn’t have one [but now apparently has].
So I would be upset that my hopefully helpful comment to assist someone begin a blog may be misconstrued as to be an accessory before the fact, since the cell could well be quite crowded by the time people are finished, as more instrumental than any assistance I offered, there are those now in this thread [to my limited understanding] who have actually indicated the person’s name : 6 times, but misspelt; 3 times by Cloze Exercise, and two by reference to other sources – including Rex, davidp, JamesP, grumpy, inventory2 and perhaps metcalph, and m@tt, and DPF [surely accessory, for providing this venue]
Stop press: and slightlyrightly – that’s nine, not much room for Whale Oil
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 8:11 pm
If we’re not allowed to take our laptops into the cell with us, there’s going to be a helluva lot of blog withdrawl symptoms
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 8:16 pm
well I guess I’m just a product of the kiwi edumacation system……….my speling sux.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 8:42 pm
@ Redbaiter 6:59 pm
Yeah, deny the science. Is that really a good place to start ‘baiter? Apart from the fact that you are way off thread, which is about electoral corruption, not about science and/or political party policies.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 8:45 pm
You guys really need to Shift your Focus away from such combustible topics, otherwise you’re all likely to get badly singed. And as for you guys with bad spelling skills, you are nothing more than morons. I just hope your comprehension abilities are better than other morons who suffer from this inadequacy.
But I’m sure you’ll all be very happy together. At least Rex will be able to sing you all to sleep at night
“Sing, sing a song … “
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 8:47 pm
All we need now is Johnboy …
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 8:50 pm
“which is about electoral corruption”
Fear mongering ain’t electoral corruption??
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 8:59 pm
Hey, Pete George,
Vote:Cat got your tongue mate ?
Have your 7450 ift try.
Cant be any worse.
October 5th, 2010 at 8:59 pm
Yvette – sorry – didn’t mean to be loose – bad for my reputation!
That cell is looking mighty cosy!
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:03 pm
Yvette 8:47 pm,
I’ve been wondering where your French speaking boyfriend had gotten to, Yvette.
Johnboy must be up in them thar hills tending his sheep – “Mon ami my little sheepie”.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:05 pm
Interesting article
http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=120720&fm=psp,nwl
Not sure which blog but might be KB – although your post was before the name suppression was granted.
This issue raises some interesting questions about name suppression in the world of electronic media where names of offenders can be distributed well before a name suppression order is put in place. Newspapers (printed versions) are unable to do this.
Another interesting item was the coverage on TVNZ tonight where the reporter stood in front of a sign showing various candidates and lo and behold one of the names had been masked out. So they suppressed the name but not the identity. I will await the court case – yeah right.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:13 pm
Yvette>3 times by Cloze Exercise, and two by reference to other sources – including Rex, davidp, JamesP, grumpy, inventory2 and perhaps metcalph, and m@tt, and DPF
Eh? What have I done? I don’t want to share a cell with all of you since, statistically speaking, two or three of you will be snorers.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:20 pm
Yvette seems to be forgetting that they segregate prisoners by sex. Unless there’s something of a personal nature she’s holding back… in which case I have some more lyrics for you:
I know all there is to know about the crying game
I’ve had my share of the crying game
First there are kisses, then there are sighs
And then before you know where you are, you’re saying goodbye
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:21 pm
@ davidp – that’s one demographic that I most certainly fit
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:22 pm
@ Toad
What a completely idiotic statement. You just prove you, and your party of extremists, know nothing. I’m not surprised.
David Garrett is not, and was never, a “crook”. He is not convicted of a crime in this country. A common assault in Tonga many years ago is barely mentionable.
Maybe you mean being a hypocrite is akin to a crook. If so, then Jeanette Fitzsimons is a crook for lighting fires during a fire ban and releasing carbon into the atmosphere.
Sue Bradford has many criminal convictions in New Zealand. Is she a crook?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:25 pm
davidp (1,373) Says:
October 5th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
Rex W>Simply declare all votes for Mr ____ (for his supper) invalid and count the rest.
You of course were just arbitrarily keen to turn things into a literacy learning opportunity – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloze_test
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:30 pm
We should do a joint name suppression flaunt. If 1000 people put a sign on their front lawn saying “…….. Party member …… ….. has been arrested for electoral fraud.”, are the authorities going to bother with us all?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:30 pm
Yvette… Bugger! I’m going to do a stretch in the pokey just because I quoted Rex. That’s a pretty shit way of using up my 15 minutes of fame. And I bet we all end up in one of Judith Collin’s converted containers too. Let’s hope that even tho it will be spartan, it has a fridge and a dishwasher.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:32 pm
No, Rex, I’d already counted myself out, but checked where Arohata was – I had thought Christchurch [see this afternoon on Radio Live they suggested pakeha in Canterbury were going to ask for the blankets and muskets back because the land is faulty] but Arohata is apparently in Tawa near Wellington.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:37 pm
Yvette>Arohata is apparently in Tawa near Wellington
Why did they bother building a prison then? Surely sentencing someone to live in Tawa is punishment enough.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:50 pm
I thought I was on to something here – Arohata, Department of Corrections website has Access Keys
Vote:But –
“This site can be used without a mouse. The following shortcut keys will take you to commonly used pages such as the home page: …”
ooh!
October 5th, 2010 at 9:58 pm
Mention ‘Criminogenics’ you guys, it could get you into some interesting study groups.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:30 pm
toad (2,431) Says:
October 5th, 2010 at 6:53 pm
…We in the Greens try to screen them out, and I am sure all others do too (ACT possibly excepted, given Garrett being parachuted into No 5 despite his hypocrisy).
Ha Toad! You will eat your words soon, when a prominent person reappears in Court.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:37 pm
Great, the rule of a Judge trumps the democratic process, every voter in a postal election closing on Saturday has the right to know who these people are and which party they represent. Imans in Iran could do no better.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:41 pm
Labour means hard work … just saying.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:58 pm
Toad can you explain JP ? Sorry you are ment to be above everything for that.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 8:30 am
If elected and if found guity would ‘they’ automatically forfeit their seat?
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 9:49 am
I.H. STEWART:………Makes the comment of the day…..
“I read your now hidden post and as far as I can remember you didn’t state he was one of the was arrested only that you had heard that he was. Given name suppression has been granted how can you possibily be able to confirm you named the right person ? You probably are liable for slander if you have it wrong but that doesn’t change just because you have hidden the post. To my way of thinking you have a very solid defence until crown law or who ever is responsible informs you that it is the person you have named. At that point you would have to hide the earlier blog. Given my total lack of legal training I am not recommending this, would love to hear from a lawyer over this.”
None of the many lawyers and law students who read these comments have managed yet to come up with the answer. Have they given up or are they still looking.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 11:04 am
They are in the law library seeking answers.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 1:05 pm
@toad
Wait, what? A comment on electoral corruption from somebody associated with the most corrupt party NZ has ever seen? The same political party that:
(a) demonised a religious group for campaigning against the lies promoted by the Green Party
(b) ensured our electoral laws were changed to favour the incumbents
and so on and so forth? The Green Party and everybody that defended their vile lies and accusations and their reshaping of our democracy for their political dogma has no business talking about electoral corruption. Especially as they were willing to sell out our democracy for their own benefit and to protect the rest of NZ from knowing the truth about them.
Vote: