Has the HoS been telling porkies?
November 13th, 2011 at 4:17 pm by David FarrarSteven Joyce has just put out a statement:
The Herald on Sunday has many questions to answer about the illegal taping of the conversation between National Leader and Prime Minister John Key and Act candidate John Banks on Friday, says National Party campaign chair Steven Joyce.
“There are a number of inconsistencies in the story which together suggest an attempt to conceal a deliberate News of the World-type covert operation,” says Mr Joyce.
“Firstly, the radio transmission device was concealed inside a pouch and placed next to the Prime Minister. Any camera operator knows that if you are seeking to obtain legitimate audio, you don’t muffle it by leaving the microphone in a pouch. This was an experienced cameraman, and the only possible conclusion is that the concealment was deliberate.
“Secondly, the Herald on Sunday article states the cameraman approached the Prime Minister’s staff to retrieve the microphone during the meeting and was rebuffed. The problem is that no approach was made until after the meeting was over. If the approach had been made during the meeting to inform staff that a recording or transmitting device was left on the table, it would have been retrieved immediately.
“Thirdly, the Herald on Sunday article states that the taping was discovered on the cameraman’s return to his office. That is untrue. When the cameraman approached the Prime Minister’s staff member for the return of the microphone, the cameraman acknowledged he was aware the conversation had been recorded.
“Fourthly, the Herald on Sunday article describes the cameraman as a ‘freelance cameraman’, and makes no attempt to disclose his working relationship with the Herald on Sunday. However in an email to the Prime Minister’s office last night chief reporter David Fisher seeks the return of the wireless microphone, which he says was ‘taken from our staff member’.
“The conclusion one is left with is that the Herald on Sunday deliberately arranged the taping, in an unwelcome introduction of UK-style News of the World tabloid tactics into the New Zealand media environment, and is now deliberately seeking to distance themselves publicly.
In related news, Whale reveals who the cameraman probably was.
Also a must read comment by Niggly:
2. Whilst it isn’t unusual to leave a wireless microphone transmitter “on” (prior to use), it is actually unusual to leave a wireless microphone transmitter “on” and inside a bag, because that indicates it isn’t about to be used and is using up battery power. Not unless the freelancer was intending to use it ….
3. Even if the wireless microphone transmitter was unintentionally “on” and left inside a bag (and thus unintentionally transmitting) and this was all “innocent” …. then the “freelance cameraman’s” story doesn’t stack up at all after this point because his videocamera’s wireless microphone receiver device would have to have been on and the videocamera (or recording equipment) turned “on” and “recording”. To make this clearer, this last aspect here indicates the recording could not have been made (even with the wireless microphone switched on and transmitting) because for the recording to be made as said here, a receiving device then needs to be deliberately turned on and the “camera operator’s equipment” also had to be on and recording.
Is there anyone out there who thinks it really was an accident?
November 13th, 2011 at 4:25 pm
If it’s true, it’s nothing less than one would expect from socialists in the steam powered media.
cheers
David Prosser
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
Perhaps both are true. He was a staff member but in the case of the ‘accidental’ recording he was free lancing? My guess is that Labour are involved somehow, we know they are getting desperate and are in full on anti-Key mode.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 4:29 pm
A despicable rag resorting to despicable tactics to boost circulation. Just stop buying the crappy newspaper.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 4:31 pm
At the moment the list seems small; “Eddie” from The Standard (unsure whether it’s Conor Eddie, Jenny Eddie or John Pagani Eddie) and his/her band of followers, Sue Moroney and Phil Goff. It’s also rumoured that Phil Goff still believes in Father Christmas too
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 4:40 pm
If he can’t be jailed then out his photo, name, address and place of work so we can all egg him wherever he may be.
Vote:I’ll bring a dozen.
November 13th, 2011 at 4:52 pm
The answer to your title question is YES
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 5:04 pm
David Farrar says:- “Is there anyone out there who thinks it really was an accident?”
It’s possible. As I commented in response to niggly’s original post:
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2011/11/the_secret_recording.html#comment-901374
What I think DID happen:
Cameraman puts down active mic. Pouch is protective, but audio porous, so stays on mic at all times. Can’t remember where he left it. Turns camera on and listens through headphones to ambient noise in order to locate mic. Realizes he has taped informal conversation. Is prevented from retrieving it, and only realizes its importance upon relistening at the office.
Why? Because of this simple fact:
If he intended to surreptitiously record the informal chat, HOW DID HE KNOW THE INFORMAL CHAT WAS GOING TO TAKE PLACE?
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 5:05 pm
Don’t get it. Surely the protection/security guys would have seen the ‘pouch’ and knew it wasn’t the PM’s. Did they think it was Bankies new manbag? Whatever they thought it was, why didn’t they enquire? Could’ve been a bomb. The whole incident seems bizarre and with Joyce stepping in with an opinion on such a trivial issue you have to wonder if it’s a red herring begging opposition parties to wade in and make a fuss over nothing. And that’s what this whole thing is. Nothing.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 5:12 pm
The Whale has outed him!!
http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2011/11/intentional-or-unintentional-ctd/#disqus_thread
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 5:18 pm
Surely the protection/security guys would have seen the ‘pouch’ and knew it wasn’t the PM’s.
So what?
Try not to dissemble quite so obviously, next time coolas. There’s a good boy.
If he intended to surreptitiously record the informal chat, HOW DID HE KNOW THE INFORMAL CHAT WAS GOING TO TAKE PLACE?
Because just about everybody in the whole country who are the least bit interested in politics knew it was going to take place Scott, so why pray tell do you hallucinate this was “secret?”
The real point is, the stoopid pathetic NZ journos have obviously looked at the NI shenanigans and thought: “gee, that’s a good news gathering technique, isn’t it” and as usual in their ham-fisted amateurish way completely cock it up in the first outing, totally decimating even the remotest possibility of its future use for all time to come.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 5:19 pm
Is there anyone out there who thinks it really was an accident?
Probably yes, but I bet the cafe owner who may/may not have colluded with Bradley Ambrose isn’t one of them.
And the Herald wonders why its got such a bad rep.
I personally would enjoy a journo, cameraman and a newspaper getting sent to jail. Scum, all of them.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 5:34 pm
I very much doubt there is much of substance in the conversation, but there is an important principle at stake. If this is allowed to pass without sanction, and especially if contents of the conversatioin are published, it sets a bad precedent. I doubt any parties would be keen for this method of reporting to go open slather.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 5:41 pm
Is there anyone out there who thinks it really was an accident?
More to the point, does anyone care? Still, mad bombers everywhere can be encouraged by the fact that the PM and his security team will ignore an unidentified package sitting right next to him…
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 5:43 pm
MEGA LULZ
The right talked up the significance of this “cup of tea” big time.
But now someone has taped what was said, the right cries FOUL.
Time to get over yourselves, bishes…
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 5:53 pm
More spin and bullshit than the Labour Party could ever manage.
Face it the Nats., as is their want fucked up and now as they do its someone elses fault.
Wonder they didn’t blame a fucking earthquake or some financial crisis.
What a bunch of useless pricks.
And Joyce has gone from hero to zero with this stupid outburst.
Gee’s man they are like fucking kids.
One is left wondering just what is on this tape eh??
Vote:Are they concerned that something is there they didn’t want out. Can be the only reason for their concern.
November 13th, 2011 at 5:59 pm
reid
My assumption was that the chat was officially recorded, and that the preamble was not.
I didn’t see the TV footage…Oops.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 6:18 pm
One is left wondering just what is on this tape eh?
I suspect V2 it may reveal discussion of a sacrificial goat, One-Tree hill and some masonic hand signals which sadly the bugger’s mic would have missed, so I think Joyce is calculating most people will probably miss the whole point entirely, hence his disingenuous deflection into plausability.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 6:20 pm
I saw footage of the microphone in the pouch being handed to a member of the PM’s security staff. The recording is the subject of a criminal offense and will be an exhibit.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 6:24 pm
“HOW DID HE KNOW THE INFORMAL CHAT WAS GOING TO TAKE PLACE?”
As Reid has already pointed out, everyone in the country knew. FAIL Scott.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 6:51 pm
I really can’t believe this shitty distraction is being dragged out. FFS, what stupid halfwits would discuss sensitive material in a cafe in Newmarket while the media are near? Come on! Ever heard of a fucking telephone?
If National and Act are so concerned about their conversations being recorded they must have something to hide. What deals have those two parties made with eachother? Should voters know what Act policies National has already agreed to?
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 6:57 pm
All just a big distraction to fill the news and keep the important stuff out of the front pages and off the blogs.
Vote:A new low in politics really. About Aussie level now.
November 13th, 2011 at 7:15 pm
I have to agree with “Someone Else” (6.51pm). Probably every journo in the greater Auckland region was packed around that cafe, that day. It was a deliberatelt planned photo op and the media were invited to be there.
It’s therefore a bit precious and a bit too late to be suddenly “shy” about what the two Johns were chatting about. The weather? Rugby? The next leader to seize power in ACT?
If they’ve got nothing to hide, release the transcipt and be done with it.
At least the same rule will apply should a similar event happen between theleader of the Labour Party and some other wannabe coalition partner.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 8:55 pm
The witch hunt seems a little unreasonable (Whaleoil publishing Ambrose’s contact details etc). While he was clearly there, there is no guarantee he was the person who made that recording – the Herald tends to have relationships with a range of camera operators and photographers.
Although it quite possibly was him.
It is possible that it was accidentally recorded, but it certainly seems unlikely. Maybe he put the mic pouch down on the table while grabbing shots from a few different angles (but why was it on?) and then got ushered out without having been able to retrieve it. He could then well have continued getting vision outside the location without monitoring audio (not really a concern when shooting cutaway footage). Many news camera operators will tend to keep rolling while the move around, makes it less likely to miss anything that happens suddenly, so it’s plausible he kept the camera rolling the whole time without knowing he was recording audio.
The Herald was very defensive on Saturday in denying that it had any freelance staff on location, which is probably true. The cameraman was probably shooting on spec. He wasn’t sent there by APN and they possibly weren’t even aware he was there.
On balance though, while the story as they portray it is possible, it doesn’t seem plausible. There are too many odd coincidences really. It’s unlikely a powered up mic would be in the bag left on the table, it’s unlikely that an experience cam op would forget where they left it, it’s unlikely they wouldn’t have been monitoring audio and immediately aware of the recording, it’s unlikely they would be, even after realising the mic had been there, unaware that they’d recorded the conversation.
It’s arguable that Key and Banks had no expectation of privacy – assuming non-press customers were allowed in the cafe then it was an area that members of the public had access to and it’s reasonable to assume they could be overheard. However that doesn’t really have any bearing on the recording as far as I’m aware – a covert recording. As I’ve always understood it – it’s illegal if no party is aware it’s being recorded.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 9:18 pm
Oh FFS get over it. The whole thing was a cheap publicity stunt and when granny actually found herself with some material that was even mildly interesting she bottled out and wouldn’t take the risk of publishing it. Fucking sheeple.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 9:24 pm
And like what competent security staff (DPS) would allow a package of unkown content to remain within 1 metre of the PM?
Vote:It could have been a bomb!
Incompetence or complicity – you choose
November 13th, 2011 at 9:26 pm
There is one way to help establish the truthfulness of the cameraman’s claim that the wireless microphone had been left on inadvertently.
He simply needs to name who he filmed/interviewed, using the wireless microphone, immediately before attending the Key/Bank coffee meeting.
If he had no prior job, or did not film anyone, or did not use his wireless microphone beforehand for a legitimate job, then it is clearly obvious that he deliberately switched on the wireless microphone for the Key/Banks meeting, rather than having left it on inadvertently, as he claims.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 9:26 pm
…actually given that the Herald’s account is that he tried to retrieve the mic before the conversation started it would seem to seriously undermine his claim that the recording was inadvertent. He knew the mic was in there, he knew how it was connected to his camera and he knew that he was recording on his camera.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 9:35 pm
The DPS must be the “laughing stock” of vested global “Close Protection Services” when photo’s like those revealed by the Herald are published.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 10:08 pm
National and many others are very strongly that the Herald ordered this recording or similar. That part I don’t think holds up. Even if the cameraman did make the recording intentionally, I think it’s very unlikely he was asked or instructed to do so. His relationship with APN is that of a freelance contributor. He shoots stuff and sells it to them.
Vote:November 13th, 2011 at 10:48 pm
It’s fishy and doesn’t look good for HoS.
But why admit what it was when he went back if it was a scam?
Why even admit that it was a recording device or that a recording was made when picking up the device?
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 7:05 am
Somehow the political parties of the right are entitled to collude in secret on how they manipulate the Epsom electorate to their greatest mutual benefit?
Attitude fail 101: Born-to-rule
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 7:26 am
Murray
Grow up you troll. I already explained that I assumed that it was a televised event having not seen it.
Of the thirty or so comments to this point, yours has been the only one off topic.
You’re trolling again Winston Peters lover.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 7:35 am
The conversation would not have discussed any policy agreements. For that, the ACT party leader would have to be involved, and last time I checked, that was not John Banks.
As to the intentionality or otherwise of the recording. The application of Occam’s Razor would logically lead one to conclude that the level of co-incidence needed to effect a recording of this nature by accident is highly unlikely and that the more probable explanantion is it was deliberate. However, any prosecution would have a hard time proving that to a judicial standard.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 8:29 am
I don’t believe it was accidental. The freelancer could have
a) turned off the recording receiver
b) wiped the tape
but no. He gives it to the HoS.
But as for
1. calling the media to a public meeting
2. then sitting down discussing “game-changing” things, in earshot of people standing there with unknown black pouches on the table.
I call bollocks on that. Who would discuss sensitive things in such a situation? Only a complete retard surely? Or it was deliberate. Where was JK’s staffer worrying about unidentified objects on the table? Surely they should be sacked for incompetence? Would you have a private sensitive conversation in that situation?
I can only conclude it was deliberate recording, and that JK and JB wanted it to be recorded. For what reason may not become clear unless the recordings are made public.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 8:37 am
I still reckon the Don hired the cameraman and what Key and Banks don’t want released is the wee chat they must have had about how they plan to bumrush the ol’ fella after the elections if things go according to their wishes.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 9:10 am
IMO it sounds like the Herald is trying to drum up publicity. I doubt that anything of substance was discussed, but that doesn’t matter if they did or not. If someone deliberately records another persons conversation without being part of that conversation, they have committed a crime. It’s similar to being “a little bit pregnant”. I couldn’t imagine it not being deliberately recorded. I imagine Key and Banks would be really pissed, as I would think most people would be, but as it’s a media organisation and election time they’re restrained.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 9:15 am
Fail Scott you’re a snivling little newbie here. If you think I’m toll go and drip all over Farrar, he’ll start by telling you I was blogging before he was. You are a crapwealse talking shit day after day for the sole purpose of electioneering. You’re a party whore and I’m going to remiding you of it every day.
FAIL Scott.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 9:25 am
Is this recording illegal?
The meeting exists for the sole purpose that it is a public meeting of the PM and the ACT candidate. Both participants publicised this meeting extensively. This isn’t a prvate meeting.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 10:28 am
“Do we have a “News of the World” virus infecting our media?”
Answer: Yes.
Getting the scoop involves putting yourself out there, frequently those methods involve hacking of some degree covertly.
Vote:On Sundays Q&A a mobile phone was employed as a gimmic by Paul Holmes to illustrate the ease at which such devices can be deployed. The mobile phone is a popular and easy to use device for such purposes and can yield a rich source of information as News Of the World journalists discovered.
November 14th, 2011 at 10:35 am
The person who reveals himself to be a true POS in this whole non-story is the editor of the rag
Herald on Sunday. One Bryce Johns.
Two quotes from this tosser.
“We would love to publish it but ethically WE are the ones that have made the right call
here by not doing it.”
And
“It is embarrasssing for the prime minister and likely to change the way some people vote.”
Knowing he is not going to publish and claiming the ethical high ground why would he make the
second quote unless he was a little twerp.
The Herald on Sunday is a pittifull rag.
It usually contains at least 3 non stories each edition that begin gushingly with, “A new survey
has just revealed that………………blah blah blah.”
Thats why i cancelled my subscription.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 10:58 am
actually now it makes sense.
The HoS is never going to publish it, since it contains nothing interesting.
By not publishing it, yet saying they have it, they can maintain a claim that there were life-changing events discussed which would make everyone vote Labour if only they knew. Some people will switch votes on that alone.
So it’s a partisan ploy by the HoS to sway voters.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 1:43 pm
Where’s Nicky Hager ? Presumably a copy has been passed to him.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 2:02 pm
“So it’s a partisan ploy by the HoS to sway voters.”
My reading is, rather it’s a “face-saving” ploy by the HoS Editor, Bryce Johns to defend his “News of the World” style-bugging tactics that he is condoning. Also a “face-saving” ploy against his competitor, the SST.
I mean really, the recording likely contained JK & JB’s observations on the election and results of some of the party’s. And really, the conversation was had in a cafe with presumably other diners and cafe staff around. Hardly the place for top-secret plots and plans. Thus hardly “game changing discussions” as Bryce Johns infers.
I think bereal sums it up nicely in his 10.35′er. I stopped buying the HoS a couple of years ago because it is crap. Now I should do the same of the SST …
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 2:06 pm
(But I still like buying the DomPost and NZ Herald though, much better news coverage and better reporters)
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 2:52 pm
if they wanted to save face, why print anything? why print something like “we’ve got this tape that we’re not releasing”.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 3:13 pm
… probably because both the HoS Editor and Freelance video guy have been both caught with their pants down – their initial “accidental recording” claim doesn’t stack up and as per what other people have wrote here (like peterwn), they run the risk of falling foul of the Crimes’ Act for making an illegal recording i.e. “bugging”.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 9:54 pm
Goff demands Key authorise the publication of the conversation. Fine. We damand Goff publish all of his voicemail. Bound to be boring, but the same principle applies.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 11:32 pm
I wrote a lot of words about this here: http://dylanreeve.posterous.com/having-private-tea-parties-in-public
In general I think what’s been claimed by the cameraman (overlooking poorly reported details in initial reports) is generally pretty plausible. There are some questions, but I really don’t think there’s any way you could believe it is the conspiracy that National has tried to suggest.
Recording people without the knowledge is generally a dickish mode, but in this case I think it’s very hard to claim they were engaged in “private communication” for the purposes of the law.
And anyone saying “if you’ve got nothing to hide then let them publish it” is being totally unreasonable. It’s a crappy argument when applied to random searches etc, and should be seen as equally so here.
Vote:November 14th, 2011 at 11:46 pm
If it really is true that an unidentified package (possibly containing a bomb) was allowed to sit on a table 1 metre away from the NZ PM without anyone in his security entourage picking up on it, then it stands to reason that they all be sacked immediately.
Vote:November 15th, 2011 at 12:04 am
Well there is that issue also. Although the DPS and security around the PM is pretty relaxed and I think that’s a good thing. When I was working at TVNZ I passed him in the hall a number times and said hi. I liked that. I also farted in the lift once just before he got in, I think that would have seen me executed in some countries…
Vote:November 15th, 2011 at 12:47 am
Wouldn’t surprise me to learn they were discussing the end of Brash and ACT being sucked into National via Banks after the election. The evidence that Dons made a ghastly mistake in bringing in the bigot and handing him ACT’s lifeline to toy with as he sees fit is pretty undeniably.
Vote: