Trevor goes undercover

May 19th, 2012 at 3:30 pm by David Farrar

Danya Levy at Stuff reports:

Labour’s MP says he’ll be driving an unmarked car to avoid having papers served on him, as he and fellow MP laugh off proceedings against them by ACC Minister .

If they were really laughing about it, they’d be keen to have their day in court. The poor duo in fact seem very anxious not to end up in court before the election having to detail the proof for their claims.

Trevor is already reporting to unmarked cars. Will he go further and start wearing a disguise? Will he refuse to turn up to electorate clinics, in an attempt to delay his day in court? His constituents may not be too happy with an MP that might shirk his duties so he can remain in hiding.

Mallard said he hadn’t defamed Collins and he had a good understanding of defamation law.

He has faced several legal threats but has only been sued for defamation once, by former NZ First MP Tuku Morgan.

This is what you call a partial truth. Someone should ask how often has he had to settle out of court or do an apology? I think he had to do three just to Rosemary Bradford.

Prime Minister John Key said the Labour MPs ”could run but can’t hide”.

Heh.

Tags: , , ,

54 Responses to “Trevor goes undercover”

  1. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Collins is an embarrasing herself. It’s bad enough she is a crap lawyer, but she seems to want to show just how useless she is.

    Of course, she could simply explain why she printed off the Boag email, who she showed it to and why why she forwarded the email to others when it was strictly confidential.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. wreck1080 (3,865 comments) says:

    what, does trevor usually ride in a cop car or something? Front or back seat?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Pete George (23,427 comments) says:

    Mallard said he is mid point of his career, so it will be interesting to see how long he can hide for – and still get relected. Until 2040?

    http://yournz.org/2012/05/18/mallard-indicates-retirement-2040/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Trevor Mallard (247 comments) says:

    Spent yesterday tweeting my location. Two sets of clinics, two cafes, SFWU fono, lunch in Copperfileds. There is a difference between hiding and not co-operating. I often drive the car without my face or logos on – my constituents aren’t as frightened that way.

    The “run but can’t hide” line was one from Joe Lewis but more recently used by Sonny Liston just before Cassius Clay (pre Ali) knocked him out the first time. And Liston was the Mafia run crook who and I’m surprised the PM is using him as a speechwriter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Collins said she was “100 per cent certain” neither she nor anyone in her office had passed the email to the Herald On Sunday. It’s curious how she can speak for those in her office. Boag sure was annoyed that her email had been sent by Collins to others. I strongly suspect that Boag thinks Collins leaked the email.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Leaping Jimmy (16,213 comments) says:

    I strongly suspect that Boag thinks Collins leaked the email.

    Who cares what you think ross.

    The important thing is, what will the evidence say when the court case commences?

    Isn’t it exciting.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. burt (8,190 comments) says:

    ross69

    Hey hey, be careful. Someone might need to defend that woman’s honour and given the company in the thread you just never know what could happen.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. thedavincimode (6,606 comments) says:

    Fuck off mallard you frightful perennially lying little cunt.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Zapper (1,015 comments) says:

    Well Trevor, at least you’re on the hook for defamation rather than assault this time. No recent urges to assault anyone while at work?

    The PM has 100 times the integrity you have. Go and have a Heineken.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > The important thing is, what will the evidence say when the court case commences?

    It’ll probably confirm what we already know – Collins is a crap lawyer with a thin skin.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. burt (8,190 comments) says:

    Man up Trevor.

    You were confident enough to make the statements and stand by them when given several chances and significant time to retract them so stand up in court. Accept the papers and stop being a such a muppet.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. jaba (2,120 comments) says:

    has Trev told his boss, David Shearer .. or is it still Helen, what he is doing and why??
    forget the thug Little, as a top union person, he answers to nobody

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. djg (72 comments) says:

    Crusher must know who the leaker is to be 100% confident it was not from her office. Trevor is in trouble on this one.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    Good point jaba. Trev, have you TXTed the snaggle-toothed baritone ghoul for advice?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Leaping Jimmy (16,213 comments) says:

    It’ll probably confirm what we already know – Collins is a crap lawyer with a thin skin.

    I’m sure that’s what you hope ross. I suspect however Collins would have received some fairly robust advice from other lawyers apart from herself before announcing she was intending to lay a statement of claim, given the damage to the govt which might arise from a hopeless case that never had any chance.

    I imagine that advice probably said something along the lines of: it’s got a great chance of succeeding but for all sorts of reasons no way is it going to be supported under the Ministerial defence guidelines since taxpayer funding on this is something Liarbore would have a field day with, so you pay for it Judith and good luck.

    But who knows what really happened. All we really know is, Trevor and Andrew don’t seem to be too keen to repeat what they said, for some reason. I would have thought it would be in their best interests to keep repeating the “defamation” given they apparently don’t think it was at all defaming. It would be like nah nah nah, in your face, Collins. I would have thought that lots and lots of Liarbore supporters would really really approve of that. But they don’t repeat it, do they ross. Isn’t that peculiar, as well.

    Like I said ross, it’s very, very exciting, isn’t it. I’m almost bursting with the mad fun of it all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Manolo (13,517 comments) says:

    I’ve had enough of the disgusting punk and coward Mallard.
    NZ is in serious trouble if this accomplished thug and imbecile is considered ministerial material by the socialists.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. gazzmaniac (2,319 comments) says:

    And back in the real world, most people just don’t give a shit about this issue.
    Both sides are keeping it in the news and everyone is just switching off. Please concentrate on reducing the cost of living and getting New Zealand out of the shithole it has found itself in.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Peter (1,688 comments) says:

    Brave, brave Sir Robin.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    Can anyone point to anything that a drone leech on the public tit such as Mallard
    has contributed to New Zealand ?

    Even Jonothan Hunt looks good when compared to a POS like Mallard

    Smart arse narcisstic suckarse bludgers such as Mallard even give Alamein Kopu a bad name.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Johnboy (15,903 comments) says:

    Funnily enough I haven’t seen the Mallardmobile around Wainui much recently!

    Still it was usually being driven by a little dark haired tart when I saw it, not Trev. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Steve (North Shore) (4,543 comments) says:

    Mallard @ 3.57
    “I often drive the car without my face or logos on – my constituents aren’t as frightened that way.”

    Are your constituents scared of you or don’t want to be seen with you Trevor? You being a bully I think both.

    Such a fine upstanding Member of Parliment, you make us proud.
    ps, I have a Groucho Marx glasses and mo – check TradeMe, but buy now is expensive

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Michael Mckee (1,091 comments) says:

    Trevor
    In the interests of Justice this taxpayer expects both you and Andrew Little to make yourselves available for service ASAP.
    I don’t care what you think of Collins this is an issue that needs clarification and your treating the law cavalierly in this way brings it, Parliament, your offices and yourselves into disrepute.
    Let’s get to court show she is the wrong and deal with it or else apologise like a person of integrity would.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Psycho Milt (2,405 comments) says:

    Mallard must be so sad and ashamed when he sees how angry he’s making all these Kiwiblog commenters.

    I suspect however Collins would have received some fairly robust advice from other lawyers apart from herself before announcing she was intending to lay a statement of claim, given the damage to the govt which might arise from a hopeless case that never had any chance.

    Absolutely. Only someone with a puffed-up sense of self-importance and and shameful overconfidence in their own abilities would embark on something as risky for the govt as this without getting really good independent advice, so… oh.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Johnboy (15,903 comments) says:

    His constituents are only frightened by the fact that they have wasted their vote on a piece of shit like Trev Steve.

    Trev is more frightened that they will realise this! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Johnboy (15,903 comments) says:

    As long as Trev makes you proud PM you will save $8 on Avigra every time you come round here for your wank! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. jaba (2,120 comments) says:

    I think mallard has realised that his skills as a minister were simply not up to it .. Clark also realised it and decided to use him as the parties “enforcer” .. his decades in parliament has meant he is knowledgable to the boring bullshit rules and regulations (ponts of order)
    Shearer won’t dump him because look at his team .. mallard is close to being his star .. phtttt

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. orewa1 (428 comments) says:

    I dont much care who is right or wrong about this alleged defamation. Politics is a robust scene and by the time people reach Crusher’s level they are expected to have a thick skin. She should have responded with a very strong rebuttal and let it go.

    But as a substantial taxpayer I very deeply resent my money being used by any of the over-ego’d parties to this. I’d rather it was used to have a few less teachers made redundant, or the deficit reduced.

    A plague on all your houses – Collins, Mallard and Little. The biggest loser will be the public’s respect for parliament. Kiss and make up, and move on to issues the electors care about.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. jims_whare (403 comments) says:

    ‘Trevor goes undercover’

    Well if what Whaleoil has mentioned over the years is correct, Mr Mallard has been ‘going undercover’ for a number of years……

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. peterwn (3,239 comments) says:

    Orewa1 – Judith Collins is paying for the lawsuit out of her own pocket. Similarly Trevor and Andrew will not get any taxpayer funding for their defence. One can rest assured that Judith has the skin of a rhino, but even such a person can be pushed too far. Judith has actually given Trevor and Andrew two chances to ‘kiss and make up’ but they have declined to do so.

    Ross69 – On what basis do you say that Judith was a ‘crap’ lawyer in her former incarnation? – seems you are repeating the likes of Trevor’s/ Andrew’s assertions that they have ‘stories’ from various people about her lawyering.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Doug (408 comments) says:

    Ross69 – On what basis do you say that Judith was a ‘crap’ lawyer in her former incarnation?

    Prior to being elected to Parliament, Ms Collins was a lawyer and company director. She was Chair of the Casino Control Authority and has served as President of the Auckland District Law Society and Vice-President of the New Zealand Law Society. She is a member of the Fulbright New Zealand Alumni Association.

    She holds a Bachelor of Laws, Master of Laws (Honours) and a Master of Taxation Studies from the University of Auckland.

    Now Ross69 what did Mallard And Little achive?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. BeaB (2,104 comments) says:

    Ross69 and tell us about your stellar career.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Michael (903 comments) says:

    No-one in any Ministers Office would have leaked that email to the media, it could only have blown up all over the National Party as the players were Nick Smith, Michelle Boag and a former National Party activist. Source has to be ACC trying to pressure Boag and Pullar into shutting up and going away while not caring (or thinking) about the political fallout.

    If Mallard and Little had any chance of winning by using a defense of truth they would have begged to be served. They are willfully not co-operating and not backing any claims with evidence. They’ve screwed up big time and only chance is to claim a public interest to have that type of scrutiny.

    Ross69 – you’re an embarrassing yourself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Ed Snack (1,835 comments) says:

    I’m sure that Trevor is now quite safe and satisfied that you personally have come in to defend him Pyscho Milt. Good to see that your sense of honesty and dignity has not, shall we say, changed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. WineOh (626 comments) says:

    Trevor, “not cooperating” might be what you say, but what everyone else sees is you ducking for cover & avoiding facing the music. The more you play petty games and don’t front up the more respect you lose especially in the court of public opinion. If you’ve got no case to answer, then why not allow the papers to be served in a dignified way & get on with it. Andrew Little is just as foolish.

    It might be too late for me, you’ve already lost your credibility in my eyes, but there are plenty of others that have supported you for years that would rather you man up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Mary Rose (393 comments) says:

    Trevor >There is a difference between hiding and not co-operating.

    There’s a difference between what looks to the world like: “Catch me if you can”; and “Bring it on.”

    The former looks juvenile, the latter shows you stand by whatever you said.

    You can’t dodge it forever and the latter might command a bit more respect.

    quick edit: WineOh – snap!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Nostalgia-NZ (5,093 comments) says:

    Another aspect of this is that there has been considerable speculation as to who leaked the email, and saying that it was leaked by the Minister’s office is probably the same as saying the Minister leaked it because it is after all an office she is responsible for. Anybody in business knows that with safety or other alleged breaches in transport, quality and so forth it is still the ‘boss’ that is ultimately responsible. In this case maybe crusher becomes the sum total of her office – a leaker.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    I suspect you use Trevor’s name in thread headlines as bait DF .. works everytime.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Lazybum (259 comments) says:

    Give the summons to Readers Digest – they always find you.
    Trevor Mallard – you are a cowardly prick. Hope Andrew & yourself are not cowering together in a cave.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Psycho Milt (2,405 comments) says:

    I’m sure that Trevor is now quite safe and satisfied that you personally have come in to defend him Pyscho Milt. Good to see that your sense of honesty and dignity has not, shall we say, changed.

    He really would be up shit creek if he needed me to defend him, but thanks for the compliment.

    Trevor, “not cooperating” might be what you say, but what everyone else sees is you ducking for cover & avoiding facing the music.

    “Everyone else” is a pretty broad category. To this “everyone else,” Mallard and Little are taking the piss out of a particularly pompous ass in a hilarious way, and to most other “everyone elses” this dispute is something they’ve never heard of and wouldn’t be interested in if they did.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. tristanb (1,133 comments) says:

    TM: Spent yesterday tweeting my location. Two sets of clinics…

    Face it. They’re warts. Try some Podophyllotoxin or Imiquimod if you’re too scared to get them frozen off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    TM: spent yesterday tweeting my location

    Good god man, stop being so foolhardy. You’ll get ipad finger if you carry on recklessly fighting for the betterment of the working classes in such fashion.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Bogusnews (477 comments) says:

    Trevor,

    so you think giving your whereabouts on this blog the day after somehow shows you aren’t cowering and hiding? C’mon mate, be a man. Take the papers and get on with it.

    The more you hide the more it look like you totally underestimated Collins and that you said something you are frightened to be exposed.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. hmmokrightitis (1,582 comments) says:

    TM: spent yesterday tweeting my location…

    S’funny, didn’t see any tweets yesterday about a spineless prat vanishing up his own arse. Maybe it was a different location?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Paul Williams (879 comments) says:

    I seldom read the comments on kiwiblog but this one:

    Absolutely. Only someone with a puffed-up sense of self-importance and and shameful overconfidence in their own abilities would embark on something as risky for the govt as this without getting really good independent advice, so… oh.

    Is gold. Pyscho Milt sums the matter up entirely. Collins childishness will be regreted by more than herself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Mark (497 comments) says:

    Sounds like Trevor Mallard is doing a Saddam Hussien, driving around in an unmarked car rather than face the music.

    Will it end the same with Trevor being pulled out of a hole in the ground.

    What a wimp.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Paulus (2,597 comments) says:

    I am under the impression that the onus of proof lies with Mallard and Little to prove their case with evidence, not that Collins has to prove anything.
    Pair of wimps – if they are certain about their evidence there is no reason to run away.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. burt (8,190 comments) says:

    Paulus

    Mallard didn’t even understand the the implications of the EFA which he voted for – what chance has he got on legislation he wasn’t required to understand. Also we mustn’t forget he had 9 years in Clark’s government so he may still think this whole mess will just go away and we’ll move on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Wayne91 (143 comments) says:

    Paul Williams

    “I seldom read the comments on kiwiblog but this one:

    Absolutely. Only someone with a puffed-up sense of self-importance and and shameful overconfidence in their own abilities would embark on something as risky for the govt as this without getting really good independent advice, so… oh.

    Is gold. Pyscho Milt sums the matter up entirely. Collins childishness will be regreted by more than herself.”

    How many posts didn’t you read to find that one?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    Give the summons to Readers Digest – they always find you.

    :D

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

    Just make an application for substituted service and attach the articles boasting about avoiding service. It will take about two seconds for a Judge to order that, say, the documents are served by email or on their lawyers. It’s pathetic – I tell all my client’s just to let me accept service.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > Ross69 – On what basis do you say that Judith was a ‘crap’ lawyer in her former incarnation?

    A lawyer with a modicum of intelligence wouldn’t say the things she says. As for her qualifications – maybe she got them from a Weetbix packet.

    http://www.medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=505

    Oh, and she’s not averse to breaking the law. Reputation? What reputation?

    http://norightturn.blogspot.co.nz/2010/08/oia-performance-stats-ministers.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Look at this exchange between Val Sim, then chief legal counsel in the Justice Ministry, and Judith Collins in 2003 at the Justice and Electoral Select Committee hearing into the Peter Ellis case. It says everything you need to know about Collins. The woman can’t even ask a simple question!

    Collins: The allegation in Lynley Hood’s book about the climate relating to allegations of sexual abuse, particularly as it relates to any questioning that child abuse might not have taken place, once it’s been alleged—do you give any weight to that at all? Do you think that that’s a valid concern that we might have?

    Sim: Things like climate in that sense are of course quite difficult to measure, and there were lots of different developments at that time, but I think they were also matters which certainly Justice Williamson appeared to take into account when he looked at the question of whether publicity surrounding the case had meant that Mr Ellis got less than a fair trial. He looked at some of the factors that were prevailing at the time, including the fact that the public had quite widespread knowledge of the overseas cases where hysteria had led to false allegations of sexual abuse.

    Collins: So that’s hysteria. I’m thinking not so much of the hysteria, I’m thinking more of the reality that a man who says, a judge who says, a juror who says that sexual abuse alleged against a female child or a male child by a male just could not have happened, that that particular judge or that particular juror who says that could feel very strongly that they are then in fact going to be themselves the victim of a huge amount of people saying “How can you possibly, possibly stand up for a paedophile or a sex abuser?” Do you have any concern that judges and jurors—that men, in general—feel so totally disempowered because of a climate that men are sex abusers? You don’t have any concern about that?

    Sim: I’m not entirely sure I understand the question.

    Collins: Right. It’s just it’s all the way through the book, and I note that you’ve read the book, so —

    Sim: Yes, yes I have. It was just the question I didn’t quite understand, but I was wondering whether it was about the question of whether people believe that children never lie or something of that ilk, and that was certainly not of the —

    Collins: No, it’s about the accusations of sexual abuse, rape, the fact that, according to Lynley Hood, so few men feel able to ever stand up to those sorts of accusations on behalf of another man, or to even give any credibility to a possibility that they didn’t occur.

    Sim: Sorry, I’m still not entirely sure that I understand the question —

    Collins: Don’t worry, I think I’ve tried enough on that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    er Ross, that sounds like a couple of lawyers jerking off in court.

    Whats your point?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Paul Williams (879 comments) says:

    How many posts didn’t you read to find that one?

    Wayne91, I read Psyco Milt’s comments, they’re often very clever… your’s not so much.

    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.