Today in the Herald the MSM caught up with what the blogs had broken that TV3 Repeater Alison Horwood, who interviewed Weatherston’s parents, Roger and Yuleen, which was broadcast on 60 Minutes on Monday, had breached regulations of Corrections in surreptitiously gaining access to Clayton Weatherston.
During the story, Alison Horwood spoke of visiting Weatherston in prison. This blog along with Busted Blonde and DPF called her out on that as it would have breached access provisions by Corrections.
TV3 denied that they hadn’t followed procedure to Regan Cunliffe at throng.co.nz.
When asked if she was given permission to visit as a Journalist, Ms Horwood told us that “There is only one standard application form for approval to visit a prisoner, and not a separate one for journalists. I filled the standard form out correctly, honestly and in a transparent manner. It does not require you to give your occupation.” And “I can assure you that at no time was I dishonest.”
Whale Oil Beef Hooked has asked for a copy of the application form under the Official Information Act and has just been provided with the documents along with an explanation of the law surrounding access of journalists to Corrections inmates.
As you can see from the documents obtain under the OIA the TV3 repeater, Alsion Horwood has lied.
She put herself down as a “(family) Friend” of Clayton Weatherston.
She has clearly gained access to Clayton Weatherston under false pretences and is now likely to find herself in all sorts of bother both with Corrections and with TV3.
Now what remains to be extracted from TV3 is whether or not Alison Horwood was ordered to lie to Corrections by her boss or not. She could then possibly claim the Nuremburg defence for that part. She still did lie to Regan Cunliffe though and quite possibly other media.
Certainly under Section 141(1f) of the Corrections Act 2004;
…every person commits an offence who, except under the authority of this Act or of any regulations made under this Act or the express authority of the prison manager or the chief executive,
(f) makes any visual recording (whether by photograph, film, videotape, or otherwise) or sound recording of a prisoner if the making of such a recording may prejudice the maintenance of the law, the safe custody of the prisoner, the well-being of any victim of an offence committed by that prisoner, the safety of any person, or the security of any prison:
The penalties for such breaches are up to 3 months in prison and/or a $5000 fine. Further the Corrections Regulation 2005 Regulation 108 states clearly;
Without first obtaining the written approval of both the chief executive and the prisoner concerned, no person may—
(a) interview a prisoner, for the purpose of—
(i) obtaining information and publishing or broadcasting it; or
(ii) publishing or broadcasting a transcript or description of the interview; or
(b) make a sound recording of a prisoner, or an interview with a prisoner, for the purpose of—
(i) >broadcasting it; or
(ii) publishing a transcript of it; or
(c) make or take a film, photograph, videotape, or other visual recording of a prisoner, for the purpose of publishing or broadcasting it.
(2) Without first obtaining the written approval of both the chief executive and the prisoner concerned, no person to whom subclause (3) applies may—
(a) interview a prisoner; or
(b) make a sound recording of a prisoner, or an interview with a prisoner; or
(c) make or take a film, photograph, videotape, or other visual recording of a prisoner.
(3) This subclause applies to a person who is—
(a) a publisher of books, or a magazine, newspaper, newsletter, circular, or other similar publication; or
(b) a broadcaster or producer of radio or television programmes; or
(c) a disseminator of news or opinion by electronic means; or
(d) a writer, a journalist (whether in electronic or print media), a radio or television broadcaster, or a producer of radio or television programmes; or
(e) an employee, contractor, or agent of a person described in any of paragraphs (a) to (d).
And Regulation 109 states;
The chief executive must, in deciding whether to give approval under regulation 108, have regard to the need to—
(a) protect the interests of people other than the prisoner concerned; and
(b) maintain the security and order of the prison concerned.
(2) The chief executive must not give that approval unless satisfied that the prisoner understands—
(a) >the nature and purpose of the filming, interviewing, photographing, recording, or videotaping concerned; and
(b) the possible consequences to the prisoner and other people of the publication or broadcasting of the film, interview, photograph, recording, transcript, or videotape concerned.
(3) The chief executive may give that approval subject to any conditions reasonably necessary to—
(a) protect the interests of any person other than the prisoner; or
(b)maintain the security and order of the prison.
Clearly Alison Horwood and TV3 have breached the law and the Corrections Regulations. Now let’s see what TV3 have to say about all this.