Serious gullibility from the media

The same gullible NZ media who seems to conveniently forget the many convictions for serious crimes by Kim DotCom also seems to swallow hook line and sinker the self-description of serial litigant Graham McCready.

This goose,  who already having been given his beans by the court in December for his pathetic private prosecution of John Banks over his electoral return, now wants to launch yet another nuisance private prosecution of Banks over the Huljich Kiwisaver prospectus that Banks and Brash had already been cleared by the police and FMA. It seems that the media loses all objectivity when it comes to John Banks.

McCready proffers himself to the media as “retired accountant”. This is about as accurate as describing Kim Dotcom as an internet copyright expert, Michael Williams as intimately involved with local road safety issues, and Gareth Morgan as a professional football coach and sports psychologist.

What isn’t mentioned by McCready is:

– his quite recent charges for blackmail (case result unknown)
– his conviction for tax fraud (a good reason why he’s retired as an accountant!)
– his institutionalisation in Sunnyside hospital for a period of time, where “he dreamed of being executed” (according to the Herald)
– his lengthy time as a beneficiary due to “occupational overuse syndrome.”

One might wonder ¬†as to what part of McCready’s body has been overused from bush accountancy, but I suppose that a serial nuisance litigator is probably capable of using a some of body parts a bit too much.

This case however highlightd the problem that many people face, where serial litigants, who have never won a case, almost never use lawyers can harass people using the system, costing defendants literally thousands of dollars when there is simply no case to answer. The costs are substantial but to the serial litigant, often indigent and useless to society sitting there doing this all for some sort perverse psychopathic fun. The courts indulge them with no reference checking or even financial checking to see if they could ever meet costs when they inevitably lose. To even challenge them on costs,e specially a bankrupt costs thousands. I believe the courts should be far more strict and vigilant against serial litigants. Perhaps a register for litigants who refuse to use legal representation, where their cases are recorded and the results and judgement public for all to see, including the courts.

Then people like Graham McCready and a certain bankrupt broken arse who doesn’t like the truth being told about him wouldn’t get a look in. Their serial and habitual abuse of court process would be revealed for all to see.

  • Stuart Dumphries

    You are right. There should be some kind of barrier to abuse of the system by serial litigants who can’t meet costs.

104%